Subsidiary Rule 59: Fill & Download for Free

Hello!The answer is absolutely! And not only Russia bailed out Trump but also Kushner. Let me start you off with a nice statistic.This represents Trump and Kushner loans underwritten by Russian Banks.When the Saudi money ran out, Trump had his debts covered by Russians.Kowtowing to Russians and Saudis demonstrate that moral and material indebtedness rules Trumpian decision making. Even as he wants to make bribery legal and claims to be against corruption as his lawyers will claim in the impeachment trial."- $364 million in loans to Donald Trump companies for properties in Chicago, Florida, and Washington, DC.- $285 million loan to Kushner Companies.Trump and Kushner alone appear to comprise about 1.6%-1.7% of DBTCA’s entire portfolio." https://t.co/cmVQQboMj2— Forensic News (@forensicnewsnet) January 24, 2020A Russian government-controlled bank deposited at least half a billion dollars into the American subsidiary of Deutsche Bank around the time that the bank lent Trump his most scrutinized loans, according to exclusively obtained confidential bank records. As Trump received loans from the subsidiary, DBTCA, totaling over $360 million, Gazprombank sent $511 million in cash to DBTCA to be dispersed however the Russian bank directed.[...]“A standard part of commercial banking needed by clients that operate internationally is the management of their cash in different currencies. Such cash balances show as liabilities on balance sheet, as that attributes the ownership of that cash to the client. Such liabilities are cash deposits, not loans,” a spokesman for the bank stressed. Deutsche Bank declined to name the entities to which Gazprombank distributed the dollars or for what purposes the Russian government wanted to convert approximately 16 billion rubles to dollars.The revelation that the Russian government was converting billions of rubles to dollars via the same Deutsche Bank subsidiary that lent to Donald Trump adds further intrigue to President Trump’s finances and possible counterintelligence concerns.forensicnews.net/...The story from forensic news has some gaps but is connected to this NY Times story and needs still more investigation of the greatest loser the USA has ever known his funds. Business Genius Trump Lost More Money Than Anyone in America Between 1985-1994It’s not just Ukraine and Russia. Trump is also actively seeking help from other countries like Saudi Arabia, China, Brazil.They hack phones of newspaper owners for him and file charges against U.S. journalists who expose corruption.This is what Republicans are defending.— Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) January 23, 2020This is very interesting…And what to think about this story in The Times…Trump sold nuclear technology to Saudis in secret after Khashoggi killing https://t.co/2KQz0RJKIw— Jon Cooper 🇺🇸 (@joncoopertweets) January 22, 2020Here’s the link to that story; Trump sold nuclear tech to Saudis in secret after Khashoggi killing"The transfer was signed off 16 days after the journalist was murdered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October and a second came in February. The remains of Khashoggi, 59, a Saudi-born US resident have never been found." Indeed!And to top it off, there’s also this:🔥It wasn’t only Deutsch Bank and Russia who helped save Trump from Bankruptcy. A Saudi prince helped save Trump from bankruptcy—twice.🔥Ask yourself why.... https://t.co/jNAP87PQQR— Venture Capital (@kelly2277) January 23, 2020This is from October 2018In 1991, Donald J. Trump was a mid-tier real estate developer with $900 million in debt, a collapsing casino business, and a name perhaps best known for a headline-dominating split with his wife Ivana. With his empire at risk of falling apart, Trump was searching for cash everywhere; his father even illegally bought $3.35 million worth of casino chips and never gambled them, to help Trump make a massive bond payment a year earlier.A helpful burst of cash from a Saudi prince eased some tension with his creditors. Alwaleed bin Talal bought Trump’s yacht for somewhere between $18 million and $20 million (reports vary). It wasn’t a great bit of business for Trump—he had bought it from the Sultan of Brunei three years earlier for a reported $29 million.In 1995, Trump was still in deep trouble—and Alwaleed swooped in again. The prince, who calls himself the “Warren Buffett of Saudi Arabia,” took over Trump’s 51% stake in his beloved New York Plaza hotel. As a result, Trump’s creditors forgave $125 million of his debt.qz.com/...It will all come out my fellow Americans, rest assured!Sources: Everyone linked in the text and eState4column5©2013 (@eState4Column5) | Twitter

Article 38 of the ICJ statute defines what sources of law the court shall apply during the proceedings:1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply:a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states;b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.2. This provision shall not prejudice the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono, if the parties agree thereto.The problem of the ICJ is that there is no normal law that it could be based on. Normal national courts obviously rule based on the law of the country that they are in, and all decision need to be traced back to that law in the end. But the ICJ doesn’t have that basis, as there is no obvious source of law. And further complicating the whole matter is that a whole lot of what we colloquially call “international law” isn’t really codified, it just is because civilized nations consider it to be normal.So the statute here mentions all the possible sources that are to be taken into account.International conventions like the convention on human rightsGenerally accepted customs, for example the principle that a visiting foreign head of state is immune to the law of the landGeneral principle of law, such as the principle “innocent until proven guilty”, or that a crime must have been a crime at the time and place when it was committedor the “teaching of highly qualified publicists”, basically meaning internationally reputable experts in international law, whose opinions can be used when there is no other clear legal basis, but only subject to the limitation of article 59, which means that this can only be used to decide in a specific case and that decision cannot set a precedent for anyone elseIf all else fails, section 2 allows the court to decide "according to the right and good", if both parties agree, meaning that the judges try to find a “right” solution without any basis in the law (because probably there isn’t any)All in all, if that sounds a bit dodgy to you, that’s because it is. The ICJ kind of operates in a shady area where there is very little in terms of established law, simply because no nation really wants to bind itself in some formal treaty that could work against it at some point.

One broadly accepted definition of sources of international law includes Article 38 of the ICJ Treaty. According to this article, the International Court of Justice shall apply the following sources of law, ranked in order of precedence:a. international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states;b. international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;d. subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.