Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NY Civil Lawsuit & Criminal Trial Against Donald Trump & Family

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    "Mind you, he does not have that in equity. So when these assets get sold — remember, he is low-basis in most if not all of these assets — take the tax implications and then subtract from that the outstanding mortgages that may exist. Technically, there's nothing left."


    The Dildo Of Consequences Rarely Arrives Lubed. - Kermit
    If they sell

    https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...184240669.html


    Ivana Trump's $22.5 Million NYC Townhouse Has No Buyers & Donald Trump Might Be the Problem

    Ivana Trump’s Upper East Side townhouse needs a buyer, and no one seems to want to touch it. Her children, Ivanka, Eric, and Donald Trump Jr., put the six-story, 8,800-square-foot residence on the market last November, four months after her sudden passing. And even with a $4 million price cut — it’s still for sale.

    Comment


    • Tee Hee Hee!
      “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
      Mark Twain

      Comment


      • Ivanka Trump testifies she wasn't involved in documents central to her father's civil fraud trial

        NEW YORK (AP) — Ivanka Trump says she remembers a number of things about a 2011 meeting to pitch her family company's plan to redevelop a historic post office into a Washington, D.C., hotel. She recalls discussion of the overall vision and the company's experience, her father talking up his renovation of New York's famous Plaza Hotel.

        But, she told a court Wednesday, she doesn't remember any mention of his annual financial statements — the documents central to the civil fraud trial that could reshape former President Donald Trump’s family business.

        “I don’t recall, with specificity, any discussion over financial statements,” testified his elder daughter, who has been in his inner circle in both business and politics.


        When pressed on how she could remember talk of the Plaza but not of the financial documents — despite documents showing they'd spurred questions before the meeting from officials overseeing the post office bidding — she explained that “the intention of the meeting was to talk about our vision for the project, so that’s what I recall.”

        With even-tempered testimony that provided a counterpoint to her father’s caustic turn on the stand days earlier, Ivanka Trump rounded out a major stretch in the trial that could reshape the family business. Her brothers Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. testified last week, her father on Monday.

        New York Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit alleges that Donald Trump’s asset values were fraudulently pumped up for years on annual “statements of financial condition” that helped him get loans and insurance.

        The non-jury trial will decide allegations of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records — but Judge Arthur Engoron already has resolved the lawsuit’s top claim by ruling that Trump engaged in fraud. That decision came with provisions that could strip the ex-president of oversight of such marquee properties as Trump Tower, though an appeals court is allowing him continued control of his holdings for now.

        James, a Democrat, is seeking over $300 million in penalties and a ban on Trump doing business in New York.

        The ex-president and Republican 2024 front-runner denies any wrongdoing, as do the other defendants. He insisted in court Monday that his financial statements actually greatly underestimated his net worth, that any discrepancies were minor, that a disclaimer absolved him of liability and that “this case is a disgrace.”

        Unlike him and his adult sons, Ivanka Trump is no longer a defendant, and her lawyers had tried to prevent her from having to testify. Ordered to do so, she answered politely — periodically flashing broad smiles and at one point thanking a lawyer in James’ office for bringing up the Old Post Office proposal because it “brought back a lot of memories” — while saying she largely didn't recall the documents and details that he asked her about.

        James’ legal team and defense lawyers repeatedly tangled Wednesday over the scope of the questioning, including whether Ivanka Trump could be asked about 2013 emails that included her husband, Jared Kushner, in discussions about potential Trump company loans.

        While Kushner didn't work for the Trump Organization, he also had introduced his wife years earlier to a Deutsche Bank banker as the Trumps were seeking financing to buy and overhaul the Doral golf resort near Miami, Ivanka Trump testified. Because he also worked in real estate, they would sometimes exchange ideas and advice, she said.

        Ivanka Trump became the point person in establishing a lending relationship with Deutsche Bank’s private wealth management arm. It eventually extended the company hundreds of millions of dollars in loans, with terms that required Donald Trump to submit his financial statements each year.

        Ivanka Trump, who was an executive vice president at the family company, said she didn’t recall ever having provided asset valuation information for the statements or having reviewed them before they were finalized. She recalled being shown “a few documents and correspondence that referenced financial statements, but that was not something I was involved in.”

        “Those were not things that I was privy to,” she testified while being asked about the statements' references to some apartments that she had options to buy in a Trump-owned building on New York’s Park Avenue.

        State lawyers contend that Donald Trump was giving his daughter a steep discount on the apartments while claiming on his financial statements that they were worth far more.


