I find this sort of commentary so, so annoying. If they hadn’t made and lost these issues at the trial level, they’d likely be considered waived on appeal.Volkonski wrote: ↑Mon Jul 22, 2024 10:50 pm Trump asks New York appeals court to throw out $454 million civil judgment
https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/22/politics ... index.html
Lawyers for Donald Trump asked a New York appeals court Monday to throw out the $454 million judgment in his civil fraud trial, arguing that the monetary penalty was unconstitutional and that most of the case should have been barred because the conduct was too old.
The former president’s attorneys raised several other legal arguments they lost at the trial court-level, including that no bank or counterparty lost money on loans, saying the judge made reversal mistakes in his rulings.
<snip>
Parenthetically, when I practiced, the government would invariable say something like, “The defense trots out the same tired arguments that failed at trial.” If I responded (sometimes I just let it go), my response ranged from snarky (“So?”) to indignant (“It is indeed regrettable that the United States considers the guarantees of our Constitution “tired,” but in any event…”).