We don’t understand divorce law. But we’re trying.
Here at The Outrage we’re working on a backup plan. In the event that the News Corporation does not present us with a fabulous buyout offer we’re keeping a list of available heiresses. (We’ve developed a special software program that optimizes possibilities by searching for the highest net-worth combined with the least number of potential in-laws.)
But we need to understand the rules of the game. As far as we can tell the steps involved are as follows:
- Find richest possible target.
- Induce target to marriage. Get pregnant if necessary. (Could be tough for us, barring new developments in technology.)
- Sign pre-nuptial agreement.
- Get married.
- Have children.
- Lead wildly expensive lifestyle.
- Induce divorce — make spouse miserable if necessary.
- Say you never read pre-nup, or only signed under duress.
- Say you married only for love, but settlement must be renegotiated for the sake of the kid(s).
- If resulting net worth is less than $20 million, repeat steps 1-9.
Like all good students, we try to learn from the masters. Hence we’re studying the saga of the wives of Donald Trump, the way some historians study the wives of Henry the Eighth.
Donald Trump is an American icon, having combined as much money with as little taste as possible. It’s hard to feel too much sympathy for the casino builder and beauty-pageant mogul, unless one happens to be his divorce lawyer.
Let’s take a look at the “Art of the (Divorce) Deal.” Ivana Trump, wife number one, didn’t BUILD any New York real estate, but she’s certainly in a position to BUY some. Her divorce settlement was $10 million in cash, a $12 million estate in Connecticut, $350,000 annual alimony, a $4 million “housing allowance” and $100,000 in annual child support for each of her three children by Trump. This fortune was only just compensation for the years of poverty and obscurity she endured as the Donald’s wife.
We sure are glad to see that Ivana got the alimony, because it’s hard to see how she’d get by on only a million a year in investment income. And we’re equally relieved about the child support — it’s really tough to raise a kid these days on a net worth of only $22 million.
While we greatly admire Ivana for getting rich without getting her hands dirty, our real star is wife number two, Marla Maples. Wife number two clearly didn’t learn much from wife number one, but she did follow the rules of the game, as outlined above.
Marla, now 33 years old, did sign a pre-nuptial agreement, but says she didn’t read it and signed under duress. Maples says, “I wanted to go with the heart.” Pre-nuptial agreements make “marriage a business deal, and that is not what God meant marriage to be.” Although Maples abhors the idea of a business deal, she is “very sad” to see that her divorce settlement is only a pittance, rumored to be $2.5 million.
Maples again: “I couldn’t believe that anyone would put that kind of financial limitation on what love is. I just think that if you care enough to share a life with someone, you can’t measure that in financial worth.”
Like everyone who says that their loss can’t be measured in financial terms, Maples would like more money to compensate for the loss of her husband.
Both Marla and Ivana think greed is bad, but one just has to look out for the kids. Marla said she signed the pre-nup only because she “was looking out for the best for my baby.” Maples wants to renegotiate the pre-nuptial agreement, but only in order to better provide for her four-year-old child.
Maples says all she wants is to give her child “a secure home in a good, safe environment, in a good school district.” Hard to believe that billions of men and women around the world want the same thing for their children — even if their ex is not a billionaire.
(Source: New York Daily News).
0 thoughts on “LOVE, AMERICAN STYLE!”
I am really surprised that Donald Trump could not see the manipulative person that marla maples really is.
Time: 12/12/97 (11:41:26)
Time: 10/20/97 (12:48:28)
Let the men eat cake!
You get what you pay for. In this instance, as is usually the case, the women are using their best assets until such time as they are no longer marketable, not unlike a used car. They are property which is what they want to be and, quite frankly, are. They are useless.