This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Rochdale By-election: George Galloway elected as new MP
- OMAM
- "Crooks is a cruel and aloof character"
- Of Mice and Men essay on Crooks - Please mark
- Of mice and Men essay
- of mice and men english literature igcse
- Urgent help regarding student accommodation and private letting
- Of Mice And Men GCSE Essays
- Lee Anderson defects to reform
- edexcel iGCSE english lit jan 2023
- What was the last song you listened to?
- SHEFFIELD Finding tenancy replacements
- Predictions for 2023 WJEC unit 1 English literature exam this summer?
- Of mice and men
- IGCSE edexcel english literature jan 2023
- Nervous/anxiety habits impacting health (pulling my teeth out"
- how to sanitise your hands
- igcse edexcel english literature paper1 17th may 2023
- Can i get finance for braces
- Of Mice and Men 2022 predictions (WJEC)
Is Galloway A Crook?
Scroll to see replies
No, actually. The Senators levelled many charges and evidence at Galloway, hardly any of which received straight and honest answers, all of which were used merely as an excuse to launch off on his own demented tirades. Check out some of the transcript, it was a joke the way he ignored the actual questions and charges and went on about what he wanted to.
If they had done this faster, you'd be complaining that they couldn't possibly have found and collated all the documents and evidence in such a short time. You'll find any excuse and a complaint, whatever the circumstances, so why should we even listen to you?
In relaity, it hasn't taken "long" at all, if you think about it, for them to find this sort of evidence in the mess that was post-invasion Iraq.
In relaity, it hasn't taken "long" at all, if you think about it, for them to find this sort of evidence in the mess that was post-invasion Iraq.
By playing the long game and assuming that Galloway would be a cavalier arrogant pig he has played right into there hands whether he is guilty or innocent is now irrelevant. He has lied under oath they might not be able to prove that he him self was behind it but that really doesn’t matter its obvious they want him out of the commons and they want to ruin both his image and his political career and I believe they have succeeded.
Ok there’s no way they could prove that he him self was behind it however he would of been aware of the thousands dollars being paid into a join account considering he was spending it and he certainly would have been aware of the hundreds of thousands of dollars being paid into his own charity by the same source.
To be honest it really doesn’t matter if he was aware or not because no jury would believe that he was oblivious to 85 thousands dollars being paid into his joint bank account by the same source that then paid in hundreds of thousands into his charity bank account.
"Neither as an individual or through the Miriam appeal have I benefited from Sadam’s oil for food program"
The previous is obviously cobblers and even is it is true he has still committed “prudery” <not sure hot to spell it> because there is evidence that shows that it was paid into a joint bank account. There are two possibility the American administration are either going to say “sorry we tried to fit you up Galloway” or there going to find him guilty in the very least of prudery which do you think is most likely?
What you have to decide is whether you believe the evidence that the Americans have, if they have the link and they 100% have something then of course it could all be fake they could of planted it in a big conspiracy against Mr Galloway but I doubt he’s going to be the end of the American judicial system “he’s had his chips so to speak”
He look scared lol how strange ( i love the way he's trying to distence him self from his "poor sick wife with cancer who he's divorcing" )
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/bb_rm_fs.stm?nbram=1&news=1&nbwm=1&bbwm=1&bbram=1&nol_storyid=4374404
Ok there’s no way they could prove that he him self was behind it however he would of been aware of the thousands dollars being paid into a join account considering he was spending it and he certainly would have been aware of the hundreds of thousands of dollars being paid into his own charity by the same source.
To be honest it really doesn’t matter if he was aware or not because no jury would believe that he was oblivious to 85 thousands dollars being paid into his joint bank account by the same source that then paid in hundreds of thousands into his charity bank account.
"Neither as an individual or through the Miriam appeal have I benefited from Sadam’s oil for food program"
The previous is obviously cobblers and even is it is true he has still committed “prudery” <not sure hot to spell it> because there is evidence that shows that it was paid into a joint bank account. There are two possibility the American administration are either going to say “sorry we tried to fit you up Galloway” or there going to find him guilty in the very least of prudery which do you think is most likely?
