State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

[pipistrelle]

I'll add that he's in fact trying to spin the 'never surrender' mugshot angle into something martyr-y, as witnessed by his cutting up and selling of The Suit He Wore At His Surrender To False Authorities Persecuting Him. Or something. And these people are eating it up. Someday, there may be thousands of churches each claiming a True Fragment Of Suit.

I got dollars to doughnuts that it's all some cheap stuff he had a staffer pick up at Fabric Hut...

That was my first thought, that someone's going to be cutting up some cheap fabric (and it won't be suit material).

[Sam the Centipede]

Off Topic

The bits of suit remind me of a Holy Relics scam too. This piece of St Anthony's robe is barely a 3mm square.

If I recall correctly, the monk William in Umberto Eco's Il nome della rosa / The Name of the Rose confuses his novice Adso by telling (facetiously) him of an abbey or church which amongst its holy relics has the skull of John the Baptist as a child. Impressive indeed.

[bill_g]

Off Topic

The bits of suit remind me of a Holy Relics scam too. This piece of St Anthony's robe is barely a 3mm square.

If I recall correctly, the monk William in Umberto Eco's Il nome della rosa / The Name of the Rose confuses his novice Adso by telling (facetiously) him of an abbey or church which amongst its holy relics has the skull of John the Baptist as a child. Impressive indeed.

Meet America Needs Fatima. They have some really cool swag for sale. True believers only please.

[jemcanada2]

I'll add that he's in fact trying to spin the 'never surrender' mugshot angle into something martyr-y, as witnessed by his cutting up and selling of The Suit He Wore At His Surrender To False Authorities Persecuting Him. Or something. And these people are eating it up. Someday, there may be thousands of churches each claiming a True Fragment Of Suit.

I got dollars to doughnuts that it's all some cheap stuff he had a staffer pick up at Fabric Hut...

That was my first thought, that someone's going to be cutting up some cheap fabric (and it won't be suit material).

It can’t be the real suit. Tfg only has one suit or else the genius billionaire has spent a lot of money on several of the same tacky, ill fitting suits.

[realist]

Donald Trump’s lawyers again ask for early verdict in civil fraud trial, judge says ‘no way’

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump ... 4e430c9190

Trump’s lawyers renewed their request for what’s known as a directed verdict a day after Trump, the leading contender for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, skipped a planned return to the witness stand as the defense’s last big witness.

Standard lawyering stuff.

Appeal preservation.

[roadscholar]

If we can have chartreuse, then we can have tantruse.

Even if it is a bit abstruse.

[bill_g]

If we can have chartreuse, then we can have tantruse.

Even if it is a bit abstruse.

Absotrusely.

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

Very tantric.

[Slim Cognito]

https://www.businessinsider.com/manhatt ... al-2023-12

Some a-hole lit some papers on fire and set off a fire extinguisher. He's been arrested.

Trump fraud trial judge evacuated from Manhattan courthouse soon after testimony ends

[MN-Skeptic]

Trump Loses Gag Order Appeal

An appellate court in New York has rejected Donald Trump's latest attempt to appeal Judge Engoron's gag order imposed on Trump, including the fines associated with Trump's failure to follow the gag order. Trump's attorneys sought a writ of prohibition that would have essentially vacated the gag order and the fines that came with it. The appellate court denied this request stating, on procedural grounds, that a writ of prohibition was not the proper avenue to appeal the gag order. As a result, with the trial in its concluding days, Trump's gag order will remain in place.

Order at the link above.

[bill_g]

That means America's favorite president, and the best leader we have ever had - no, honest, it's true - many people have said so - important people - people you don't know - but they said it - that man - Donald Trump will scorch the Earth with a whole new round of blistering and inciteful comments on his Truth Social account. Mark my words. It's not going to be pretty. Not at all. Buckle up people.

[raison de arizona]

Ladies and Gentlemen, may I present to you Judge Arthur Engoron, absolutely demolishing Trump's "defenses" in the NY AG fraud trial just now:

"[A] lie is still a lie. Valuing occupied residences as if vacant, valuing restricted land as if unrestricted, valuing an apartment as if it were triple its actual size, valuing property many times the amount of concealed appraisals, valuing planned buildings as if completed and ready to rent…
… valuing golf courses with brand premium while claiming not to, and valuing restricted funds as cash, are not subjective differences of opinion; they are misstatements at best and fraud at worst."

https://www.threads.net/@tristansnell/post/C1BDbK6xu45/

[Maybenaut]

Here’s the order. It’s short (three pages), but worth the read.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... 121823.pdf

[p0rtia]

Wow.... Worth the read, indeed!

