Donald Trump Announces 2016 White House Bid
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
I think that the reason Trump is trying to get total immunity is because that is the only way he can get out of the box that he put himself into. What I think he should do is keep pushing for this, then let the court orchestrate and get him to sign a declaration that he has to wear a target that is 1 foot around on both the front and back of his body. He can also put a sign on there, saying that any bullet outside of this 1 foot circle doesn’t count.
Trump team argues assassination of rivals is covered by presidential immunity
Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive&…thehill.com
Huzzah! So now Biden can do whatever HE wants because Presidents are Immune from EVERYTHING! (so long as they have 35+1 people on their side)
Way to go, Trump Lawyers!
Goddamn they are fucking stupid, and so is the US public if they side with that (which sadly too many do, and they've admitted such on video)
With Donald Trump present in court, judges express skepticism of claims that he’s immune from prosecution
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Eric Tucker, Alanna Durkin Richer and Lindsay Whitehurst
Published Jan 09, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 6 minute read
WASHINGTON — With Donald Trump present for the first time in months, federal appeals court judges in Washington expressed deep skepticism Tuesday that the former president was immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
The panel of three judges, two of whom were appointed by President Joe Biden, also questioned whether they had jurisdiction to consider the appeal at this point in the case, raising the prospect that Trump’s effort could be dismissed.
During lengthy arguments, the judges repeatedly pressed Trump’s lawyer to defend claims that Trump was shielded from criminal charges for acts that he says fell within his official duties as president. That argument was rejected last month by the lower-court judge overseeing the case against Trump, and the appeals judges suggested through their questions that they, too, were dubious that the Founding Fathers envisioned absolute immunity for presidents after they leave office.
“I think it’s paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed allows him to violate criminal law,” said Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush.
The outcome carries enormous ramifications both for the landmark criminal case against Trump and for the broader, and legally untested, question of whether an ex-president can be prosecuted for acts committed in the White House. It will also likely set the stage for further appeals before the U.S. Supreme Court, which last month declined a request to weigh in but could still get involved later.
A swift decision is crucial for special counsel Jack Smith and his team, who are eager to get the case — now paused pending the appeal — to trial before the November election. But Trump’s lawyers, in addition to seeking to get the case dismissed, are hoping to benefit from a protracted appeals process that could delay the trial well past its scheduled March 4 start date, including until potentially after the election.
Underscoring the importance to both sides, Trump, the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner, attended Tuesday’s arguments even though the Iowa caucuses are just one week away and despite the fact that there’s no requirement that defendants appear in person for such proceedings.
In his first court appearance in Washington — one of four cities where he faces criminal prosecutions — since his arraignment in August, Trump sat at the defence table, watching intently and occasionally taking notes and speaking with his lawyers.
He’s already signaling that he could use the appearance to portray himself as the victim of a politicized justice system. Though there’s no evidence Biden has had any influence on the case, Trump’s argument could resonate with Republican voters in Iowa as they prepare to launch the presidential nomination process.
After the arguments, Trump spoke to reporters at The Waldorf-Astoria hotel, which used to be the Trump International Hotel, calling it “a very momentous day.” He insisted he did nothing wrong and claimed he was being prosecuted for political reasons.
“A president has to have immunity,” he said.
Former presidents enjoy broad immunity from lawsuits for actions taken as part of their official White House duties. But because no former president before Trump has ever been indicted, courts have never before addressed whether that protection extends to criminal prosecution.
Trump’s lawyers insist that it does, arguing that courts have no authority to scrutinize a president’s official acts and that the prosecution of their client represents a dramatic departure from more than two centuries of American history that would open the door to future “politically motivated” cases. They filed a similar motion on Monday in another criminal case against Trump in Georgia.
“To authorize the prosecution of a president for official acts would open a Pandora’s box from which this nation may never recover,” said D. John Sauer, a lawyer for Trump, asserting that, under the government’s theory, presidents could be prosecuted for giving Congress “false information” to enter war or for authorizing drone strikes targeting U.S. citizens abroad.
He later added: “If a president has to look over his shoulder or her shoulder every time he or she has to make a controversial decision and wonder if ‘after I leave office, am I going to jail for this when my political opponents take power?’ that inevitably dampens the ability of the president.”
But the judges were skeptical about those arguments. Judges Henderson and Florence Pan noted the lawyer representing Trump during his impeachment trial suggested that he could later face criminal prosecution, telling senators at the time: “We have a judicial process in this country. We have an investigative process in this country to which no former officer holder is immune.”
“It seems that many senators relied on that in voting to acquit” Trump, Pan told Sauer.
J. Michelle Childs also questioned why former President Richard Nixon would need to be granted a pardon in 1974 after the Watergate scandal if former presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution. Sauer replied that in Nixon’s case, they were not the same kind of “official acts” Trump’s lawyers argue make the basis of Trump’s indictment.
Asides from the merits of the arguments, the judges jumped right into questioning Trump’s lawyer over whether the court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal at this time. Sauer said presidential immunity is clearly a claim that is meant to be reviewed before trial. Smith’s team also said that it wants the court to decide the case now.
Smith’s team maintains that presidents are not entitled to absolute immunity and that, in any event, the acts Trump is alleged in the indictment to have taken — including scheming to enlist fake electors in battleground states won by Biden and pressing his vice president, Mike Pence, to reject the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021 — fall far outside a president’s official job duties.
“The president has a unique constitutional role but he is not above the law. Separation of powers principles, constitutional text, history, precedent and immunity doctrines all point to the conclusion that a former president enjoys no immunity from prosecution,” prosecutor James Pearce said, adding that a case in which a former president is alleged to have sought to overturn an election “is not the place to recognize some novel form of immunity.”