        Her brothers, who are still Trump Organization EVPs, also have professed minimal knowledge of their father’s annual financial statements. Donald Trump Jr. testified that he dealt with the documents only in passing; Eric Trump said he relied completely on accountants and lawyers to ensure the documents’ accuracy. The other Trumps weren’t in court for Ivanka Trump’s testimony. Donald Trump scheduled a rally Wednesday night in Florida near the televised debate he’s skipping with Republican rivals.

        While a Trump Organization executive, Ivanka Trump dealt with securing a loan and a lease for the Washington hotel and financing for Doral in Florida and a hotel and condo skyscraper in Chicago, according to court filings.

        As her father's inauguration neared, she announced in January 2017 that she was stepping away from her Trump Organization job. She became an unpaid senior adviser. After her time in the administration, she moved to Florida.

        An appeals court dismissed her as a defendant in the lawsuit in June, saying the claims against her were too old.

        Her attorneys contended that she shouldn't have to testify. They said the state was just trying to harass the family by dragging her into court.

        The state attorney general's office argued that her testimony would be relevant, saying she was involved in some events discussed in the case and remains financially and professionally entwined with the Trump Organization and its leaders.

        “Ms. Trump will do all that she can to try to separate herself from this corporation,” James predicted on the way into court. “But she’s inextricably tied to the Trump Organization and to these properties that she helped secure financing for.”

        Engoron and, later, an appeals court ruled that she had to testify.
        ____________

        Completely predictable: "I don't know anything about the business that I was an executive of and can I please go now?"

        Not sure why the NYAG was so keen to put her on the stand.
        “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

        Comment


        • Was there not the back and forth between her and the AG over a series of emails back in December 2011 about a loan and Trump's net worth. To me those emails implicate her as to her knowledge regarding worth whether she admits it or not.

          Comment


          • "Stunning": Court reporters hint at “rumblings” of potential Trump settlement talks in NY fraud case


            Donald Trump, Alina Habba

            Rumors of potential settlement talks on Tuesday swirled around the Manhattan courthouse where former President Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial is taking place.

            Frank Runyeon, a reporter for Law360, on Tuesday cited a “very curious” 25-minute delay in the trial resuming after an afternoon break. Trump attorney Alina Habba walked out of the chambers "alone” before the New York attorney general’s team went in, Runyeon wrote on X/Twitter, linking the incident to Trump recently complaining about a “low-ball settlement offer.”

            Trump's attorneys have already appealed Judge Arthur Engoron's pre-trial summary judgment holding Trump, his eldest sons and his company liable for persistent fraud and have signaled that they plan to push for a mistrial.

            MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin, who has been reporting from the courthouse during the weekslong trial, also reported “rumblings that the private conversations we’ve observed between each side and the court reflect some sort of settlement negotiation.”

            Rubin noted that Habba would make sense as Trump’s proxy in potential settlement talks because aside from being his outside counsel she is also listed as the legal spokesperson and general counsel for his Save America PAC. “She just might be the best positioned to negotiate on behalf of Team Trump,” Rubin wrote.

            “Why do folks believe the private conversations today between each side and the judge reflect settlement conversations? In part because of Trump’s Truth Social post” on Monday, Rubin wrote in another post.

            Trump on Monday claimed that Judge Arthur Engoron “asked me to settle for a MUCH LOWER AMOUNT, at a settlement conference, but I said NO, I DID NOTHING WRONG!”

            Trump two weeks earlier also claimed that the attorney general’s lawyers “want to settle.”

            “Why should I be forced to settle when I did nothing wrong?” he wrote.

            Rubin noted that the only publicly reported settlement conversations date back to September 2022, before the lawsuit was actually filed.

            “Moreover, that reporting discusses many settlement overtures from the Trump Organization to the attorney general, but does not reference any settlement conferences before Judge Engoron. So what is Trump talking about and when did it happen? Stay tuned,” Rubin wrote.

            Former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman tweeted that we should learn soon if settlement talks are indeed happening.

            “This would be an absolutely stunning development, but I can’t think of a better explanation for Kise’s being outside the court room for so long mid trial,” he wrote.

            The Daily Beast’s Jose Pagliery also reported on Tuesday that Habba met privately with the judge, “probably seeking a settlement to quietly end his bank fraud trial.”

            But Pagliery predicted that it would be “a cold day in hell when the Trumps & New York AG agree to shelve this trial.”