What you have to decide is whether you believe the evidence that the Americans have, if they have the link and they 100% have something then of course it could all be fake they could of planted it in a big conspiracy against Mr Galloway but I doubt he’s going to be the end of the American judicial system “he’s had his chips so to speak”
He look scared lol how strange ( i love the way he's trying to distence him self from his "poor sick wife with cancer who he's divorcing" )
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/bb_rm_fs.stm?nbram=1&news=1&nbwm=1&bbwm=1&bbram=1&nol_storyid=4374404
Northumbrian
Go on, give me a quote to support your ********.
I direct anyone looking for quotes to support my point to find a transcript and look at the tangents that Galloway goes off on and how he bothers less with answering any questions than with sanctimonious rants of his usual propagandist, rhetorical nature. In fact, if anything, it would be far more of a challenge to find quotes where he did simply give straight and honest answers to what he was asked.
Northumbrian
You honestly don't think thyey would have checked his wife's account earlier?
How were they supposed to know to check her account before they had discovered relevant documents and obtained statements from relevant witnesses?
As I've said before, absolutely any position in time would meet with your refusal to acknowledge that that point in time was a viable one, so we can really disregard your views on the issue.
I direct anyone looking for quotes to support my point to find a transcript and look at the tangents that Galloway goes off on and how he bothers less with answering any questions than with sanctimonious rants of his usual propagandist, rhetorical nature. In fact, if anything, it would be far more of a challenge to find quotes where he did simply give straight and honest answers to what he was asked
How were they supposed to know to check her account before they had discovered relevant documents and obtained statements from relevant witnesses?
Northumbrian
There is simply no question dodging.
... As you repeatedly assert.
But in order to enlighten forum-goers as to your desire for truth in issues where Galloway is involved, I feel they should be informed of what you've said on other issues.
You repeatedly lie to this forum about the grounds on which Galloway "won" his libel suit against the Telegraph. You consistently say it was because the Telegraph lied, had no basis for its claims etc., trying to paint Galloway as an innocent victim and the Telegraph etc. as big nasty liars.
Well, a rather interesting point is that the veracity of the documents that the Telegraph used for its story was never challenged by Galloway's lawyers. In other words, he did not deny that they were accurate in court, and the court never ruled upon the issue. Yet what you repeatedly say on this forum is that the Telegraph lost because it lied and made up all its accusations etc., something which is factually untrue.
Which gives us a guide to your position on Galloway-related issues...
Northumbrian
Because presumably if a man is being investigated for fraud/corruption etc, the natural thing is to also check the finances of his wife and associates.
...
Would they not have had to have found and examined the documents and got the witness statements before they even knew they were to be investigating him for corruption? Furthermore, you seem to have this idea that the US Senate has unlimited power to just instantly go examining the bank records of anyone it wants to whenever it wants to. I think you'll find that some sort of evidence, or at least a reason, is needed before they can justify doing things like that.
As I said before, you're taking the "time" factor and spinning a whole web of denial around it. But you'd do the same if it had been done faster or slower, or in any other way. So why should we acknowledge that you might even have a slight point, when we all know you'd try to spin a defence out of the "time" factor, irrespective of what that "time" was.
We have all heard of the actions of secret service agents being able to infilitrate peoples' hard drives on personal PC's, ID documentation and personal bank accounts to manipulate and change details in order to discredit the individual. 
Could it be possible that this is the reason why it has taken so long for the US to 'come up' with discriminating evidence?
If these secret forces can arrange killings to look like natural deaths, then they can 'deposit' monies into people's bank accounts without them being aware.
Could it be possible that this is the reason why it has taken so long for the US to 'come up' with discriminating evidence?