When Henderson asked how the court could write its opinion in a way that doesn’t open the “floodgates” of investigations against ex-presidents, Pearce said he did not anticipate “a sea change of vindictive tit-for-tat prosecutions in the future.” He called the allegations against Trump were fundamentally unprecedented.
“Never before has there been allegations that a sitting president has, with private individuals and using the levers of power, sought to fundamentally subvert the democratic republic and the electoral system,” he said. “And frankly, if that kind of fact pattern arises again, I think it would be awfully scary if there weren’t some sort of mechanism by which to reach that criminally.”
It’s not clear how quickly the panel from the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals from the D.C. Circuit will rule, though it has signaled that it intends to work fast.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected the immunity arguments, ruling on Dec. 1 that the office of the presidency does not confer a “‘get-out-of-jail-free pass.”’ Trump’s lawyers appealed that decision, but Smith’s team, determined to keep the case on schedule, sought to leapfrog the appeals court by asking the Supreme Court to fast-track the immunity question. The justices declined to get involved.
The appeal is vital to a broader Trump strategy of trying to postpone the case until after the November election, when a victory could empower him to order the Justice Department to abandon the prosecution or even to seek a pardon for himself. He faces three other criminal cases, in state and federal court, though the Washington case is scheduled for trial first.
—Richer reported from Boston.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Eric Tucker, Alanna Durkin Richer and Lindsay Whitehurst
Published Jan 09, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 6 minute read
WASHINGTON — With Donald Trump present for the first time in months, federal appeals court judges in Washington expressed deep skepticism Tuesday that the former president was immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
The panel of three judges, two of whom were appointed by President Joe Biden, also questioned whether they had jurisdiction to consider the appeal at this point in the case, raising the prospect that Trump’s effort could be dismissed.
During lengthy arguments, the judges repeatedly pressed Trump’s lawyer to defend claims that Trump was shielded from criminal charges for acts that he says fell within his official duties as president. That argument was rejected last month by the lower-court judge overseeing the case against Trump, and the appeals judges suggested through their questions that they, too, were dubious that the Founding Fathers envisioned absolute immunity for presidents after they leave office.
“I think it’s paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed allows him to violate criminal law,” said Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush.
The outcome carries enormous ramifications both for the landmark criminal case against Trump and for the broader, and legally untested, question of whether an ex-president can be prosecuted for acts committed in the White House. It will also likely set the stage for further appeals before the U.S. Supreme Court, which last month declined a request to weigh in but could still get involved later.
A swift decision is crucial for special counsel Jack Smith and his team, who are eager to get the case — now paused pending the appeal — to trial before the November election. But Trump’s lawyers, in addition to seeking to get the case dismissed, are hoping to benefit from a protracted appeals process that could delay the trial well past its scheduled March 4 start date, including until potentially after the election.
Underscoring the importance to both sides, Trump, the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner, attended Tuesday’s arguments even though the Iowa caucuses are just one week away and despite the fact that there’s no requirement that defendants appear in person for such proceedings.
In his first court appearance in Washington — one of four cities where he faces criminal prosecutions — since his arraignment in August, Trump sat at the defence table, watching intently and occasionally taking notes and speaking with his lawyers.
He’s already signaling that he could use the appearance to portray himself as the victim of a politicized justice system. Though there’s no evidence Biden has had any influence on the case, Trump’s argument could resonate with Republican voters in Iowa as they prepare to launch the presidential nomination process.
After the arguments, Trump spoke to reporters at The Waldorf-Astoria hotel, which used to be the Trump International Hotel, calling it “a very momentous day.” He insisted he did nothing wrong and claimed he was being prosecuted for political reasons.
“A president has to have immunity,” he said.
Former presidents enjoy broad immunity from lawsuits for actions taken as part of their official White House duties. But because no former president before Trump has ever been indicted, courts have never before addressed whether that protection extends to criminal prosecution.
Trump’s lawyers insist that it does, arguing that courts have no authority to scrutinize a president’s official acts and that the prosecution of their client represents a dramatic departure from more than two centuries of American history that would open the door to future “politically motivated” cases. They filed a similar motion on Monday in another criminal case against Trump in Georgia.
“To authorize the prosecution of a president for official acts would open a Pandora’s box from which this nation may never recover,” said D. John Sauer, a lawyer for Trump, asserting that, under the government’s theory, presidents could be prosecuted for giving Congress “false information” to enter war or for authorizing drone strikes targeting U.S. citizens abroad.
He later added: “If a president has to look over his shoulder or her shoulder every time he or she has to make a controversial decision and wonder if ‘after I leave office, am I going to jail for this when my political opponents take power?’ that inevitably dampens the ability of the president.”
But the judges were skeptical about those arguments. Judges Henderson and Florence Pan noted the lawyer representing Trump during his impeachment trial suggested that he could later face criminal prosecution, telling senators at the time: “We have a judicial process in this country. We have an investigative process in this country to which no former officer holder is immune.”
“It seems that many senators relied on that in voting to acquit” Trump, Pan told Sauer.
J. Michelle Childs also questioned why former President Richard Nixon would need to be granted a pardon in 1974 after the Watergate scandal if former presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution. Sauer replied that in Nixon’s case, they were not the same kind of “official acts” Trump’s lawyers argue make the basis of Trump’s indictment.
Asides from the merits of the arguments, the judges jumped right into questioning Trump’s lawyer over whether the court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal at this time. Sauer said presidential immunity is clearly a claim that is meant to be reviewed before trial. Smith’s team also said that it wants the court to decide the case now.
Smith’s team maintains that presidents are not entitled to absolute immunity and that, in any event, the acts Trump is alleged in the indictment to have taken — including scheming to enlist fake electors in battleground states won by Biden and pressing his vice president, Mike Pence, to reject the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021 — fall far outside a president’s official job duties.
