135

Chubb ended Trump fraud bond talks after backing E. Jean Carroll appeal bond, court filing says (www.cnbc.com)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

KEY POINTS

Donald Trump and his co-defendants were in talks with insurance giant Chubb for a $464 million appeal bond, but the company backed out, a Trump Organization lawyer said.
Chubb previously provided Trump’s $91.6 million appeal bond in writer E. Jean Carroll’s civil defamation case.
In his New York civil business fraud case, Trump’s lawyers said they reached out unsuccessfully to more than 30 companies to secure a bond.
Those companies include Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, Liberty Mutual, Allianz, Chubb and Travelers, among others.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] [email protected] 38 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

There's another key point in the article: the reason why those other companies didn't bite is that they would not entertain taking real estate as collateral. Chubb was the only company willing to even try and negotiate that, and Trump couldn't come up with a satisfactory package for them.

Since we already know that Trump overvalued his properties for loan purposes, it is very possible that an objective analysis of their worth vs. their outstanding debt led to the conclusion that they are mostly underwater.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 6 months ago

Chubb was the only company willing to even try and negotiate that, and Trump couldn’t come up with a satisfactory package for them.

I'm seeing possibly subtext here that Chubb intentionally screwed Trump which was a surprise.

So Team Trump were talking with Chubb for bonds against both the $91 million judgment as well as the $464 million judgment. Team Trump was offering up both liquid assets (the Schwab brokerage account with whatever stocks and bonds are in there) and real estate. Team Trump really wanted bonds against the real estate.

It looks like Chubb said something like "Hmm, well we have two bonds we're talking about here. Lets do the $91 million bond in purely liquid, and then we can look at the real estate for the $464 million bond. Seeing how you need the $91 million bond in a couple of days lets get that knocked out first". Team Trump agreed handing over all the liquid assets (the Schwab account) so the $91 million bond is now "fully collateralize" meaning liquid money to back up the bond.

Then Team Trump says "Okay the $91 million bond worked great! Now lets do the $464 million bond backed by Trump real estate!"

Chubb says "Hard pass, not interested."

So all the good stuff is gone and Trump has nothing good left to try to secure any bond on the $464 million. Chubb makes whatever commission they placed on top of the $91m bond, and simply pays out the $91m to Jean Carrol when the appeal fails. Jean Carrol wins, Chubb wins, Trump gets played.

I say all of this with zero love for Chubb, but when a grifter gets grifted, its satisfying to watch.

this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024

135 points (96.6% liked)

politics

18881 readers

4041 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News