If these secret forces can arrange killings to look like natural deaths, then they can 'deposit' monies into people's bank accounts without them being aware.
yawn
We have all heard of the actions of secret service agents being able to infilitrate peoples' hard drives on personal PC's, ID documentation and personal bank accounts to manipulate and change details in order to discredit the individual.
Could it be possible that this is the reason why it has taken so long for the US to 'come up' with discriminating evidence?
If these secret forces can arrange killings to look like natural deaths, then they can 'deposit' monies into people's bank accounts without them being aware.
Could it be possible that this is the reason why it has taken so long for the US to 'come up' with discriminating evidence?
If these secret forces can arrange killings to look like natural deaths, then they can 'deposit' monies into people's bank accounts without them being aware.
Erm..thats just what I said, what you have to accept is Galloway is finished he'll be thrown out the commons by the end of spring and a bi election will be called probably to coincide with the local council elections. There are two possible outcomes:
There American government will admit to trying to "fit him up" and admit it was all lies.
Or he will be found guilty.
If George Galloway is found innocent then the evidence pitched against him would have to be lies and considering its been made by the American administration do you really think it’s likely? He'll probably get a fine im not suggesting that they would lock him up but a fine at the hands of a criminal change is all it would take to have him out the commons which is why he looks so worried the burden of proof is different to a British court which is why he hasn't been accused in the united kingdom
(Im actually interested if anyone actually things he's going to get away with it)
yawn
We have all heard of the actions of secret service agents being able to infilitrate peoples' hard drives on personal PC's, ID documentation and personal bank accounts to manipulate and change details in order to discredit the individual.
Wtf are you on about. "Secret Service agents"? The primary job of the Secret Service of the US is to protect the President etc., why they would have any interest in doing those things is beyond me. And we have not "all heard of the actions etc.", I haven't heard about them doing those things recently, perhaps you could point me to some recent articles?
yawn
Could it be possible that this is the reason why it has taken so long for the US to 'come up' with discriminating evidence?
AS I said before, you'd make the "time" a factor, whatever it was. It's the worst defence possible.
yawn
If these secret forces can arrange killings to look like natural deaths, then they can 'deposit' monies into people's bank accounts without them being aware.
...
Oh sure, they went back to 2000 and deposited the money back then to make it look in 2005 as if the money was... what? Hang on, how do they go back 5 years? Wouldn't the bank have records... and bank managers have memories?
Come on, you can cook a lot of conspiracy ********, but to start saying that some US agency is running around changing computer records and depositing money (5 years ago, somehow) is just getting ridiculous.
JonathanH
Wtf are you on about. "Secret Service agents"? The primary job of the Secret Service of the US is to protect the President etc., why they would have any interest in doing those things is beyond me. And we have not "all heard of the actions etc.", I haven't heard about them doing those things recently, perhaps you could point me to some recent articles?
AS I said before, you'd make the "time" a factor, whatever it was. It's the worst defence possible.
...
Oh sure, they went back to 2000 and deposited the money back then to make it look in 2005 as if the money was... what? Hang on, how do they go back 5 years? Wouldn't the bank have records... and bank managers have memories?
Come on, you can cook a lot of conspiracy ********, but to start saying that some US agency is running around changing computer records and depositing money (5 years ago, somehow) is just getting ridiculous.
AS I said before, you'd make the "time" a factor, whatever it was. It's the worst defence possible.
...
Oh sure, they went back to 2000 and deposited the money back then to make it look in 2005 as if the money was... what? Hang on, how do they go back 5 years? Wouldn't the bank have records... and bank managers have memories?
Come on, you can cook a lot of conspiracy ********, but to start saying that some US agency is running around changing computer records and depositing money (5 years ago, somehow) is just getting ridiculous.
You really do need begin looking at the corruption of governments - whilst your inherent trust is cute, your naivety is worrying!
Do you really believe that with technology, it is not possible to make false credit deposits into the bank accounts of unsuspecting people/banks that appear to have been made some years previously.?
yawn
You really do need begin looking at the corruption of governments - whilst your inherent trust is cute, your naivety is worrying!