“The president has a unique constitutional role but he is not above the law. Separation of powers principles, constitutional text, history, precedent and immunity doctrines all point to the conclusion that a former president enjoys no immunity from prosecution,” prosecutor James Pearce said, adding that a case in which a former president is alleged to have sought to overturn an election “is not the place to recognize some novel form of immunity.”
When Henderson asked how the court could write its opinion in a way that doesn’t open the “floodgates” of investigations against ex-presidents, Pearce said he did not anticipate “a sea change of vindictive tit-for-tat prosecutions in the future.” He called the allegations against Trump were fundamentally unprecedented.
“Never before has there been allegations that a sitting president has, with private individuals and using the levers of power, sought to fundamentally subvert the democratic republic and the electoral system,” he said. “And frankly, if that kind of fact pattern arises again, I think it would be awfully scary if there weren’t some sort of mechanism by which to reach that criminally.”
It’s not clear how quickly the panel from the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals from the D.C. Circuit will rule, though it has signaled that it intends to work fast.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rejected the immunity arguments, ruling on Dec. 1 that the office of the presidency does not confer a “‘get-out-of-jail-free pass.”’ Trump’s lawyers appealed that decision, but Smith’s team, determined to keep the case on schedule, sought to leapfrog the appeals court by asking the Supreme Court to fast-track the immunity question. The justices declined to get involved.
The appeal is vital to a broader Trump strategy of trying to postpone the case until after the November election, when a victory could empower him to order the Justice Department to abandon the prosecution or even to seek a pardon for himself. He faces three other criminal cases, in state and federal court, though the Washington case is scheduled for trial first.
—Richer reported from Boston.
With Donald Trump present in court, judges express skepticism of claims that he’s immune from prosecution
Federal appeals court judges in Washington expressed deep skepticism Tuesday that Donald Trump was immune from prosecution.
Trump plans to deliver a closing argument at civil fraud trial, sources say
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Jennifer Peltz And Jake Offenhartz
Published Jan 09, 2024 • 3 minute read
NEW YORK — Former President Donald Trump aims to deliver his own closing argument Thursday in his New York civil business fraud trial in addition to his legal team’s summations, according to two people familiar with the highly unusual plan.
Trump is a defendant in the case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. She claims his net worth was inflated by billions of dollars on financial statements that helped him secure business loans and insurance.
An attorney for Trump informed Judge Arthur Engoron earlier this week that the former president wished to speak during the closing arguments, and the judge approved the plan, according to one of the two people who spoke to The Associated Press. Both persons who confirmed the plan did so on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to disclose the information to reporters.
The Trump campaign and a spokesperson for James declined to comment.
The former president and current Republican front-runner denies any wrongdoing, and he has condemned the case during a peppery day of testimony, on social media and in verbal comments in the courthouse hallway. In recent days on his Truth Social platform, he called the case a “hoax,” dismissed the months-long proceedings as as a “pathetic excuse for a trial” and criticized the judge and attorney general, both Democrats.
But delivering a summation would be another matter.
Although some people represent themselves, it’s very uncommon for defendants personally to give summations if they have attorneys to do so. Trump has several, and he isn’t a lawyer himself.
ABC News first reported Trump’s plan.
In closing arguments, both sides give their views of what the evidence has shown and why they should win. It’s each camp’s last chance to try to persuade the ultimate decision-maker — in this case, Judge Engoron.
Trump’s plans regarding the trial have changed before. In December, he was scheduled to testify as a witness for a second time, but he canceled the day before, saying he had “nothing more to say.”
James’ office says Trump, his business and some top executives defrauded banks and insurers by hugely goosing the values of assets such as his triplex at Trump Tower in New York and his Mar-a-Lago club and residence in Florida.
The state claims the bigger numbers got Trump better rates, while lenders and insurers didn’t get the information they needed to make a truly informed assessment of the risk they were taking on and what they should charge for it.
The “defendants reaped hundreds of millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains through their unlawful conduct,” state lawyers wrote in a court filing Friday. They are seeking $370 million in penalties, plus interest, and a ban on Trump doing business in New York.
The defense says Trump more than qualified for the deals he got _ and say he upheld his end of them, including by repaying all the loans. He and his lawyers maintain that his financial statements were clearly offered as unaudited estimates that recipients should check out for themselves, and that the net worth numbers were far too low, not the opposite. Any overstatements were just errors too small to affect the bottom line, the defense says.
“There have been no losses to any party, as the loans here were negotiated between very sophisticated parties,” Trump lawyers Christopher Kise and Michael T. Madaio wrote Friday in court papers. “Lenders made their own informed decisions.”
Engoron will weigh claims of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records. He has said he hopes to have a verdict by the end of this month.
He decided the lawsuit’s top claim before trial, ruling that Trump and other defendants engaged in fraud for years. The judge then ordered that a receiver take control of some of the ex-president’s properties, but an appeals court has frozen that order for now.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Jennifer Peltz And Jake Offenhartz
Published Jan 09, 2024 • 3 minute read
NEW YORK — Former President Donald Trump aims to deliver his own closing argument Thursday in his New York civil business fraud trial in addition to his legal team’s summations, according to two people familiar with the highly unusual plan.
Trump is a defendant in the case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. She claims his net worth was inflated by billions of dollars on financial statements that helped him secure business loans and insurance.
An attorney for Trump informed Judge Arthur Engoron earlier this week that the former president wished to speak during the closing arguments, and the judge approved the plan, according to one of the two people who spoke to The Associated Press. Both persons who confirmed the plan did so on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to disclose the information to reporters.
The Trump campaign and a spokesperson for James declined to comment.
The former president and current Republican front-runner denies any wrongdoing, and he has condemned the case during a peppery day of testimony, on social media and in verbal comments in the courthouse hallway. In recent days on his Truth Social platform, he called the case a “hoax,” dismissed the months-long proceedings as as a “pathetic excuse for a trial” and criticized the judge and attorney general, both Democrats.