            “The judge might drown Trump in fines ranging from $250 million to a gazillion dollars. And the entire Trump Org could end up in receivership soon,” he wrote. “What would the Trumps counteroffer?”

            New York attorney Paul Golden told Newsweek that while Trump settled his Trump University case in 2018, "it is possible the public would view a settlement of the current fraud case very differently."

            "In the event Trump is considering settlement, and thus far we have not seen any evidence of it, he would have a great many issues to consider, including how a potential settlement would affect his brand, his businesses, and real property, and what kinds of fines would be at stake,” Golden said, adding that the case is "unusual in one major respect: most attorneys never have to consider whether a settlement would affect one's client's ability to win the presidency."
            _________

            Almost certainly something juicy going on, but settlement? Trump certainly wants all this to just go away, but I agree with Pagliery. It'll be a cold day in hell before that happens.

            “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

            Comment


            • What do they think has been going on for the last few weeks. The Judge has already said Trump is guilty. That is settled!

              The last few weeks the testimony revolves around a number to settle on as per a penalty. That is at the sole discretion of the judge. He need not make any deal.

              Comment


              • In tears, ex-Trump exec testifies he gave up company job because he was tired of legal woes


                FILE - Trump Organization Senior Vice President and Controller Jeffrey McConney arrives to the courthouse in New York, Nov. 15, 2022. McConney is among defendants in the trial in which New York Attorney General Letitia James alleges that Trump and executives at his company fraudulently inflated his wealth on his financial statements, which were used to secure loans and insurance.

                NEW YORK (AP) — Tearing up as he testified, Donald Trump's former corporate controller said he “gave up” on his longtime job because he was worn out by the company's legal woes.

                Jeffrey McConney was on the witness stand for a fourth day in six weeks at the ex-president’s civil fraud trial when defense lawyer Jesus M. Suarez asked why McConney no longer works at the Trump Organization.

                McConney paused, took off his glasses, raised his hands in the air, wiped his eyes with tissues that a court officer brought to him and started reflecting aloud about his more than 35 years at the company, ending in February.

                “I’m very proud of the work that I did,” he said, then launched into a litany of investigations and legal proceedings in which he's been subpoenaed or called to testify.

                “I just wanted to relax and stop being accused of misrepresenting assets for the company that I loved working for. I’m sorry,” he testified Tuesday, his voice trembling.


                McConney is among defendants in the trial in which New York Attorney General Letitia James alleges that Trump and executives at his company fraudulently inflated his wealth on his financial statements, which were used to secure loans and insurance.

                Trump, the Republican presidential front-runner, has deplored the case as a political attack by James, a Democrat. He contends the documents actually underestimated his net worth. And he has emphasized that the statements came with notes saying that they weren't audited and that others might reach different conclusions about his financial position— disclaimers that he characterizes as telling recipients to vet the numbers themselves.

                Former controller McConney said he has retired and is receiving $500,000 in severance payments.

                His exit came months after he was granted immunity to testify for the prosecution at the Trump Organization’s New York criminal tax fraud trial, where he admitted breaking the law to help fellow executives avoid taxes on company-paid perks. The company was convicted and is appealing.

                At the current civil trial, McConney was called to the stand last month by the attorney general's office, and again this week by defense lawyers. He has testified that he and other executives arrived at the asset values that James' office says were wildly high.

                He disclosed, for example, that the estimate for the boss's Trump Tower penthouse was increased by $20 million partly because of the value of Trump's celebrity and that he valued Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida as though the property could be sold as a private home, though an agreement with the National Trust for Historic Preservation barred such a use.

                But McConney also testified that there was no “right way” to determine valuations. He said the bases for his evaluations were clear to the outside accountants who prepared the financial statements, and he testified Tuesday that he never intended to mislead anyone or to be purposefully inaccurate.

                “I think everything was justified. Numbers don’t represent fully what these assets are worth,” he said, adding that he and others at the company “felt comfortable” with the valuations.

                “To be hit over the head every time with a negative comment over something is just really frustrating, and I gave up,” he said, throwing up his hands.
                ________

                I'd be crying too if I was suddenly held to account for 35 years of cooking the books....
                “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                Comment


                • Trump Doesn’t Want to Name His Experts in the Hush Money Case
                  Trump's lawyers and prosecutors at the Manhattan DA’s office are battling over Trump’s team naming who they plan to call to the stand in the upcoming hush money trial.



                  As the Manhattan District Attorney gears up for Donald Trump’s criminal trial next year, the former president is locked in a battle over experts.

