Yeah I’d be curious to see what happens if he skips, because he has Secret Service protection for the rest of his life.
The Secret Service has an obligation to protect him, but they’re also federal officers. Would they protect him from the bounty hunters? Would they rat him out? Would they act as the bounty hunters and drag him back to the courthouse against his will?
It also raises questions about a potential conviction. If he gets convicted, will the Secret Service simply post extra guards specifically for his (isolated) prison cell? They’d probably want to try and outsource it to the prison directly, but then you run into the issue of having a person who still has Top Secret clearance and has proven to be irresponsible with it being guarded by people who don’t have that clearance. The Secret Service would probably need to clear several of their members and post them there as guards, simply to prevent Don from blabbing national secrets to anyone who will listen. Basically, limit his contact to only people who also have clearance.
Regardless, I’d pay good money to get a livestream of the bounty hunters taking Don down.
I don’t get why the secret service would do anything to stop it. They aren’t loyal to a person, I thought, they’re federal officers charged to protect an individual. Protect from… who, the government? No, from harm. Is it their job to turn him in? Maybe not, quite frankly I don’t know, but I don’t see how they’d turn against other police forces - they aren’t his personal militia.
I doubt they’d up and go to war for him, but if some of the SS were part of his cult, I could see them doing ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING they could to keep him free.
I would imagine they would. Their duty is to keep him safe, not help him carry out illegal activities. I think they could make the moral choice to take him in as long as they could be sure he would be safe being arrested. And if they can’t be I would imagine they would be pulling the strings to make it safe while keeping tabs and not staying hidden.
That’s like fucking nothing to the mega rich like Trump.
The fact that we have a two-tiered justice system couldn’t be more obvious than a rich white politician getting slapped on the wrist despite leading an insurrection against American democracy while poor black men are killed in the street by militant cops for literally no reason. Gross on so many levels.
But it’s still wildly unfair. Imagine getting a $10k bond, you either need $10k cash you can part with temporarily (assuming you show up and are innocent) or far more likely you need to pay $1k to a bondsman that you won’t get back. Someone living paycheck to paycheck might not have the savings and so they either pay a poor tax or spend some time in jail.
But for the rich, they always have the funds, or someone willing to loan it for a lot less than 10-15%. And it’s rarely set high enough to be a significant deterrent.
Illinois just became the first state to eliminate cash bail, because you’re either a flight/violation risk or you’re not, money shouldn’t tip the scale.
This amount of money is a slap on the wrist compared to what he claims his wealth is. If you or I would commit this crime this would be equivalent to < $100 for bond
It’s only to assure the accused comes back to face the charges. It isn’t a penalty. Otherwise, the thinking goes, the defendant will have no reason to come back and face the court. This was probably extra true around the time of the founding of the US, when someone could more easily slip away and start a new life
If it’s not not based on ability to pay, it can’t possibly work like you describe. Instead poor people get stuck in jail because they can’t pay, and rich people never set foot in jail because the bond is pocket change to them. From what I gather, that’s exactly how it works in practice, so it’s really just a system to give special treatment to rich people and punish poor people who haven’t been convicted of a crime.
In a practical sense, it does work as you say, and can prevent the poor from obtaining bail. The system wasn’t explicitly designed that way, and rich people who are dangerous to the community can get super high bail set as well. Source: I’m a lawyer
Isn’t it? Shouldn’t it be? Isn’t it supposed to be a disincentive? What’s the risk of losing $200k to a man who is supposed to be worth billions (but is surely worth hundreds of millions at least)?
You’re right. I’m not trying to say that he’s been sentenced or anything, but I’m referring to how little money $20,000 is to a guy like Trump. We’re talking the price of a moderately used 2017 Honda Civic as bond for a guy who participated in a malicious conspiracy to overturn the results of a democratic election (in multiple states, mind you). It’s a start contrast to the fact that there are countless innocent people who have lost their lives for no due to a justice system that is all too ready and willing to lay down the law against little people like you and me.