But delivering a summation would be another matter.
Although some people represent themselves, it’s very uncommon for defendants personally to give summations if they have attorneys to do so. Trump has several, and he isn’t a lawyer himself.
ABC News first reported Trump’s plan.
In closing arguments, both sides give their views of what the evidence has shown and why they should win. It’s each camp’s last chance to try to persuade the ultimate decision-maker — in this case, Judge Engoron.
Trump’s plans regarding the trial have changed before. In December, he was scheduled to testify as a witness for a second time, but he canceled the day before, saying he had “nothing more to say.”
James’ office says Trump, his business and some top executives defrauded banks and insurers by hugely goosing the values of assets such as his triplex at Trump Tower in New York and his Mar-a-Lago club and residence in Florida.
The state claims the bigger numbers got Trump better rates, while lenders and insurers didn’t get the information they needed to make a truly informed assessment of the risk they were taking on and what they should charge for it.
The “defendants reaped hundreds of millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains through their unlawful conduct,” state lawyers wrote in a court filing Friday. They are seeking $370 million in penalties, plus interest, and a ban on Trump doing business in New York.
The defense says Trump more than qualified for the deals he got _ and say he upheld his end of them, including by repaying all the loans. He and his lawyers maintain that his financial statements were clearly offered as unaudited estimates that recipients should check out for themselves, and that the net worth numbers were far too low, not the opposite. Any overstatements were just errors too small to affect the bottom line, the defense says.
“There have been no losses to any party, as the loans here were negotiated between very sophisticated parties,” Trump lawyers Christopher Kise and Michael T. Madaio wrote Friday in court papers. “Lenders made their own informed decisions.”
Engoron will weigh claims of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records. He has said he hopes to have a verdict by the end of this month.
He decided the lawsuit’s top claim before trial, ruling that Trump and other defendants engaged in fraud for years. The judge then ordered that a receiver take control of some of the ex-president’s properties, but an appeals court has frozen that order for now.
Trump plans to deliver a closing argument at civil fraud trial, sources say
Former President Donald Trump aims to deliver his own closing argument Thursday in his New York civil business fraud trial
Donald Trump defies judge, gives courtroom speech on tense final day of New York civil fraud trial
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak and Jennifer Peltz
Published Jan 11, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 5 minute read
Barred from giving a formal closing argument, Donald Trump still seized an opportunity to speak in court at the conclusion of his New York civil fraud trial Thursday, unleashing a barrage of attacks in a six-minute diatribe before being cut off by the judge.
Trump spoke as the judge was trying to find out if the former president would follow rules requiring him to keep his remarks focused on matters related to the trial. Asked whether he would comply with the guidelines, Trump defied the judge and simply launched into his speech.
“We have a situation where I am an innocent man,” Trump protested. “I’m being persecuted by someone running for office and I think you have to go outside the bounds.”
Judge Arthur Engoron — who earlier denied Trump’s extraordinary request to give his own closing statement — let him continue almost uninterrupted for what amounted to a brief personal summation, then cut him off for a scheduled lunch break.
Trump’s in-court remarks, which were not televised, ensured a tumultuous final day for a trial over allegations that he habitually exaggerated his wealth on financial statements he provided to banks, insurance companies and others.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, sued Trump in 2022 under a state law that gives her broad power to investigate allegations of persistent fraud in business dealings. She wants the judge to impose $370 million in penalties and forbid him from doing business in New York.
Adding to the day’s tension, the exchanges took place hours after authorities responded to a bomb threat at the judge’s house in New York City’s suburbs. The scare didn’t delay the start of court proceedings.
Trump, the leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination, has disparaged Engoron throughout the trial, accusing him in a social media post Wednesday night of working closely with James.
On Wednesday, Engoron had rejected an unusual plan by Trump to deliver his own closing remarks in the courtroom, in addition to summations from his legal team. The sticking point was that Trump’s lawyers would not agree to the judge’s demand that he stick to “relevant” matters and not try to introduce new evidence or make a campaign speech.
After two of Trump’s lawyers had delivered traditional closing arguments Thursday, one of them, Christopher Kise, asked the judge again whether Trump could speak. Engoron asked Trump whether he would abide by the guidelines.
Trump then launched into his remarks.
“This is a fraud on me. What’s happened here, sir, is a fraud on me,” Trump said. He later accused the judge of not listening to him. “I know this is boring to you.”
“Control your client,” Engoron warned Kise.
Engoron then told Trump he had a minute left, let him speak a little more, and then adjourned.
In the afternoon, a lawyer for New York state said in his closing remarks that Trump and his “cash poor” company couldn’t have completed various development projects without loans and cash flow from interest savings enabled by spurious financial statements.
“Fraud was central to the operation of the Trump Organization’s business,” said the attorney, Kevin Wallace. He said that Trump and the other defendants intentionally put false information in the company’s financial statements.
Trump skipped the afternoon court session in favor of a news conference that served as counter programming to the state’s closing argument. He peppered his remarks at a lower Manhattan office building he owns — and could lose control of as a result of the trial — with barbs about President Joe Biden and a writer who accused him of rape, E. Jean Carroll.
The day began with police on Long Island checking out the threat at Engoron’s Long Island home. At 5:30 a.m. Nassau County police said they responded to a “swatting incident” at the house in Great Neck. Nothing amiss was found at the location, officials said.
Taking the bench a few minutes late, Engoron made no mention of the incident.
The false report came days after a fake emergency call reporting a shooting at the home of the judge in Trump’s Washington, D.C. criminal case. The incidents are among a recent spate of similar false reports at the homes of public officials.
Engoron decided some of the key issues before testimony began. In a pretrial ruling, he found that Trump had committed years of fraud by lying about his riches on financial statements with tricks like claiming his Trump Tower penthouse was nearly three times its actual size.