OMG! He believes governments rather than terrorists, terrorist supporters and conspiracy theories - NAIVE!11!!
I know plenty about corrupt governments, I was asking whether you have any evidence that the things you are claiming have been done, have actually been done recently. Your complete failure to provide any articles or sources (along with your apparent complete ignorance of what US agencies would be involved) would support my conclusion that you're making this s**t up as you go along.
yawn
Do you really believe that with technology, it is not possible to make false credit deposits into the bank accounts of unsuspecting people/banks that appear to have been made some years previously.?
It might be or it might not be. What I do know is that the banks would notice, that you have yet to name a US agency that would do these things, you've yet to give a reason, you've yet to provide any evidence that these things have been done in the recent past, you've failed to acknowledge that the suspect payments have not been challenged. etc. etc.
If you started answering questions, instead of moving to ever wilder, more delirious and more ridiculous excuses and defences, then maybe I'd be bothered to listen to you.
Your current line of "government corruption exists, thus they have done this thing!11!!" wouldn't stand up to the scrutiny of a toddler. You have not a shred of evidence or basis, beyond a few wild, baseless ideas. "Desperation", is perhaps a name for it...
I have to say that, while it is of course possible, it seems a bit far-fetched. And why would anyone go to all that trouble? It's not as if Galloway casts a huge political shadow. If "they" are going to do make someone appear corrupt like that, why not do it to someone like John Kerry?
Galloway is an outpsoken opponent. plus he made them look like amateurs last time they questioned him. Whole thing is stupid. They have no power over him. its not like they can demand his extradition. They dont have any real evidence either. they can showw circumstancial evidence his ex-wife might have benefited from oil money. but she is not him. and they cant link him whatsoever.
plus theres the fact he doesnt need to answer them, and if there was evidence he would know it would come out.
his actions are those of an innocent man. he was a fierce critic of saddam long before blair and bush jumped on the bandwaggon.
plus theres the fact he doesnt need to answer them, and if there was evidence he would know it would come out.
his actions are those of an innocent man. he was a fierce critic of saddam long before blair and bush jumped on the bandwaggon.
Galloway had 23,000 lira wired to his Caman Island mansion.
the most guilty man in politics
The fact that Donald Rumsfelds old company recieved 2 billion dollars
worth of (potentialy useless) bird flu vaccination contracts or that a large number of french politicians have been found guilty of corruption and recieving kickbacks from private business for contracts, barely makes the news.
Yet Galloway is the big mover and shaker? i think not.
the most guilty man in politics
The fact that Donald Rumsfelds old company recieved 2 billion dollars
worth of (potentialy useless) bird flu vaccination contracts or that a large number of french politicians have been found guilty of corruption and recieving kickbacks from private business for contracts, barely makes the news.
Yet Galloway is the big mover and shaker? i think not.
Adam83
Galloway had 23,000 lira wired to his Caman Island mansion.
the most guilty man in politics
The fact that Donald Rumsfelds old company recieved 2 billion dollars
worth of (potentialy useless) bird flu vaccination contracts or that a large number of french politicians have been found guilty of corruption and recieving kickbacks from private business for contracts, barely makes the news.
Yet Galloway is the big mover and shaker? i think not.
the most guilty man in politics
The fact that Donald Rumsfelds old company recieved 2 billion dollars
worth of (potentialy useless) bird flu vaccination contracts or that a large number of french politicians have been found guilty of corruption and recieving kickbacks from private business for contracts, barely makes the news.
Yet Galloway is the big mover and shaker? i think not.
if i were to find his account number and sort code surely i could wire money to him too...
I don't see the importance of some corrupt iraqi officials saying they had set aside/allocated oil /cash for galloway. you have to prove he himself knew and/or tried to collect.
JonathanH
Wtf are you on about. "Secret Service agents"? The primary job of the Secret Service of the US is to protect the President etc., why they would have any interest in doing those things is beyond me. And we have not "all heard of the actions etc.", I haven't heard about them doing those things recently, perhaps you could point me to some recent articles?