If we did even 1% of what Trump has done we would be held without bail until the date of our trial.
That’s only if you get a bondsman to pay the rest of it. Knowing trump, anyone in their right mind wouldn’t put 180k of their own money down thinkimg the fat idiot won’t run his mouth and violate the terms of his bond.
But then again, if they were in their right minds, they wouldn’t support him.
This is somewhat misleading. If you have the money for bond you typically just pay it yourself because a bail bondsman keeps some of the money when it’s returned.
If you use a surety bondsman, you pay 10-15%, you don’t get that back in any case. If you have the cash to pay the bond and don’t plan on violating the terms, you’d put it up yourself.
That said, like most insurances, you have to find someone that’s willing to accept the risk, and if the terms really include “don’t attack people on social media” you’d have to be the dumbest person in the world to put that up for him.
Keep in mind, you only have to post 10% to get out, so $20K.
What’s $20K to him if he skates?
Isn’t the full amount posted by somebody? And if you leave the bondsman can find you and take you to the cops?
Don vs Dog the bounty hunter would be a battle of the bad haircuts
Dog the Bounty Hunter tackling Trump is such an absurdly perfect image. I’ll expect to see a New York Times article about it in a month.
Given that we’re in the dumbest time line, this is actually a plausible scenario.
Just follow the cheeseburger shortages
Yeah I’d be curious to see what happens if he skips, because he has Secret Service protection for the rest of his life.
The Secret Service has an obligation to protect him, but they’re also federal officers. Would they protect him from the bounty hunters? Would they rat him out? Would they act as the bounty hunters and drag him back to the courthouse against his will?
It also raises questions about a potential conviction. If he gets convicted, will the Secret Service simply post extra guards specifically for his (isolated) prison cell? They’d probably want to try and outsource it to the prison directly, but then you run into the issue of having a person who still has Top Secret clearance and has proven to be irresponsible with it being guarded by people who don’t have that clearance. The Secret Service would probably need to clear several of their members and post them there as guards, simply to prevent Don from blabbing national secrets to anyone who will listen. Basically, limit his contact to only people who also have clearance.
Regardless, I’d pay good money to get a livestream of the bounty hunters taking Don down.
I don’t get why the secret service would do anything to stop it. They aren’t loyal to a person, I thought, they’re federal officers charged to protect an individual. Protect from… who, the government? No, from harm. Is it their job to turn him in? Maybe not, quite frankly I don’t know, but I don’t see how they’d turn against other police forces - they aren’t his personal militia.
I doubt they’d up and go to war for him, but if some of the SS were part of his cult, I could see them doing ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING they could to keep him free.
Talking our of my butt, but it would be worth it to either put him is ADX, or build a new prison just for him.
Reopen Alcatraz and put him in there.
I’m sure the irony of having him in prison in California would be lost on no one except him.
Yes, it’s usually 10% if you go to a bail bondsman. And yes, you still owe them if you skip out, and they can hunt you down.
I don’t think the secret service would let that happen though.
You mean the same secret service that deleted subpeonaed evidence to protect themselves and trump?
That’s “subpoenaed.”
It looks just as ridiculous, maybe more.
I think Biden did some housecleaning in the secret service staff.
Why wouldn’t the secret service let a bail bondsman carry out the active attest warrant that’s sure to follow if he skips.
Why would Trump even need a bail bondsman? He can surely afford to pay his own bail and get it all back, rather than taking the 10% bond as a loss.
I was about to agree, but
Trump never pays for anything up front.
Trump never pays anyone who does a service for him.
Logic and reason do not apply to his behavior.
I mean they wouldn’t let him skip bail. If he somehow did, they’d probably help get him back.
But we have no idea how much cash he actually has on hand.