                  Specifically, the Manhattan DA wants to know who Trump’s lawyers plan to call to the stand to rationalize the former president’s hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels—and Trump’s lawyers don’t want to say.

                  After nearly three months of the DA asking, prosecutors have formally requested that Justice Juan Merchan intervene, complaining that the former president is sabotaging their ability to prepare for the historic trial—and possibly setting up roadblocks with only four months to go.

                  DA Alvin Bragg Jr. hit the real estate tycoon with 34 felony charges earlier this year over the way Trump hid his hush money payment in the weeks before the 2016 election, a blatant attempt to keep the porn star from tarnishing what ultimately became a successful presidential campaign. Since then, Merchan has warned Trump—who lashed out against the judge’s own daughter—to temper his vitriolic threats, and both sides have been gearing up for trial.

                  But court filings show that it’s not going well.

                  Prosecutors say Trump’s lawyers ignored two months of emails starting in August, refusing to respond to their repeated requests that the defense team identify who in the world they’re planning to call at trial. Those experts would, in theory, justify how Trump orchestrated a two-step cover-up that involved having close associate Michael Cohen transfer $130,000 to silence Stormy Daniels, then faking Trump Organization business records to pay him back as supposed “legal fees.”

                  The DA’s entire case rests on the idea that Trump faked business records, which is normally a misdemeanor but only get bumped up into more serious felony status because it was done to hide another crime: a violation of election law.

                  It’s a theory that already got hearty support from a federal judge who brushed away Trump’s attempt to yank the case out of state court—sending it right back to Merchan.

                  Judging by the Trump strategy laid out in court documents so far, any expert his lawyers call will likely claim New York’s election law doesn’t actually relate to federal positions. Defense lawyers have conceded that New York “contemplates… federal elections under certain circumstances,” but they lean heavily on the notion that the state statute refers to “public office”—while the term “public officer” is elsewhere “defined by reference to jobs ‘of the state.’”

                  Any Trump expert also would attempt to back up the defense team’s argument that the hush money wasn’t technically a campaign contribution, because he would have paid her off anyway—potentially to keep it from ruining his marriage to Melania Trump and avoiding the insanely costly New York tabloid billionaire divorce.

                  And if that idea doesn’t work, they plan to point out that the DA didn’t go after 2016 rival and eternal enemy Hillary Clinton after the Federal Elections Commission last year concluded that she essentially violated the same rules—when she didn’t properly disclose the money her campaign spent on the opposition research that resulted in the Trump-Russia “Steele dossier.”

                  In any case, prosecutors want to know who’s going to testify on Trump’s behalf and what they plan to say—the most basic stuff.

                  Susan Hoffinger, chief of the Manhattan DA’s investigations division, initially emailed three of Trump’s lawyers on Aug. 24 to share some items prosecutors plan to use at trial—and remind them that they blew their deadline to do the same the previous day.

                  “As such, the People request that Defendant comply with his reciprocal discovery obligations,” she wrote, specifically asking them to identify any expert witnesses.
                  But in court filings, prosecutors say Trump’s lawyers didn’t respond to several follow-ups—until Oct. 20, when the billionaire’s attorneys essentially said: You first.

                  “The defense obligation only kicks in once the People have completed their discovery obligations,” Gedalia M. Stern finally shot back.

                  He was referring to a gripe that he and fellow Trump lawyers Susan R. Necheles, Steven Yurowitz, Todd Blanche, Emil Bove, and Stephen Weiss had listed in a court filing weeks earlier. Prosecutors want to reference 33 books about Trump at trial—and Trump’s lawyers don’t want to comb through all of them.

                  “DANY did not produce these books in discovery, and it has not specified the specific parts of the books that the prosecutors believe are relevant and will be used at trial. The court should order DANY to disclose those specifications,” Blanche and the others wrote on Sept. 29.

                  But prosecutors say that excuse only appeared five weeks late. And now it’s been three months since the deadline.

                  It appears that Justice Merchan hasn’t yet weighed in. Publicly available court records don’t show any judicial order on file.

                  Prosecutors now warn that this kind of hiccup could muddy up the busy months ahead. Trump is already drowning in legal trouble, currently wrapping up an extremely lengthy bank fraud trial in the civil courthouse next door. And come the new year, the top-ranking Republican presidential primary candidate will be busy with the Iowa caucuses, followed by elections in Nevada, Michigan, and South Carolina.