Do you seriously believe that all these secret service agents do is protect the life of the President? Go do your own search on the internet to discover exactly what the remit of agents are and don't forget to include the FBI and the CIA in your search criteria.
JonathanH
...
Oh sure, they went back to 2000 and deposited the money back then to make it look in 2005 as if the money was... what? Hang on, how do they go back 5 years? Wouldn't the bank have records... and bank managers have memories?
Oh sure, they went back to 2000 and deposited the money back then to make it look in 2005 as if the money was... what? Hang on, how do they go back 5 years? Wouldn't the bank have records... and bank managers have memories?
Banks rely on computer records not the memories of bank managers.
JonathanH
Come on, you can cook a lot of conspiracy ********, but to start saying that some US agency is running around changing computer records and depositing money (5 years ago, somehow) is just getting ridiculous.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2807/emfed.html
How the white house, or more specifically the 'Council on Foreign Relations and The Federal Reserve' manipulates foreign exchanges and discredits and destroy the careers of people who oppose them in the media.
http://www.ibill.com/about/gkardterms.cfm
"ibill provides gkbill with turn key technology for the management of customer information including passwords, transactional information, record keeping, accounting and other serives. The ibill services are accessed through the internet."
If it can be done, then it can be done illegally!
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/8.76html
Risks to the public in computers and related systems.
I still say you are naive in your protestations that this sort of thing would not happen by actions of secret service agents.
yawn
Do you seriously believe that all these secret service agents do is protect the life of the President? Go do your own search on the internet to discover exactly what the remit of agents are and don't forget to include the FBI and the CIA in your search criteria.
You never mentioned the FBI or CIA before. And asking me to find a remit for what the jobs of various agencies is, is light-years from having any evidence that they've done what you claimed. Oh yes, you have NO actual evidence they've done what you claim.
yawn
Banks rely on computer records not the memories of bank managers.
I'm quite aware of that, fool, just I think bank personnel may remember large trasnfers of money and not entirely forget their existence etc. so would not be fooled by bank records as easily as you seem to claim.
yawn
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2807/emfed.html
How the white house, or more specifically the 'Council on Foreign Relations and The Federal Reserve' manipulates foreign exchanges and discredits and destroy the careers of people who oppose them in the media.
How the white house, or more specifically the 'Council on Foreign Relations and The Federal Reserve' manipulates foreign exchanges and discredits and destroy the careers of people who oppose them in the media.
No, that's what we call a "conspiracy theory" site. Look at it, this mysterious "Council on Foreign Relations" (never properly defined) has apparently taken control of the "Department of State, Central Intelligence Agency, and the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the Government".
Although, conspiracy sites seem to be your major source of information, reasonable people do not accept crackpot "secret society" theories in usual debate. Also, how does this prove anything that you claim was done?
yawn
http://www.ibill.com/about/gkardterms.cfm
"ibill provides gkbill with turn key technology for the management of customer information including passwords, transactional information, record keeping, accounting and other serives. The ibill services are accessed through the internet."
If it can be done, then it can be done illegally!
"ibill provides gkbill with turn key technology for the management of customer information including passwords, transactional information, record keeping, accounting and other serives. The ibill services are accessed through the internet."
If it can be done, then it can be done illegally!
How so? These sytems have many safeguards put in to secure money. And secondly, even if it CAN be done illegally, asserting that something CAN be done is still light-years from showing it was or will be done. Again, no evidence.
yawn
I still say you are naive in your protestations that this sort of thing would not happen by actions of secret service agents.
I'm not saying it wouldn't happen full stop. I'm saying that however much you assert it can happen and that some spooky all-powerful body is able to do it, you have not a HINT of proper evidence of it having been done in any case, never mind this one. So to build your entire defence around what is theoretically possible, is ludicrous and plain stupid. You have no evidence.
