So Jen Pskaki has these two guys on - Neil Katyal and Andrew Weissman - and boy are they spewing some crazy shit

[Ocelot II]

78. The judge has to approve the bond. If he thinks there was something untoward about it,

he can decline to approve it, or he can make TFG re-apply. If TFG already had obtained the bond before he asked for an extension, the fact that he or his idiot lawyer lied to the court doesn't necessarily vitiate the bond, but the judge might want to know why he wanted an extension if he already had the bond. It's doubtful the insurer would have issued it without already having received the premium and a collateral arrangement, so was the extension needed to cement some underlying deal? Or some unrelated reason? It's certainly a fair question, but this judge wasn't born yesterday so it's likely he's aware of the discrepancy and will want to know the answer.