The trial involves six undecided claims, including allegations of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records. Trump’s company and two of his sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., are also defendants. Eric Trump was also in court for closing arguments.
During his argument, Kise contended Trump did nothing wrong and didn’t mislead anyone about his wealth. He said his client “should get a medal” for his business acumen instead of punishment he deemed the “corporate death penalty.”
“This entire case is a manufactured claim to pursue a political agenda,” Kise said.
Since the trial began Oct. 2, Trump has gone to court nine times to observe, testify and complain to TV cameras about the case.
He clashed with Engoron and state lawyers during 3 1/2 hours on the witness stand in November and remains under a limited gag order after making a disparaging and false social media post about the judge’s law clerk.
Thursday’s arguments were part of a busy legal and political stretch for Trump.
On Tuesday, he was in court in Washington, D.C., to watch appeals court arguments over whether he is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020 election — one of four criminal cases against him. Trump has pleaded not guilty. On Monday, the presidential primary season kicks off with the Iowa caucus.
State lawyers say that by making himself seem richer, Trump qualified for better loan terms from banks, saving him at least $168 million.
Kise acknowledged that some holdings may have been listed “higher by immaterial” amounts, but he added” “there’s plenty of assets that were undervalued by substantial sums.”
Engoron said he is deciding the case because neither side asked for a jury and state law doesn’t allow for juries for this type of lawsuit. He said he hopes to have a decision by the end of the month.
Last month, in a ruling denying a defense bid for an early verdict, the judge signaled he’s inclined to find Trump and his co-defendants liable on at least some claims.
“Valuations, as elucidated ad nauseum in this trial, can be based on different criteria analyzed in different ways,” Engoron wrote in the Dec. 18 ruling. “But a lie is still a lie.”
— Associated Press reporters Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak and Jennifer Peltz
Published Jan 11, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 5 minute read
Barred from giving a formal closing argument, Donald Trump still seized an opportunity to speak in court at the conclusion of his New York civil fraud trial Thursday, unleashing a barrage of attacks in a six-minute diatribe before being cut off by the judge.
Trump spoke as the judge was trying to find out if the former president would follow rules requiring him to keep his remarks focused on matters related to the trial. Asked whether he would comply with the guidelines, Trump defied the judge and simply launched into his speech.
“We have a situation where I am an innocent man,” Trump protested. “I’m being persecuted by someone running for office and I think you have to go outside the bounds.”
Judge Arthur Engoron — who earlier denied Trump’s extraordinary request to give his own closing statement — let him continue almost uninterrupted for what amounted to a brief personal summation, then cut him off for a scheduled lunch break.
Trump’s in-court remarks, which were not televised, ensured a tumultuous final day for a trial over allegations that he habitually exaggerated his wealth on financial statements he provided to banks, insurance companies and others.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, sued Trump in 2022 under a state law that gives her broad power to investigate allegations of persistent fraud in business dealings. She wants the judge to impose $370 million in penalties and forbid him from doing business in New York.
Adding to the day’s tension, the exchanges took place hours after authorities responded to a bomb threat at the judge’s house in New York City’s suburbs. The scare didn’t delay the start of court proceedings.
Trump, the leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination, has disparaged Engoron throughout the trial, accusing him in a social media post Wednesday night of working closely with James.
On Wednesday, Engoron had rejected an unusual plan by Trump to deliver his own closing remarks in the courtroom, in addition to summations from his legal team. The sticking point was that Trump’s lawyers would not agree to the judge’s demand that he stick to “relevant” matters and not try to introduce new evidence or make a campaign speech.
After two of Trump’s lawyers had delivered traditional closing arguments Thursday, one of them, Christopher Kise, asked the judge again whether Trump could speak. Engoron asked Trump whether he would abide by the guidelines.
Trump then launched into his remarks.
“This is a fraud on me. What’s happened here, sir, is a fraud on me,” Trump said. He later accused the judge of not listening to him. “I know this is boring to you.”
“Control your client,” Engoron warned Kise.
Engoron then told Trump he had a minute left, let him speak a little more, and then adjourned.
In the afternoon, a lawyer for New York state said in his closing remarks that Trump and his “cash poor” company couldn’t have completed various development projects without loans and cash flow from interest savings enabled by spurious financial statements.
“Fraud was central to the operation of the Trump Organization’s business,” said the attorney, Kevin Wallace. He said that Trump and the other defendants intentionally put false information in the company’s financial statements.
Trump skipped the afternoon court session in favor of a news conference that served as counter programming to the state’s closing argument. He peppered his remarks at a lower Manhattan office building he owns — and could lose control of as a result of the trial — with barbs about President Joe Biden and a writer who accused him of rape, E. Jean Carroll.
The day began with police on Long Island checking out the threat at Engoron’s Long Island home. At 5:30 a.m. Nassau County police said they responded to a “swatting incident” at the house in Great Neck. Nothing amiss was found at the location, officials said.
Taking the bench a few minutes late, Engoron made no mention of the incident.
The false report came days after a fake emergency call reporting a shooting at the home of the judge in Trump’s Washington, D.C. criminal case. The incidents are among a recent spate of similar false reports at the homes of public officials.
Engoron decided some of the key issues before testimony began. In a pretrial ruling, he found that Trump had committed years of fraud by lying about his riches on financial statements with tricks like claiming his Trump Tower penthouse was nearly three times its actual size.
The trial involves six undecided claims, including allegations of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records. Trump’s company and two of his sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., are also defendants. Eric Trump was also in court for closing arguments.
During his argument, Kise contended Trump did nothing wrong and didn’t mislead anyone about his wealth. He said his client “should get a medal” for his business acumen instead of punishment he deemed the “corporate death penalty.”
“This entire case is a manufactured claim to pursue a political agenda,” Kise said.
