Talk About Tennis 2.0

ti-amie wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2024 12:39 am

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2024 10:39 pm I would sell it all. I would not want to even come close to anything Giullani ever owned.

Good point

Still the apartment could bring in some revenue. After the exorcism of course...

I'm sure the co-op board wants nothing but a quiet sale. The ladies from Georgia would probably have a hard time generating revenue from that pad. Upper East Side co-op almost never allow for guests to stay very long, and is likely a no rent building. They fussy up there. I'd sell it, everything in it, keep the car, and go hard after that $2 million tfg owes him.

I was thinking about UES co-op boards and how they would react to a sale and I agree with you Owen. The only way they could get any revenue would be from a sale, and I doubt it will be done quietly.

I wonder if the car would present the same scenario. What would a 1980 Benz be worth to a collector, someone like Jay Leno for example. LOL me I'd want a new Benz not one that probably costs a fortune to maintain.

Unless the 1980 MB was already a pricey one, it would not cost that mush. MB made hundreds of thousands of S500's and S350's, for example. A fine automobile, but not a huge collectors item.
The fact that it belonged to (can't write this word here, but it rhymes with AUNT) Dracula may make it a bit more pricey, but that is relative.

The memorabilia and the sale of the apartment should afford the ladies a comfortable life going forward as long as they can fend off the leeches that will claim they're the second cousin of their great aunt's second husband.

There are very good, legit and reliable money managers available. Your pastor doesn't count.

Kyle Griffin
‪@kylegriffin1.bsky.social‬
Reuters: U.S. APPEALS COURT DECLINES TO BLOCK RELEASE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL REPORT ON DONALD TRUMP -COURT ORDER

Anna Bower‬ ‪@annabower.bsky.social‬
·
3m
Practical effect of this (I think) is that Nauta and De Oliveira still have time to file an emergency application with SCOTUS before Judge Cannon’s order enjoining release of the report expires. If 11th Cir. had vacated her order, DOJ could’ve released report before SCOTUS appeal filed.

NEW: Eleventh Circuit court of appeals DENIES Nauta and De Oliveira's emergency motion to block special counsel report. The court leaves in place Judge Cannon's order enjoining release of the report, which would remain in effect for 3 more days.

PBS News‬ ‪@pbsnews.bsky.social‬
·
5s
Special counsel Jack Smith has resigned from the Justice Department after submitting his investigative report on President-elect Donald Trump, an expected move that comes amid legal wrangling over how much of that document can be made public in the days ahead.

https://buff.ly/3PyJiXC

Willow Oliver‬
‪@willowoliver.bsky.social‬
· 15m
They're just doing that NOW? So (expletive) pathetic

Josh Gerstein
‪@joshgerstein.bsky.social‬
JUST IN: 11th Circuit politely tells Judge Aileen Cannon to get moving on motions seeking to unseal remainder of Special Counsel Jack Smith's final report. Basically, gives her 60 days to act or appeals court will take further action. Doc: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

2 Order of the Court 25-13400
____________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the
United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 9:23-cr-80101-AMC-1
____________________
Before J ILL PRYOR , GRANT, and ABUDU, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:

Before the Court are related petitions for writs of manda-
mus, which request relief in relation to Petitioners’ pending mo-
tions to intervene to seek vacatur of the district court’s January 21,
2025, order barring release of Volume II of the Special Counsel’s
Final Report.
Petitioners filed their motions on February 14 and February
24, 2025, and filed notification on July 7 and July 10, 2025, inform-
ing the district court that their motions had been fully briefed for
more than 90 days. To date, the district court has not ruled or con-
ducted any other further proceedings on the pending motions.
Accordingly, Petitioners have established undue delay in res-
olution of their motions to intervene and the petitions for writs of
mandamus are HELD IN ABEYANCE for a period of 60 days to
allow the district court to fully resolve the motions.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 7.11.0.pdf