I would imagine they would. Their duty is to keep him safe, not help him carry out illegal activities. I think they could make the moral choice to take him in as long as they could be sure he would be safe being arrested. And if they can’t be I would imagine they would be pulling the strings to make it safe while keeping tabs and not staying hidden.
I have a feeling Dog wouldn’t take him in and they would just hang out at the back of Da Kine
That’s like fucking nothing to the mega rich like Trump.
The fact that we have a two-tiered justice system couldn’t be more obvious than a rich white politician getting slapped on the wrist despite leading an insurrection against American democracy while poor black men are killed in the street by militant cops for literally no reason. Gross on so many levels.
This isn’t a slap on the wrist punishment, this is the bond to not be held in jail pending trial.
But it’s still wildly unfair. Imagine getting a $10k bond, you either need $10k cash you can part with temporarily (assuming you show up and are innocent) or far more likely you need to pay $1k to a bondsman that you won’t get back. Someone living paycheck to paycheck might not have the savings and so they either pay a poor tax or spend some time in jail.
But for the rich, they always have the funds, or someone willing to loan it for a lot less than 10-15%. And it’s rarely set high enough to be a significant deterrent.
Illinois just became the first state to eliminate cash bail, because you’re either a flight/violation risk or you’re not, money shouldn’t tip the scale.
This amount of money is a slap on the wrist compared to what he claims his wealth is. If you or I would commit this crime this would be equivalent to < $100 for bond
Bond isn’t based on ability to pay…
If it’s not based on ability to pay, what even is the point?
Rules for thee but not for me
It’s only to assure the accused comes back to face the charges. It isn’t a penalty. Otherwise, the thinking goes, the defendant will have no reason to come back and face the court. This was probably extra true around the time of the founding of the US, when someone could more easily slip away and start a new life
If it’s not not based on ability to pay, it can’t possibly work like you describe. Instead poor people get stuck in jail because they can’t pay, and rich people never set foot in jail because the bond is pocket change to them. From what I gather, that’s exactly how it works in practice, so it’s really just a system to give special treatment to rich people and punish poor people who haven’t been convicted of a crime.
In a practical sense, it does work as you say, and can prevent the poor from obtaining bail. The system wasn’t explicitly designed that way, and rich people who are dangerous to the community can get super high bail set as well. Source: I’m a lawyer
Isn’t it? Shouldn’t it be? Isn’t it supposed to be a disincentive? What’s the risk of losing $200k to a man who is supposed to be worth billions (but is surely worth hundreds of millions at least)?
You’re right. I’m not trying to say that he’s been sentenced or anything, but I’m referring to how little money $20,000 is to a guy like Trump. We’re talking the price of a moderately used 2017 Honda Civic as bond for a guy who participated in a malicious conspiracy to overturn the results of a democratic election (in multiple states, mind you). It’s a start contrast to the fact that there are countless innocent people who have lost their lives for no due to a justice system that is all too ready and willing to lay down the law against little people like you and me.
If we did even 1% of what Trump has done we would be held without bail until the date of our trial.
That’s only if you get a bondsman to pay the rest of it. Knowing trump, anyone in their right mind wouldn’t put 180k of their own money down thinkimg the fat idiot won’t run his mouth and violate the terms of his bond.
But then again, if they were in their right minds, they wouldn’t support him.
This is somewhat misleading. If you have the money for bond you typically just pay it yourself because a bail bondsman keeps some of the money when it’s returned.
That’s cash bail, not a bond.
If you use a surety bondsman, you pay 10-15%, you don’t get that back in any case. If you have the cash to pay the bond and don’t plan on violating the terms, you’d put it up yourself.
That said, like most insurances, you have to find someone that’s willing to accept the risk, and if the terms really include “don’t attack people on social media” you’d have to be the dumbest person in the world to put that up for him.
There’s also potential to forfeit if he violates the release conditions or commits other crimes.
Isn’t that 10% for the bails bondsman? The jail still gets the whole amount to hold.
If bro skates… bro.