699

Donald Trump on Wednesday launched fresh vitriol against the judge and prosecuting attorney in his New York business fraud trial, carefully skirting a gag order imposed on him just a day prior.

Trump tried Tuesday to bully a court clerk, sharing false conspiracies about her as well as her personal information. Presiding Judge Arthur Engoron issued a gag order later that day prohibiting all parties involved in the case from publicly discussing court staff.

While Trump avoided mentioning court staff on Wednesday, he went all out with attacks against Engoron and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

“This is election interference. They made up a fake case, these fraudulent people,” Trump told reporters. “And the judge already knows what he’s gonna do. He’s a Democrat judge. In all fairness to him, he has no choice.… He’s run by the Democrats.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] 2piradians@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If those arguments have merit then they'll have to sort out the details of how much Trump overvalued his properties. As I understand it that is the purpose of the trial at this point.

The Florida-based real estate pros referenced in the article didn't throw out any estimated values of Mar a Lago, and they didn't suggest it hadn't been overvalued by Trump.

The lawyer in NYC quoted seems to have little concern over the whole thing.

| Cintron, the Harrington Ocko & Monk partner, doesn’t think the Mar-a-Lago valuation controversy moves the needle on the question of whether Trump committed fraud.

| “There is enough of a pattern of this practice that he’s engaged with in respect to his properties to support Judge Engoron’s conclusions that there was an intent to defraud,” Cintron said.

EDIT: Apologies for formatting, I haven't figured out quotes in Lemmy

[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

| Cintron, the Harrington Ocko & Monk partner, doesn’t think the Mar-a-Lago valuation controversy moves the needle on the question of whether Trump committed fraud.

This I agree with. In the end, what Trump's team is arguing is that "hey, I only committed a little fraud, not the amount they're accusing me of!", as if that's all that much better.

But it does open the door enough for Trump's team to be able to use it as a basis for appeal, especially if those incorrect estimates are tied in any way to the verdict or damages he's going to have to pay. And unfortunately, Trump has an amazing talent of being able to kick the door in if you leave it open enough for him to even squeeze in a toe.

[-] 2piradians@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Going by the events of recent history, I'm inclined to agree that they'll weasel out of appropriate consequences by arguing over anything except the main points.

It sure would be nice if the NY court proves us both wrong. I believe that if just one of the cases follows through holding his feet to the fire (including on appeal), the other courts will be much more inclined to follow suit.

this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
699 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3482 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS