in that I’m really uncomfortable with the judge because, in granting summary judgment, he gave Trump an easy appeal issue. In order to grant summary judgment, the judge was required to view the evidence in the light most favorable to Trump and was prohibited from making a credibility determination as to Trump’s deposition testimony and other witnesses. But he clearly did not do that and came close to calling Trump a liar (which of course he is) by describing his evidence as “fantasy” and making other derogatory comments. The judge could have waited until after the trial, issued the same opinion, and then on appeal the evidence would be viewed in the light most favorable to the Atty General. I think the sj gets reversed on appeal for this reason. Really stupid move by the judge.
There is no jury trial in this case. The judge will sit as the finder of fact. I’m a bit confused as to why. The talking heads say Alina Habob failed to request a jury trial. Incredible malpractice – you would think Trump would be furious. But she was sitting beside Trump this morning. And she went on Fox and responded there is no right to a jury trial for these allegations which I think is wrong but hard to believe she would say that on TV. After missing the 15 day deadline to demand a jury trial, she also could have asked the judge to hold a jury trial anyway, claiming excusable neglect or something like that. She did not do that. But you are absolutely right – the ultimate judgment would have a lot more credibility if a jury rendered it instead of the judge who Trump called a criminal this morning. At the very least, the judge should have allowed cameras so we all could see Trump is being treated fairly. But he did not do that either.Trump's trial for financial fraud got under way today in New York with Trump at the defense table glowering just like his GA mug shot. So that was funny.
But seriously, while I believe he's guilty as sin I am not completely comfortable with what the judge in this case has done. While I understand he (and other judges) have a right in certain circumstances to declare summary judgement and find for the prosecution (or the defense) without going to a jury, I'm not sure it was a good idea to do so in this case. Because of Trump's own disdain for real justice I think it's important that a jury of ordinary citizens should have heard the case and, if they found Trump guilty, been. the ones to decide on the punishment. Now, Trump will be more easily able to say the system was stacked against him and is part of an effort to destroy him for political purposes.
Of course, he would have done the same exact thing if found guilty by a jury of his peers. But at least then there would have been fewer who could have agreed with him.
What do the rest of you legal eagles have to say?
And I'm in your camp as to where's the jury. But as I check out the latest and greatest news cycles, It's because trumps lawyer waived that right to have a jury. Apparently they didn't check the box to have a jury.
I could be wrong, but that's what I'm reading.
Now my question is, what's the over under on the penalty?? Hearing a min of 250M, to a max of 600M.
My guess, 350M....Over or under??
in that I’m really uncomfortable with the judge because, in granting summary judgment, he gave Trump an easy appeal issue. In order to grant summary judgment, the judge was required to view the evidence in the light most favorable to Trump and was prohibited from making a credibility determination as to Trump’s deposition testimony and other witnesses. But he clearly did not do that and came close to calling Trump a liar (which of course he is) by describing his evidence as “fantasy” and making other derogatory comments. The judge could have waited until after the trial, issued the same opinion, and then on appeal the evidence would be viewed in the light most favorable to the Atty General. I think the sj gets reversed on appeal for this reason. Really stupid move by the judge.
There is no jury trial in this case. The judge will sit as the finder of fact. I’m a bit confused as to why. The talking heads say Alina Habob failed to request a jury trial. Incredible malpractice – you would think Trump would be furious. But she was sitting beside Trump this morning. And she went on Fox and responded there is no right to a jury trial for these allegations which I think is wrong but hard to believe she would say that on TV.
After missing the 15 day deadline to demand a jury trial, she also could have asked the judge to hold a jury trial anyway, claiming excusable neglect or something like that. She did not do that. But you are absolutely right – the ultimate judgment would have a lot more credibility if a jury rendered it instead of the judge who Trump called a criminal this morning. At the very least, the judge should have allowed cameras so we all could see Trump is being treated fairly. But he did not do that either.
And, yes, it's been reported she DID have the opportunity to request a jury trial and didn't, which is major malpractice. Also consistent with the shitty legal support Trump is getting. Of course that's because so many good lawyers won't work for Trump because he's a shitty client who won't follow his lawyers advice and also doesn't pay them sometimes.
All that said, I STILL think the judge should have ordered a jury trial.
Only the best people. LOL.
I also posted that Habba / Trump declined to request a jury trial.
http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion-boards/politics-and-religion-39/re-the-judge-ordered-all-of-trumps-business-licenses-433420
.
Back to the possibility of Trump appealing the summary judgement: Here is the full text of Engoron's ruling: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23991876/trump-ny-fraud-ruling.pdf I'll post a couple of bits:
.
Page 10: ""Exacerbating defendants’ obstreperous conduct is their continued reliance on bogus arguments, in papers and oral argument. In defendants’ world: rent regulated apartments are worth the same as unregulated apartments; restricted land is worth the same as unrestricted land; restrictions can evaporate into thin air; a disclaimer by one party casting responsibility on another party exonerates the other party’s lies; the Attorney General of the State of New York does not have capacity to sue or standing to sue (never mind all those cases where the Attorney General has sued successfully) under a statute expressly designed to provide that right; all illegal acts are untimely if they stem from one untimely act; and square footage subjective.
.
"That is a fantasy world, not the real world. ..."
.
Page 21: "This instant action is essentially a “documents case.” As detailed infra, the documents here
clearly contain fraudulent valuations that defendants used in business, satisfying OAG’s burden
to establish liability as a matter of law against defendants. Defendants’ respond that: the
documents do not say what they say; that there is no such thing as “objective” value; and that,
essentially, the Court should not believe its own eyes.’(9)
.
"The defenses Donald Trump attempts to articulate in his sworn deposition are wholly without
basis in law or fact. He claims that if the values of the property have gone up in the years since
the SFCs were submitted, then the numbers were not inflated at that time (i.e.; “But you take the
2014 statement, if something is much more valuable now — or, I guess, we’ll have to pick a date
which was a little short of now. But if something is much more valuable now, then the number
that I have down here is a low number”). NYSCEF Doc. No. 1363 at 69-75). He also seems to
imply that the numbers cannot be inflated because he could find a “buyer from Saudi Arabia” to
pay any price he suggests.'(10) Id. at 30-33, 60-62, 79-80.
.
"The Trump Tower Triplex: This Court takes judicial notice that the Trump Tower apartment in which Donald Trump resided for decades (the “Triplex") is 10,996 square feet. NYSCEF Doc. No. 816 at 2. Between 2012-2016, Donald Trump submitted SFCs falsely claiming that the Triplex was 30,000 square feet, resulting in an overvaluation of between $114-207 million dollars. NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 782 at
Rows 833-834, 1028, 783 at Rows 799-800, 1199, 784 at Rows 843-844, 785 at Rows 882-883,
789 at Row 913, 817. The misrepresentation continued even after defendants received written
notification from Forbes that Donald Trump had been overestimating the square footage of the
Triplex by a factor of three.!!
.
"In opposition, ***defendants absurdly suggest that “the calculation of square footage is a subjective
process*** that could lead to differing results or opinions based on the method employed to conduct
the calculation.'” NYSCEF Doc. No. 1293 at 20. Well yes, perhaps, if the area is rounded or
oddly shaped, it is possible measurements of square footage could come to slightly differing
results due to user error. Good-faith measurements could vary by as much as 10-20%, not 200%.
A discrepancy of this order of magnitude, by a real estate developer sizing up his own living
space of decades, can only be considered fraud.13
.
9. As Chico Marx, playing Chicolini, says to Margaret Dumont, playing Mrs. Gloria Teasdale, in “Duck
Soup,” “well, who ya gonna believe, me or your own eyes?”
10. This statement may suggest influence buying more than savvy investing.
11. Three days after receiving a written inquiry from Forbes, Trump Organization Vice President, Amanda
Miller, sent an email to Trump Organization Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer, Alan
Garten, indicating that she “spoke to Allen W[eisselberg] re: [Trump World Tower and Trump Tower] —
***we are going to leave those alone.”*** NYSCEF Doc. No. 821. Although OAG need not show intent to
deceive under a standalone § 63(12) cause of action, ***this directive to continue to use a grossly inflated
number despite clear knowledge it is false demonstrates the repetitive and ongoing nature of defendants’ propensity to engage in fraud.***
12. Despite this assertion in their motion papers, counsel for defendants, Christopher Kise, Esq, conceded
during oral argument held on September 22, 2023, that square footage is, in fact, an objective number."
.
I don't know how Appeals work in NYS, but I'll imagine a scenario:
Appeals Judge: Yeah, I should take a look at this [read, read, read ...]
AJ: Did Team Trump (TT) actually claim that????!!! [check documents in evidence] Geeez Louise ...
AJ: Engoron was going easy ...
AJ: 33,000 for 11,000???!! Really? "That one was a mistake." AFTER 11 years????!!
AJ: Appeal denied. What he (Engoron) said ... times two.
Trump's trial for financial fraud got under way today in New York with Trump at the defense table glowering just like his GA mug shot. So that was funny. ...
I've been wondering about a different, but related, jury issue. In the NYC (Alfred Bragg) trial, the Judge empaneled the jury, created the juror questionnaire and screened the candidates. As I recall, the jurors were kept anonymous so that NEITHER side, Trump nor Bragg) could investigate the jurors backgrounds, likes / dislikes, etc. and, possibly, use that info to intimidate the empaneled jurors.
.
In the GA RICO trial, due to start on 23-Oct, the judge has ruled that the jurors IDs will be kept secret for their protection. (The names of the Special Grand Jurors has been disclosed and they are receiving death threats and other threats from MAGAs.)
.
So here's my Q and concern. Aileen Cannon is the Trump-friendly, previously overruled judge in the stolen documents case. Despite some errors and decisions that seem to favor Trump, Smith has not sought to have her removed and replaced with a more competent Judge. If CANNON appoints herself to be the sole arbiter of the Mar-A-Lago jury, is there a chance that she will pack it with pro-Trump jurors? Her questionnaire, her direct examination, etc. could put in the fix.
.