You're desperate to defend a disgusting traitor, and that makes you just as bad. Oh, and the whole COMPLETE LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE thing, makes you look pretty stupid. You call me "naive" and you're inventing a huge conspiracy theory in order to believe that Galloway isn't corrupt. Who's naive?
JonathanH
You're desperate to defend a disgusting traitor, and that makes you just as bad. Oh, and the whole COMPLETE LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE thing, makes you look pretty stupid. You call me "naive" and you're inventing a huge conspiracy theory in order to believe that Galloway isn't corrupt. Who's naive?
You're desperate to defend a disgusting traitor, and that makes you just as bad. Oh, and the whole COMPLETE LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE thing, makes you look pretty stupid. You call me "naive" and you're inventing a huge conspiracy theory in order to believe that Galloway isn't corrupt. Who's naive?
I might call you naive but I do not stoop to making personal insults such as calling you a 'fool' or 'stupid' - I leave that to those who resort to such tactics when they are losing the debate!
Your description of Galloway being a 'disgusting traitor' exposes your uncompromising bias against him. I am not desperate - I remain unconvinced of an individual person's alleged guilt until they are charged, tried and found guilty by their peers in a court of law. In others words, "innocent until proven guilty" - ever heard of it?
yawn
I might call you naive but I do not stoop to making personal insults such as calling you a 'fool' or 'stupid' - I leave that to those who resort to such tactics when they are losing the debate!
I've noticed that you regularly assert that insults are only used when someone is losing, because apparently you making stupid points and being called on it, simply means you are somehow "winning". Unfortunately for you, you use that excuse even in debates where you are manifestly and obviously being decimated and people are insulting you because your points are so poor. Asserting victory is a pretty poor tactic...
Adam83
JonathanH,
'yawn' is ripping you to shreds here.
'yawn' is ripping you to shreds here.
Oh wow, thanks. I'll just get someone who agrees with me to come along and tell you that the opposite is true. Thanks for the contribution though, it was really valuable. Ass.
yawn
I am not desperate - I remain unconvinced of an individual person's alleged guilt until they are charged, tried and found guilty by their peers in a court of law. In others words, "innocent until proven guilty" - ever heard of it?
Indeed I have. And as I've explained, you can believe quite rightly in someones guilt, even if they were never found guilty. Look at OJ Simpson. Also, I'd describe your invention of a whole conspiracy, based on no evidence, in order to explain away certain pieces of evidence as pretty desperate...
Also, you seem to have convinced yourself of a huge conspiracy, based on no evidence whatsoever, so I'm not sure how you apply what you say are principles that you believe in. My beliefs have some basis and evidence...
These are the same people who appeared to forge a document to include Galloway?
This actualy is incredibly serious if Galloway is innocent, because it would then appear he is being targeted just because of his politics. Which is the beginning of the end.
So far the things they have come up with against him are pretty poor imo.
This actualy is incredibly serious if Galloway is innocent, because it would then appear he is being targeted just because of his politics. Which is the beginning of the end.
So far the things they have come up with against him are pretty poor imo.
Related discussions
- Rochdale By-election: George Galloway elected as new MP
- OMAM
- "Crooks is a cruel and aloof character"
- Of Mice and Men essay on Crooks - Please mark
- Of mice and Men essay
- of mice and men english literature igcse
- Urgent help regarding student accommodation and private letting
- Of Mice And Men GCSE Essays
- Lee Anderson defects to reform
- edexcel iGCSE english lit jan 2023
- What was the last song you listened to?
- SHEFFIELD Finding tenancy replacements
- Predictions for 2023 WJEC unit 1 English literature exam this summer?
- Of mice and men
- IGCSE edexcel english literature jan 2023
- Nervous/anxiety habits impacting health (pulling my teeth out"
- how to sanitise your hands
- igcse edexcel english literature paper1 17th may 2023
- Can i get finance for braces
- Of Mice and Men 2022 predictions (WJEC)
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 2 weeks ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