Since the trial began Oct. 2, Trump has gone to court nine times to observe, testify and complain to TV cameras about the case.
He clashed with Engoron and state lawyers during 3 1/2 hours on the witness stand in November and remains under a limited gag order after making a disparaging and false social media post about the judge’s law clerk.
Thursday’s arguments were part of a busy legal and political stretch for Trump.
On Tuesday, he was in court in Washington, D.C., to watch appeals court arguments over whether he is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020 election — one of four criminal cases against him. Trump has pleaded not guilty. On Monday, the presidential primary season kicks off with the Iowa caucus.
State lawyers say that by making himself seem richer, Trump qualified for better loan terms from banks, saving him at least $168 million.
Kise acknowledged that some holdings may have been listed “higher by immaterial” amounts, but he added” “there’s plenty of assets that were undervalued by substantial sums.”
Engoron said he is deciding the case because neither side asked for a jury and state law doesn’t allow for juries for this type of lawsuit. He said he hopes to have a decision by the end of the month.
Last month, in a ruling denying a defense bid for an early verdict, the judge signaled he’s inclined to find Trump and his co-defendants liable on at least some claims.
“Valuations, as elucidated ad nauseum in this trial, can be based on different criteria analyzed in different ways,” Engoron wrote in the Dec. 18 ruling. “But a lie is still a lie.”
— Associated Press reporters Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.
Donald Trump defies judge, gives courtroom speech on tense final day of New York civil fraud trial
Donald Trump still got a brief chance to speak in court at the conclusion of his New York civil trial Thursday.
I'm not sure the maunderings and ramblings of that shithead can be called a "speech."
Though Beau’s carpentry skills with respect to his shelves still bother me, I do have to compliment him on his choice to avoid drywall in his garage. Good call!!
Trump team argues assassination of rivals is covered by presidential immunity
Former President Trump’s legal team suggested Tuesday that even a president directing SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent would be an action barred from prosecution given a former executive&…
Huzzah! So now Biden can do whatever HE wants because Presidents are Immune from EVERYTHING! (so long as they have 35+1 people on their side)
Way to go, Trump Lawyers!
Goddamn they are fucking stupid, and so is the US public if they side with that (which sadly too many do, and they've admitted such on video)
Columnist’s lawyer warns judge that Trump hopes to ’sow chaos’ as jury considers defamation damages
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Larry Neumeister
Published Jan 12, 2024 • 3 minute read
The notorious 2005 "Access Hollywood" video in which Donald Trump was caught on a hot mic speaking disparagingly about women over a decade before he became president can be shown to jurors deciding what he owes Carroll, a columnist he defamed, a federal judge ruled Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2024, as he set up ground rules for a trial next week.
The notorious 2005 "Access Hollywood" video in which Donald Trump was caught on a hot mic speaking disparagingly about women over a decade before he became president can be shown to jurors deciding what he owes Carroll, a columnist he defamed, a federal judge ruled Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2024, as he set up ground rules for a trial next week.
NEW YORK (AP) — A lawyer for a columnist who last year won a $5 million jury award against Donald Trump for sex abuse and defamation urged a judge Friday to take strong measures to ensure the former president doesn’t “sow chaos” when a new jury considers next week if he owes even more in damages.
Trump said Thursday that he will attend the Manhattan federal court trial, where a jury will consider a request beginning Tuesday by lawyers for columnist E. Jean Carroll that she be awarded $10 million in compensatory damages and millions more in punitive damages for statements Trump has made.
“If Mr. Trump appears at this trial, whether as a witness or otherwise, his recent statements and behavior strongly suggest that he will seek to sow chaos. Indeed, he may well perceive a benefit in seeking to poison these proceedings,” attorney Roberta Kaplan wrote in a letter to the judge.
“There are any number of reasons why Mr. Trump might perceive a personal or political benefit from intentionally turning this trial into a circus,” Kaplan said.
She said she worried about “the possibility that he will seek to testify, and the associated risk that he will violate Court orders if he does so.”
She recommended that Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who is unrelated to the lawyer, warn the Republican frontrunner in this year’s presidential race of the possible consequences of violating court orders severely limiting what Trump and his lawyers can say at the trial.
A lawyer for Trump did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
The judge has ruled that Trump and his lawyers cannot introduce evidence or arguments “suggesting or implying” that Trump did not sexually assault Carroll in the dressing room of a luxury Manhattan department store across from Trump Tower in midtown. He also said they cannot say she fabricated her account of the assault or that she had financial and political motivations to do so.
In her letter, Carroll’s lawyer urged Kaplan to require Trump to say under oath in open court but without jurors present that he understands he sexually assaulted Carroll and that he spoke falsely with actual malice and lied when he accused her of fabricating her account and impugning her motives.
A jury last May awarded Carroll $5 million in damages after concluding that, although there was not sufficient evidence to find Trump raped Carroll, there was proof that she was sexually abused at the Bergdorf Goodman store, and Trump defamed her with statements he made in October 2022.
Because the defamation award was limited to Trump’s fall 2022 statements, a jury next week will begin considering whether Carroll is entitled to additional damages for statements Trump made about her claims while he was president in 2019 and the day after the verdict last spring.
Carroll, 80, testified at last year’s trial that she has suffered emotionally and in her romantic life since Trump attacked her and that his severe denunciation of claims she first made in a 2019 memoir after she was inspired by the #MeToo movement have severely damaged her career and led to threats against her.
Trump has repeatedly said that he never assaulted Carroll and didn’t know her and that he suspected she was driven to make claims against him to promote her book and for political reasons.
In her letter to the judge Friday, Kaplan cited Trump’s behavior at a state court proceeding Thursday in Manhattan where he ignored a judge’s insistence that he keep remarks focused on trial-related matters, saying: “I am an innocent man” and adding that he was being “persecuted by someone running for office.”