Screenshot 2023-12-19 at 9.20.30 AM.png (123.15 KiB) Viewed 49967 times

[raison de arizona]

Nice, thanks Maybenaut! I especially liked Engoron’s dismissal of tfg’s “expert,” pointing out that he would clearly say anything for a million dollars.

[Suranis]

Apparently hidden in the terms and conditions it says you might not actually get a piece of the suit or a dinner with Mango.

Besides, if you buy 47 NFTs that means you are paying out $4700. There's not going to be many people demanding their Dish cloth and one scoop of ice Cream. I think his suit is safe. Not that he can afford to buy another one anyway.

[chancery]

On the topic of Trump's experts, a paragraph from the NYAG's 12/18 letter-brief in opposition to Trump's motion for directed verdict that was just denied.

Nor does any of the testimony from the most ineffective team of experts that Defendants’ money can buy change the analysis. Defendants cite to their experts in contending that “property valuation is necessarily subjective, such that there is not only one true or correct legitimate value for any given property.” Motion at 4. So what? The trial was never about whether the assets in the SFCs were valued at their “one true or correct legitimate value,” but rather whether Defendants intentionally inflated the estimated current values of assets listed in the SFCs, thereby creating false business records, issuing false financial statements, and committing insurance fraud. 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.

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef ... 78U/7F2g==

[Sam the Centipede]

Thx chancery. One detects a frisson of frustration and a soupçon or sarcasm in the prosecutors' response to the frivolity.

Could they perhaps have relied on the judge's good sense and let him (or his clerk!) dismiss the nonsense without their contribution? Doing so wouldn't concede the motion, would it? Perhaps that would seem unprofessional? Or just not in their behavioral repertoire.

[chancery]

It's rarely a good idea to blow off the chance to respond to what your adversary has submitted.

One of the reasons why lawyers keep the pressure on with things like repeated directed verdict motions is that pressure can lead to mistakes.

Clerks have a crushing workload, and don't always have time to go over their notes and the voluminous transcript. Even if the points have been repeated again and again, they won't necessarily come to the clerk's mind when she sits down to prepare a draft order for the judge to review, a draft that has to be done quickly because there's so much else to do.

So you always want to give the judge's staff something to work with.

[p0rtia]

I'm with chancery.

I'm sick of reading the shite these corrupt, lying, cherry-picking ignorant lawyers vomit into their motions. It's insulting to the intelligence of the court, the citizenry, and the English language.

I'm delighted to the good guys pushing back and showing their justifiable anger and contempt. I'm not worried that they'll overdo it--my god they've barely scratched the surface.

On a related note, I occasionally read/hear some legal expert or other talking about the need for the various state bars to kick it into gear. Big time. That would be good too.

[Rolodex]

Thanks to all for posting these filings - they're fascinating and hoo boy, are they salty, but in a most high-falutin' way! I think Engoron is to make his disgorgement amounts decision filed in January. Wonder if Trump will be competing with rudy for giant awards they can't afford.

Side note: Engoron (or maybe the clerk?) has a really cool way to do his initials (see his denial of directed verdict, p 3).

[RTH10260]

I love how Engoron had all prior motions taken "under advisement" on the back burner and resolved them all at the same time by ruling on the latest only.

[northland10]

I love how Engoron had all prior motions taken "under advisement" on the back burner and resolved them all at the same time by ruling on the latest only.

I've watched others judges do that from time to time. They will have a bunch of motions pending, then file a bunch of more motions, and eventually, the judges rules on one or two, and the rest, hey deny as moot.

If they were a judge in GIL case, I would recommend a pile of prepped order's that just need to be signed:

1. One or two prepped orders that read "I said no, can't you take a hint?" for the motion for reconsideration GIL will file (you can always include Twombly in it as it will always apply).

2. A larger pile for "NO SANCTIONS FOR YOU" orders.

3. A truckload, and 5 high capacity copiers for "NO, NOT RECUSING"

[bbflatt]

2. A larger pile for "NO SANCTIONS FOR YOU" orders.

Is there some punctuation missing in that one?

[bob]

2. A larger pile for "NO SANCTIONS FOR YOU" orders.

Is there some punctuation missing in that one?

Klayman habitually demands that his opponents be sanctioned. But your point is well taken; there should be two substacks:

"NO SANCTIONS FOR YOU!" and
"NO! SANCTIONS FOR YOU!"