                  In his Nov. 9 memo seeking the judge’s help, assistant district attorney Matthew Colangelo said he expects a fight over whatever witnesses Trump intends to call—and that could take some time too.

                  “Further delaying the required disclosures will hinder the People’s ability to prepare for trial,” he wrote. “Delaying defendant’s expert disclosures risks burdening the court with late motions… to exclude expert testimony.”
                  ____
                  “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                  Comment



                  • Trump Caught Moving Money Around to Pay Massive Tax Bill
                    Trump wasn't supposed to be moving significant amounts of money around without notifying a court-appointed auditor. He just got caught paying himself so he could pay his taxes.




                    A court-ordered financial auditor has caught Donald Trump quietly moving $40 million from the Trump Organization into a personal bank account—seemingly so the former president could pay his whopping $29 million tax bill.

                    Trump isn’t supposed to be moving any money around without alerting Barbara S. Jones, a former federal judge in New York tasked with babysitting the Trump Organization for its relentlessly shady business practices. But on Wednesday, she notified a New York state court about some major bank transfers that were never brought to her attention by the Trumps.

                    Jones described the way she discovered the Trump family company once again breaking the rules during an audit of its finances in recent months. In the run-up to the ongoing bank fraud trial that threatens to vaporize the real estate company and boot the Trumps from the business world, Justice Arthur F. Engoron ordered the company to not start shifting around funds to avoid paying what’s becoming an increasingly threatening massive penalty.

                    That meant the Trumps had to notify Jones anytime they moved more than $5 million out of the billionaire’s massive trust. Except they didn’t.

                    Jones said she and her team recently spotted unusual activity when reviewing 10 months of bank statements from 12 separate accounts belonging to the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust. They found that Trump had pulled out $40 million in “three cash transfers” without ever notifying her.

                    She asked about it and got answers.

                    “These transactions included a cash transfer of $29 million to Donald J. Trump, which I have confirmed was used for tax payments,” she wrote.

                    But the rest apparently went to cover Trump’s mounting legal costs following a searing jury verdict in May that determined he sexually assaulted the journalist E. Jean Carroll—and slapped him with a $5 million penalty.

                    “I have also confirmed that the other transfers were for insurance premiums and to an attorney escrow account,” Jones wrote, referencing the Carroll case.
                    ____________

                    How deeply shocking

                    Now let's see if there are any consequences.
                    “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                    Comment


                    • Deutsche Bank saw Trump as ‘whale’ of a client, NY fraud trial documents show


                      Deutsche Bank saw Trump as ‘whale’ of a client, NY fraud trial documents show

                      Deutsche Bank eagerly pursued former President Trump as a “whale” of a client more than a decade ago, and their partnership became mutually beneficial over the years, according to documents introduced by Trump’s legal team Wednesday during his ongoing fraud trial.

                      Trump’s counsel introduced emails from 2011 between then-bank managing director Rosemary Vrablic and colleagues, in which Vrablic expressed significant interest in working with the Trumps.

                      “We are whale hunting,” she wrote after meeting Donald Trump Jr., before she had met his father. The bankers used “whale” to refer to very wealthy clients, she testified Wednesday.

                      Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank is a core component of New York Attorney General Letitia James’s lawsuit against the former president, his business and several executives — including his adult sons. The state claims the Trump Organization falsely inflated and deflated the value of its assets on key financial statements to receive lower taxes and better insurance coverage, deceiving lenders and insurers in the process.

                      As part of its defense, Trump’s counsel has attempted to show that bankers were excited to work with the former president’s business and that there was “no victim” of its business dealings. According to a bank document prepared for Deutsche Bank’s then-co-chairman in 2013, shown as evidence at trial, the bank’s revenue from its business with Trump skyrocketed from around $13,000 in 2011 to a projected $6 million in 2013.

                      Trump testified earlier this month that his statements of financial condition — documents at the heart of the case that detail the value of his business’s various assets and were used to secure loans and deals — were “not really documents that the banks paid much attention to.”

                      “I’ve been dealing with banks for 50 years and probably know banks as well as anybody,” Trump said on the witness stand earlier this month. “I know what they look at. They look at the deal.”


                      But the attorney general’s office claims the government was nonetheless misled and banks were shortchanged millions of dollars. Earlier in the trial, an expert witness hired by the state testified that the Trump Organization’s skewed financial statements may have cost banks more than $168 million in interest.

                      Judge Arthur Engoron has already found Trump and his business liable for fraud. The trial is addressing other claims, including conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records.