Q1: Do you love Trump? Yes or Rejected
Q2: Are you a devoted follower of QAnon? Yes or Rejected
Q3: Do you believe that Trump always tells the truth? Y or Rejected
Q4: If I appoint you to the jury, will you vote to exonerate Trump on all counts? Yes or Rejected
etc..
.
What are the mechanisms for the DoJ to insure that Jury selection is NOT influenced by Cannon's previously declared belief that Trump deserves special treatment because he is a former president? (She was overruled by the 11th Circuit when she said that she let Trump seek a Special Master because he was a special case during an earlier phase of the stolen documents case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Cannon#Trump_v._United_States,_civil_case )
Trump's trial for financial fraud got under way today in New York with Trump at the defense table glowering just like his GA mug shot. So that was funny. ...
…because it’s outside the statute of limitations. I’m wondering if this marks a first time in history that Dems have tried to sue their way back into the White House. I guess they have to do something. They know the woke stuff is about as popular as AIDS.
"I read somewhere ..." "Someone told me ..." "Everybody knows ..." "A famous General -- I'm not going to name him but you know who it is -- said to me, SIR! 80% of the case will be thrown out, Sir!"
.
If it comes from Trump -- spoken, tweeted, or otherwise -- it is probably wrong, false, fabricated or an outright lie.
.
http://news.yahoo.com/trump-legal-news-brief-trump-hit-with-partial-gag-order-after-he-attacks-judges-clerk-193431863.html
Trump legal news brief: Trump hit with partial gag order after he attacks judge's clerk.
.
"The judge in the New York financial fraud trial against former President Donald Trump issues a partial gag order on the former president. The judge also clarifies remarks he made Monday about the statute of limitations in the case. Trump, meanwhile, says he will take the witness stand “at the appropriate time.” ...
.
"At the conclusion of Monday’s proceedings, Trump told reporters that Engoron had effectively indicated that the statute of limitations meant he “would kick out 80% of this case.” “It was a great credit to the court that the judge was willing to do this sort of overruled himself and I greatly respect that,” Trump said.
[Trump said it; it's false.]
.
"***** In fact, Trump stripped Engoron’s remarks of their context. ***** "
.
“Every use of false financial statements in business starts the statute of limitations running again,” Engoron clarified Tuesday. “I understand that the defendants strongly disagree with this and will appeal on those grounds.” Why it matters: In part, Trump has attended the trial to address the media during breaks to put forth his interpretation of the case against him. *****As Engoron’s message at the start of the second day indicates, Trump’s declarations should be taken with a grain of salt.*****
.
(I'll leave it to others to discuss the gag order and the reasons it was imposed.)
…because it’s outside the statute of limitations. I’m wondering if this marks a first time in history that Dems have tried to sue their way back into the White House. I guess they have to do something. They know the woke stuff is about as popular as AIDS.
Why no link, willy? Did you pull that out of your ass? Are you embarrassed to provide a link because you read it on some crackpot website?
No, willy, the TRUTH is that you did NOT "read it somewhere." The TRUTH is that the "80%" remark was made by that great legal scholar Donald Jurisprudence Trump, the liar-in-chief. And you repeated it verbatim. You swallowed and regurgitated the words of someone even dumber than you are.
Whenever someone says : "I read somewhere" or "I heard it on the radio" it only means one thing - they're lying!
they are both cretins. Only Looooser The ChickenHawk is dumber.
…that 80% of the case is past the statute of limitations?
NO, HE DID NOT.
.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12586351/Trump-makes-wild-claim-80-fraud-case-THROWN-statute-limitations-expired-President-gives-thumbs-court-judge-slams-prosecutors-waste-time-having-accountants-testify.html
Trump makes wild claim that 80% of fraud case could be THROWN OUT because statute of limitations has expired
.
A ruling in June established a limiting DATE (counting back from 2022) of ~2014. TRUMP HAS CLAIMED THAT THAT EXCLUDES 80% OF THE ALLEGATIONS. However, there were well established extensions to the statute of limitations in some cases due to Covid, non-residency in NYS, etc..
.
In addition, Trump's 80% claim is made on the CLOSING DATES of the loans obtained under fraudulent means. NYS law uses the DATE OF THE FRAUDULENT ACT as the active date. Trump claims that a fraudulently approved loan that was closed in 2013 is exempt from being charged in NYS. In the opinion of numerous lawyer commenter / analysts who have examined the case, the NY AG has established that fraudulent transactions using fraudulent loans occurred WITHIN the statute of limitations. (E.g., obtaining a new fraudulent loan in 2016 to pay off a previous fraudulent loan from 2013 is a NEW FRAUDULENT ACT that incorporates the prior fraudulent loan.)
.
The details will be determined during the trial as the accountants and lawyers battle it out.
…that 80% of the case is past the statute of limitations?
.
"Some people say ..." WHO? WHICH PEOPLE? Let Trump NAME (incriminate) EVEN ONE LAWYER who said that. Which criminal statutes do "some people" say Engoron has violated?
.
"Some people say" Trump is a narcissistic sociopath and a pathological liar. I am one of those people.
-- Modified on 10/3/2023 9:43:00 PM
who’s the pivot man? Icky cause he can’t get it up?
-- Modified on 10/3/2023 4:26:18 PM