She wrote that Trump’s behavior in state court “provides a potential preview of exactly what we might expect to see at next week’s trial.”
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Larry Neumeister
Published Jan 12, 2024 • 3 minute read
The notorious 2005 "Access Hollywood" video in which Donald Trump was caught on a hot mic speaking disparagingly about women over a decade before he became president can be shown to jurors deciding what he owes Carroll, a columnist he defamed, a federal judge ruled Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2024, as he set up ground rules for a trial next week.
The notorious 2005 "Access Hollywood" video in which Donald Trump was caught on a hot mic speaking disparagingly about women over a decade before he became president can be shown to jurors deciding what he owes Carroll, a columnist he defamed, a federal judge ruled Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2024, as he set up ground rules for a trial next week.
NEW YORK (AP) — A lawyer for a columnist who last year won a $5 million jury award against Donald Trump for sex abuse and defamation urged a judge Friday to take strong measures to ensure the former president doesn’t “sow chaos” when a new jury considers next week if he owes even more in damages.
Trump said Thursday that he will attend the Manhattan federal court trial, where a jury will consider a request beginning Tuesday by lawyers for columnist E. Jean Carroll that she be awarded $10 million in compensatory damages and millions more in punitive damages for statements Trump has made.
“If Mr. Trump appears at this trial, whether as a witness or otherwise, his recent statements and behavior strongly suggest that he will seek to sow chaos. Indeed, he may well perceive a benefit in seeking to poison these proceedings,” attorney Roberta Kaplan wrote in a letter to the judge.
“There are any number of reasons why Mr. Trump might perceive a personal or political benefit from intentionally turning this trial into a circus,” Kaplan said.
She said she worried about “the possibility that he will seek to testify, and the associated risk that he will violate Court orders if he does so.”
She recommended that Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who is unrelated to the lawyer, warn the Republican frontrunner in this year’s presidential race of the possible consequences of violating court orders severely limiting what Trump and his lawyers can say at the trial.
A lawyer for Trump did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
The judge has ruled that Trump and his lawyers cannot introduce evidence or arguments “suggesting or implying” that Trump did not sexually assault Carroll in the dressing room of a luxury Manhattan department store across from Trump Tower in midtown. He also said they cannot say she fabricated her account of the assault or that she had financial and political motivations to do so.
In her letter, Carroll’s lawyer urged Kaplan to require Trump to say under oath in open court but without jurors present that he understands he sexually assaulted Carroll and that he spoke falsely with actual malice and lied when he accused her of fabricating her account and impugning her motives.
A jury last May awarded Carroll $5 million in damages after concluding that, although there was not sufficient evidence to find Trump raped Carroll, there was proof that she was sexually abused at the Bergdorf Goodman store, and Trump defamed her with statements he made in October 2022.
Because the defamation award was limited to Trump’s fall 2022 statements, a jury next week will begin considering whether Carroll is entitled to additional damages for statements Trump made about her claims while he was president in 2019 and the day after the verdict last spring.
Carroll, 80, testified at last year’s trial that she has suffered emotionally and in her romantic life since Trump attacked her and that his severe denunciation of claims she first made in a 2019 memoir after she was inspired by the #MeToo movement have severely damaged her career and led to threats against her.
Trump has repeatedly said that he never assaulted Carroll and didn’t know her and that he suspected she was driven to make claims against him to promote her book and for political reasons.
In her letter to the judge Friday, Kaplan cited Trump’s behavior at a state court proceeding Thursday in Manhattan where he ignored a judge’s insistence that he keep remarks focused on trial-related matters, saying: “I am an innocent man” and adding that he was being “persecuted by someone running for office.”
She wrote that Trump’s behavior in state court “provides a potential preview of exactly what we might expect to see at next week’s trial.”
Columnist’s lawyer warns judge that Trump hopes to ’sow chaos’ as jury considers defamation damages
A lawyer for Trump did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
Donald Trump ordered to pay The New York Times and its reporters nearly $400,000 in legal fees
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak
Published Jan 12, 2024 • 3 minute read
NEW YORK (AP) — Former President Donald Trump was ordered Friday to pay nearly $400,000 in legal fees to The New York Times and three investigative reporters after he sued them unsuccessfully over a Pulitzer Prize-winning 2018 story about his family’s wealth and tax practices.
The newspaper and reporters Susanne Craig, David Barstow and Russell Buettner were dismissed from the lawsuit in May. Trump’s claim against his estranged niece, Mary Trump, that she breached a prior settlement agreement by giving tax records to the reporters is still pending.
New York Judge Robert Reed said that given the “complexity of the issues” in the case and other factors, it was reasonable that Donald Trump be forced to pay lawyers for the Times and the reporters a total of $392,638 in legal fees.
“Today’s decision shows that the state’s newly amended anti-SLAPP statute can be a powerful force for protecting press freedom,” Times spokesperson Danielle Rhoads Ha said, referring to a New York law that bars baseless lawsuits designed to silence critics. Such lawsuits are known as SLAPPs or strategic lawsuits against public participation.
“The court has sent a message to those who want to misuse the judicial system to try to silence journalists,” Rhoads Ha said.
In a separate ruling Friday, Reed denied a request by Mary Trump _ now the sole defendant — that the case be put on hold while she appeals his June decision that allowed Donald Trump’s claim against her to proceed.
A message seeking comment was left with Mary Trump’s lawyer, Theodore Boutrous.
Donald Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, said they remain disappointed that the Times and its reporters were dropped from the case. She said they are pleased that the court has “once again affirmed the strength of our claims against Mary and is denying her attempt to avoid accountability.”
“We look forward to proceeding with our claims against her,” Habba said.
Donald Trump’s lawsuit, filed in 2021, accused the Times and its reporters of relentlessly seeking out Mary Trump as a source of information and convincing her to turn over confidential tax records. He claimed the reporters were aware her prior settlement agreement barred her from disclosing the documents, which she’d received in a dispute over family patriarch Fred Trump’s estate.