                      Four Deutsche Bank executives are expected to testify this week in the defense case, which is set to span until mid-December, when Trump plans to retake the stand as the defense’s last witness.
                      ____________

                      Whale: A particularly weak poker player with a very large stack of chips or bankroll that can be targeted with minimal risk.
                      “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                      Comment


                      • FYI...in the ARCYBER world a phishing attempt against a senior cial is known as "whaling". Seems related.
                        “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                        Mark Twain

                        Comment


                        • Appeals court reinstates gag order that barred Trump from maligning court staff in NY fraud trial


                          Former President Donald Trump speaks outside the courtroom after testifying at New York Supreme Court, Monday, Nov. 6, 2023, in New York.

                          NEW YORK (AP) — A New York appeals court Thursday reinstated a gag order that barred Donald Trump from commenting about court personnel after he continually disparaged a law clerk in his New York civil fraud trial.

                          The one-sentence decision from a four-judge panel came two weeks after an individual appellate judge had put the order on hold while the appeals process played out.

                          Trial judge Arthur Engoron, who imposed the gag order, said he now planned to enforce it “rigorously and vigorously.”

                          Trump attorney Christopher Kise called it “a tragic day for the rule of law.”


                          Engoron imposed the initial gag order Oct. 3 after Trump posted a derogatory comment about the judge’s law clerk to social media. The post, which included a baseless allegation about the clerk’s personal life, came the second day of the trial in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit.

                          James’ lawsuit alleges Trump exaggerated his wealth on financial statements used to secure loans and make deals. Trump denies any wrongdoing. The former president, now the front-runner for the Republican 2024 presidential nomination, contends the lawsuit is a political attack by James, a Democrat.

                          Over the trial’s first few weeks, Engoron fined Trump $15,000 for violating the gag order. The judge expanded the order — which initially covered only parties in the case — to include lawyers after Trump’s attorneys questioned clerk Allison Greenfield’s prominent role on the bench, where she sits alongside the judge, exchanging notes and advising him during testimony.

                          Trump’s lawyers filed a lawsuit against Engoron, challenging his gag order as an abuse of power.

                          State lawyers had sought to tie Trump’s comments to an uptick in nasty calls and messages directed at the judge and law clerk.

                          A court security captain wrote in a sworn statement last week that Greenfield has been receiving 20-30 calls per day to her personal cell phone and 30-50 messages per day on social media, LinkedIn and to two personal email addresses.

                          The captain reported that Greenfield received enough harassing voicemails to fill a transcript with 275 single-spaced pages, and that about half the harassing and disparaging messages to her were antisemitic.

                          Trump’s lawyers had argued that while messages and calls were “vile and reprehensible,” he shouldn’t be muzzled because of other people’s bad behavior. Trump never called for violence against Greenfield, nor did he or his lawyers ever encourage or condone harassment and threats, the attorneys wrote in a court filing.

                          They argued that the gag order infringed on his free speech rights.

                          “As the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination and as a citizen on trial, President Trump is well within his rights to comment on what he perceives as bias,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

                          While the order was on hold, Trump posted about Greenfield as recently as Wednesday, referring to the judge’s “very disturbed and angry law clerk.”

                          Trump is due to testify in the case, for a second time, Dec. 11.
                          _________

                          December 11th (and the leadup to it) is going to be very interesting...If Trump keeps his mouth shut, then his lawyers will have gotten through to him exactly what will happen.

                          If he doesn't, then he's actively seeking martyrdom behind bars to whip up his cult and keep the grift going.
                          “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                          Comment


                          • N.Y. high court denies Donald Trump's bid for expedited review of gag order in fraud trial


                            A bid by attorneys for former President Donald Trump for a quick high court review of a gag order imposed on him by the judge in his New York civil fraud trial was denied on Monday.

                            Dec. 4 (UPI) -- The state of New York's highest court on Monday denied a bid by former President Donald Trump to fast-track his appeal of a gag order as defense testimony resumed in his $250 million civil fraud trial.

                            Trump's lawyers began the day Monday with a filing urging New York's Court of Appeals to grant an expedited review of his request to vacate a ruling by a panel of state appellate court judges upholding a gag order imposed on the former president by trial Judge Arthur Engoron.

                            Trump is scheduled to take the stand in his own defense on Dec. 11, spurring his legal team to have the gag order lifted before then.

