I'd post some of the ridiculous quotes from your article but they're not worth the effort.

To sum it up, their opinion is that it's not fair Trump has to pay a bond like any other criminal, because he has to liquidate his assets and will lose money on his investments, and that there really wasn't any "real damages" caused by his defrauding of banks and insurers by inflating his assets by several billions each year for over a decade.

It's almost as if they're implying he will appeal on the merits of the case rather than some dredged up technicality like he does for all of his other cases.

While you're crying, tell us how paying bond works for the poor folks?