The Times’ reporting challenged Donald Trump’s claims of self-made wealth by documenting how his father, Fred Trump, had given him at least $413 million over the decades, including through tax avoidance schemes. Mary Trump identified herself in a book published in 2020 as the source of the documents.
The Times’ story said that Donald Trump and his father avoided gift and inheritance taxes by methods including setting up a sham corporation and undervaluing assets to tax authorities. The Times says its report was based on more than 100,000 pages of financial documents, including confidential tax returns for the father and his companies.
Donald Trump, who sought $100 million in damages, alleged Mary Trump, the Times and the reporters “were motivated by a personal vendetta” against him. He accused them of engaging “in an insidious plot to obtain confidential and highly sensitive records which they exploited for their own benefit.”
In dismissing the Times and its reporters from the lawsuit, Reed wrote that legal news gathering is “at the very core of protected First Amendment activity.”
Mary Trump, 58, is the daughter of Donald Trump’s brother, Fred Trump Jr., who died in 1981 at age 42. She is an outspoken critic of her uncle, whom she has regarded as “criminal, cruel and traitorous.”
In July, Mary Trump filed a counterclaim against Donald Trump under New York’s anti-SLAPP law, arguing that Donald Trump’s lawsuit was “purely retaliatory and lacking in merit” and intended to “chill her and others from criticizing him in the future.”
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak
Published Jan 12, 2024 • 3 minute read
NEW YORK (AP) — Former President Donald Trump was ordered Friday to pay nearly $400,000 in legal fees to The New York Times and three investigative reporters after he sued them unsuccessfully over a Pulitzer Prize-winning 2018 story about his family’s wealth and tax practices.
The newspaper and reporters Susanne Craig, David Barstow and Russell Buettner were dismissed from the lawsuit in May. Trump’s claim against his estranged niece, Mary Trump, that she breached a prior settlement agreement by giving tax records to the reporters is still pending.
New York Judge Robert Reed said that given the “complexity of the issues” in the case and other factors, it was reasonable that Donald Trump be forced to pay lawyers for the Times and the reporters a total of $392,638 in legal fees.
“Today’s decision shows that the state’s newly amended anti-SLAPP statute can be a powerful force for protecting press freedom,” Times spokesperson Danielle Rhoads Ha said, referring to a New York law that bars baseless lawsuits designed to silence critics. Such lawsuits are known as SLAPPs or strategic lawsuits against public participation.
“The court has sent a message to those who want to misuse the judicial system to try to silence journalists,” Rhoads Ha said.
In a separate ruling Friday, Reed denied a request by Mary Trump _ now the sole defendant — that the case be put on hold while she appeals his June decision that allowed Donald Trump’s claim against her to proceed.
A message seeking comment was left with Mary Trump’s lawyer, Theodore Boutrous.
Donald Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, said they remain disappointed that the Times and its reporters were dropped from the case. She said they are pleased that the court has “once again affirmed the strength of our claims against Mary and is denying her attempt to avoid accountability.”
“We look forward to proceeding with our claims against her,” Habba said.
Donald Trump’s lawsuit, filed in 2021, accused the Times and its reporters of relentlessly seeking out Mary Trump as a source of information and convincing her to turn over confidential tax records. He claimed the reporters were aware her prior settlement agreement barred her from disclosing the documents, which she’d received in a dispute over family patriarch Fred Trump’s estate.
The Times’ reporting challenged Donald Trump’s claims of self-made wealth by documenting how his father, Fred Trump, had given him at least $413 million over the decades, including through tax avoidance schemes. Mary Trump identified herself in a book published in 2020 as the source of the documents.
The Times’ story said that Donald Trump and his father avoided gift and inheritance taxes by methods including setting up a sham corporation and undervaluing assets to tax authorities. The Times says its report was based on more than 100,000 pages of financial documents, including confidential tax returns for the father and his companies.
Donald Trump, who sought $100 million in damages, alleged Mary Trump, the Times and the reporters “were motivated by a personal vendetta” against him. He accused them of engaging “in an insidious plot to obtain confidential and highly sensitive records which they exploited for their own benefit.”
In dismissing the Times and its reporters from the lawsuit, Reed wrote that legal news gathering is “at the very core of protected First Amendment activity.”
Mary Trump, 58, is the daughter of Donald Trump’s brother, Fred Trump Jr., who died in 1981 at age 42. She is an outspoken critic of her uncle, whom she has regarded as “criminal, cruel and traitorous.”
In July, Mary Trump filed a counterclaim against Donald Trump under New York’s anti-SLAPP law, arguing that Donald Trump’s lawsuit was “purely retaliatory and lacking in merit” and intended to “chill her and others from criticizing him in the future.”
Donald Trump ordered to pay The New York Times and its reporters nearly $400,000 in legal fees
Trump's claim against his estranged niece, Mary Trump, that she breached a prior settlement agreement by giving tax records to the reporters is still pending.
I’m not sure the maunderings and rambling of the shithead presently in the Oval Office can be called speech either . What’s your point ?
Having a good day princess . Seems like you are a little crabby this morning .
Well, Trump was right. There was voting irregularity in the 2020 election...
Here's another example of it.
apnews.com
Here's another example of it.
Virginia county admits election tally in 2020 shorted Joe Biden
A northern Virginia county is acknowledging that it underreported President Joe Biden’s margin of victory there over Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election by about 4,000 votes.
apnews.com
Ramaswamy is out.
youtube.com
“No path for me to be the next president” Vivek Ramaswamy Ends White House Bid
Vivek Ramaswamy, the millionaire ex-biotech executive and surprise contender in the 2024 Republican race, withdrew from the White House bid after a modest pe...
youtube.com