                            In seeking the fast-tracked high court review, Trump attorney Clifford Robert argued as he has in earlier filings his client is suffering "irreparable injury daily" and is being "silenced on matters implicating the appearance of bias and impropriety on the bench" due to the gag order, which was initially imposed by Engoron on Oct. 3, the second day of the trial.

                            He slapped the order on Trump after the former president posted social media comments disparaging the judge's law clerk, which court officials say spurred hundreds of threats and anti-Semitic vitriol directed toward the court and its officers from Trump's supporters.

                            The appeals court last month temporarily lifted the gag orders and sanctions barring Trump from attacking Engoron's law clerk Allison Greenfield.

                            His bid for an expedited hearing, however, was rejected by high court officials later on Monday, Courthouse News and ABC News reported, meaning the gag order will still be effective when Trump takes the stand next week.

                            Meanwhile, defense testimony resumed Monday with a real estate expert called by Trump's attorneys.

                            The former president and his family are accused by New York Attorney General Letitia James of vastly inflating the values of their properties in a decades-long scheme to defraud banks and investors. She is seeking at least $250 million in restitution.

                            Engoron ruled in September during the first phase of the trial that Trump indeed fraudulently inflated the values of his real estate properties, granting a partial summary judgement in the case to James.

                            Real estate appraiser Frederick Chin testified Monday that Trump's valuations were not necessarily fraudulent because developers can take many factors into account when determining a property's worth, including their value of their own reputations -- the so-called "genius factor," ABC News reported.

                            Upon cross-examination by prosecutors, however, Chin agreed that Trump's valuation of a mansion and surrounding properties in Westchester County, N.Y., was neither "reasonable" or "proper," according to Courthouse News.

                            James alleges bogus valuations of the "Seven Springs" property were used by Trump to claim an apparent $21 million tax deduction and to improperly inflate his net worth. She said Trump bought the property for $7.5 million in 1996, but by 2012 had valued it $291 million.
                            ___________

                            Nice try asshole. Predictable, but still a nice try. You'll have to wait in line like everybody else.
                            “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                            Comment


                            • Eric Trump no longer testifying in Trump’s civil fraud trial


                              Eric Trump is no longer testifying as part of the defense case in Donald Trump’s New York civil fraud trial, Trump attorney Chris Kise said in court Tuesday.

                              Eric Trump, a defendant along with his father, brother Donald Jr., and the Trump Organization, had been scheduled to appear on Wednesday as part of the defense presentation, but Kise told Judge Arthur Engoron that the defense was streamlining its case.

                              There are two remaining witnesses for the defense: accounting expert Eli Bartov, a professor at NYU, will testify on Thursday, and the former president is scheduled to appear on Monday.

                              Donald Trump and his three adult children were all called as witnesses by the attorney general’s office during its case. The New York attorney general’s $250 million lawsuit against Trump, his sons and his company accuses them of committing repeated fraud by inflating the values of Trump’s properties.

                              When Eric Trump was questioned by the attorney general’s office, he was pressed about his understanding of his father’s financial statements that were used to support real estate transactions in tense testimony.

                              Donald Trump Jr. was the first witness called by the defense, one of several who have returned for a second round of testimony during the defense presentation.

                              In court Tuesday, Kise asked Engoron to postpone Trump’s testimony until the New York appeals court resolved the gag order issue. Trump’s lawyers were unsuccessful in their latest effort to fight the order barring Donald Trump from talking about the judge’s staff, after they sought Monday to kick their appeal up to the state’s highest court.

                              Engoron quickly rejected Kise’s request.

                              “Absolutely not. No way. No how. That’s a non-starter. He will testify Monday and that’s that,” Engoron said.

                              __________

                              "Streamlining the defense" That's a good one.

                              I was wondering when that was going to happen.

                              And of course Trump is trying to drag things out even more lol
                              “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                              Comment


                              • NY officials lose their temper and shred Trump's fraud-trial 'antics' in a sarcasm-laced filing
                                • The testimony's over, but the acrimony lingers on at the Trump civil fraud trial.
                                • In a filing Monday, a lawyer for NY's attorney general condemns the Trump team's continual "antics."
                                • "The most ineffective team of experts that Defendants' money can buy," they snipe.
                                The testimony's over, but the acrimony lingers on at Donald Trump's civil fraud trial in New York.

                                Sarcasm and frustration practically drip from the latest filing in the case by the New York attorney general's office, which complains about the Trump team's "antics," "maneuvers," and "sound bites."

