You are being dishonest, and that makes me more suspicious.

Oh my god, first you were arguing that this was false

if he hadn't (paid the bond), they'd have been able to seize assets.

and it's not.

Then you move the goalposts to it was about seizing all his assets.

which is also false.

when I talk about how the actual process would go, you call me dishonest because of????

Idiots on Reddit and Twitter?

I was talking about the NY AG and the judge not idiots on Twitter.

More goalpost moving

Additionally, asset seizures are already dubious when it comes to the Constitutional rights of the people

Attachment is a legal concept hundreds of years old. It's been part of creditor/debtor law forever. Here's an example from 1702

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Return_of_1702_writ_of_attachment_signed_by_Chief_Justice_John_Guest_of_Pennsylvania.jpg

Here's an example from the papers of Thomas Jefferson.

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-02-02-0132-0004-0117

This is different from the more recent civil forfeiture laws.