                                "The most ineffective team of experts that Defendants' money can buy," the Monday filing snarks of Trump's more than $2 million in paid witnesses.

                                The three-page filing is the state attorney general's fed-up response to Trump's latest request for what's called a "directed verdict."

                                That's when a judge, overwhelmed by a lack of evidence, skips way ahead — forgoing any more testimony, or, in this case, the still-pending closing briefs and arguments — and hands an early win to the defendants.

                                This is the sixth time in nearly three months of trial that Trump's team has asked for a directed verdict.

                                Each time, the judge in the non-jury trial, New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, either ignored the request and continued the trial, or denied the motion.

                                Procedurally, the latest request "makes zero sense," the AG's filing says, "coming after Defendants have already made five prior directed verdict motions during the trial, two of which were 'denied' and another of which was 'absolutely denied.'"

                                The words "denied" and "absolutely denied" are the judge's. The italics and ire belong to the AG, or more precisely, her special counsel, Andrew Amer.

                                "The motion, for the reasons explained below, as with many of the Defendants' courtroom antics and maneuvers during the course of this trial, is nothing more than a political stunt designed to provide Mr. Trump, his co-defendants, and their counsel with sound bites for press conferences, Truth Social posts, and cable news appearances," the AG writes.

                                As just one "sound bites" example, on November 9, Trump attorney Alina Habba told viewers of Fox & Friends that her team was about to seek a directed verdict, at that point their third.

                                "Today is a really important day," she told viewers.

                                The more evidence presented at trial, the worse things got for Trump, Amer argues.

                                "It is logically impossible for the Defendants' Motion to have greater merit now based on a larger evidentiary record than their prior failed motions had," the state lawyer writes.

                                "Unlike a fine Bordeaux, Defendants' case for a directed verdict does not improve with age."

                                Lawyers for Trump didn't immediately return Business Insider's request for comment.


                                New York Attorney General Letitia James with Andrew S. Amer, center, and Kevin C. Wallace, right.

                                Amer calls the defense motion "beyond frivilous"

                                Amer goes on to call this latest directed-verdict request "beyond frivolous," since it relies "on arguments the Court has already rejected," or which are contradicted by the evidence, or which "have no record support at all."

                                The judge has already found that based on pretrial evidence alone, Trump, his company, and his top executives committed fraud by hiking his net worth by billions of dollars a year in a decade's worth of financial statements he sent to banks and insurers.

                                The civil trial, in which closing briefs and arguments are due next month, is to determine if that already-proven fraud further rose to the level of criminality, and what the final penalties will be.

                                A criminal conspiracy has now been proven, Amer wrote Monday.

                                "There is ample evidence of agreements to inflate asset values among and between the defendants to support a conspiracy," he wrote.

                                Each year, Trump's ex-CFO, Allen Weisselberg, and his ex-comptroller, Jeffrey McConney, agreed to use the inflated values, he wrote.

                                Between 2011 and 2015, Trump approved the use of those values, he wrote. Trump had moved to the White House when the 2016 net-worth statement was issued, and from then until 2021, those inflated values were approved by his trustees, Donald Trump, Jr., and Weisselberg, Amer wrote.

                                And in 2021, Donald Trump, Jr., and Eric Trump "together reviewed and approved the methods used to inflate the value of certain golf clubs," he wrote, referring to what the AG's office has called a "deceptive strategy" of secretly adding a Trump "brand premium" to the clubs' value.

                                "Nor does any of the testimony from the most ineffective team of experts that Defendants' money can buy change the analysis," Amer writes, taking a shot at Trump's pricey expert witnesses.

                                The Trump experts had claimed that property values are subjective.

                                "So what?" Amer asks in response.

                                The trial was never about whether the assets were objectively correctly valued, he adds.

                                Rather, the trial was about whether Trump intentionally hiked his numbers, "thereby creating false business records, issuing false financial statements, and committing insurance fraud," he writes, referring to the state criminal statutes at hand.


                                "As the People will demonstrate in their post-trial brief and closing argument, Defendants did these illegal acts and must now disgorge their ill-gotten gains," he concludes, referring to the more than $250 million in penalties that the state is seeking.

                                "To the extent the Court deems it necessary at all to address Defendants' sixth attempt to obtain a directed verdict," Amer concludes in one final barb, "it should summarily deny the Motion."

                                Closing briefs in the trial are due January 5 and closing arguments are scheduled for January 11. The judge has said he will reach a verdict by the end of January.
                                ________
                                “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X