Speaking to reporters outside the courtroom, he called the case a “charade” and a waste of taxpayers’ money. That shouldn’t bother Eric then.
1 Like
Mr Trump’s defence lawyers had made repeated objections about the working relationship between the judge and his principal law clerk, including suggestions that she was biased.
Mr Trump himself has also accused the clerk of bias.
In his order, Justice Arthur Engoron of the New York state court in Manhattan said he has an “unfettered right” to consult with his staff members throughout the trial, and that a gag order was intended to protect their safety.
I’m not a defence lawyer but pissing off the judge does not seem like a good idea to me.
1 Like
He knows he has lost this case. Its evident to everyone. So he is preparing the narrative for what happens afterwards and how he pitches this in his presidential campaign. He will become the victim, he will have some vague proposal about limiting the powers of the legal system (which tinpot dictator does not). This is all about after the case now.
3 Likes
It may be the only idea that Trump’s lawyers have got … 
Engoron revealed that his chambers had been bombarded with threats since the trial began and warned that he would not allow the attacks on his staff to continue.
“The threat of, and actual, violence resulting from heated political rhetoric is well-documented,” Engoron wrote. “Since the commencement of this bench trial, my chambers have been inundated with hundreds of harassing and threatening phone calls, voicemails, emails, letters, and packages."
Trump’s lawyer Christopher Kise pressed Engoron to lift that gag order on Friday and threatened to ask for a mistrial because, he alleged, the judge’s chief clerk had engaged in political activity with Democratic officials. “We all need to take this very seriously because the entire world is watching,” he said.
Engoron questioned the accuracy of those allegations. “It’s a shame we’ve descended to this level,” he said.
The clerk, Allison Greenfield, is a Democrat who previously worked as a trial attorney in New York City’s law department. Greenfield often passes notes to Engoron, and Trump’s legal team have accused her of swaying the judge’s opinion.
Trump’s highly-paid lawyers are just a couple of mud-slingers … 
1 Like
Indeed … and, as one batch of lawyers are dumped by Trump, he’s looking for another batch:
People close to the former president say they are seeking out a different type of lawyer committed to his “America First” ideology and willing to endure the personal and professional risks of association with Mr. Trump. They want lawyers in federal agencies and in the White House who are willing to use theories that more establishment lawyers would reject to advance his cause. This new mind-set matches Mr. Trump’s declaration that he is waging a “final battle” against demonic “enemies” populating a “deep state” within the government that is bent on destroying America.
John Mitnick was appointed by Mr. Trump as general counsel of the Homeland Security Department in 2018. But he was fired in 2019 as part of a broad purge of the agency’s leaders — whom Mr. Trump had installed.
Mr. Mitnick predicted that “no qualified attorneys with integrity will have any desire to serve as political appointees” in a second Trump term, and that instead it would be “predominantly staffed by opportunists (1) who will rubber-stamp whatever Trump and his senior White House staff want to do.”
(1) Preferably greedy, unprincipled and ambitious …
Alina Habba (born March 25, 1984) is an Assyrian-American lawyer and Managing Partner of Habba, Madaio & Associates LLP, a legal firm based in Bedminster, New Jersey, with offices in New York City. She represents former President of the United States, Donald Trump. She is also a senior advisor for MAGA, Inc., Trump’s Super PAC.
In 2019, Habba joined the Trump National Golf Club Bedminster in New Jersey, an eight-minute drive from her law firm. There, she and Donald Trump got acquainted. Habba had never done legal work for Trump when, in September 2021, he hired her as part of his legal team, replacing several well-established lawyers who had worked for Trump for many years but had withdrawn their services, including: Marc Kasowitz, Charles Harder, Marc Saroff Mukasey, Jay Sekulow, and Lawrence S. Rosen.
New York attorney general Letitia James spoke outside the court before the hearing. She said she expected Trump to “engage in name-calling and taunts and race-baiting, and call this a witch hunt”.
Before heading to the court, Trump used Truth Social to attack the judge and attorney general in the case and claimed once again the case is politically motivated:
Got a really Biased, Nasty, Club controlled, but often overturned, Judge, a Racist, Evil, and Corrupt Attorney General, BUT A CASE THAT, ACCORDING TO ALMOST ALL LEGAL SCHOLARS, HAS ZERO MERIT,” he wrote. “A dark day for our Country. WITCH HUNT!
Donald Trump has arrived at the Manhattan court house.
Kevin Wallace, who is questioning Trump for the New York Attorney General’s Office, has started his examination with questions about the structure of the former president’s financials. Specifically, Wallace is asking about Trump’s revocable trust, which holds now his assets and names him as the sole beneficiary.
Trump rambled on then railed against the many prosecutors bringing cases against him, saying they are “all Democrats, all Trump haters, in all cases they’re not good, inappropriate and not good.”
The ex-president grew testy when asked about financial documents from approximately one decade ago. When Wallace asked Trump about the document, he shot back: “It’s so long ago this is well beyond the statute of limitations.” Trump insisted that others would be exempt from scrutiny for a document this old. “But I’m probably not, because I’m sure the judge will rule against me, because he always rules against me.”
“Mr Trump, please just answer the question.” Engoron said.
As questioning progressed, Trump grew increasingly incensed by Wallace’s questions about his real estate being over-valued.
“Your case was that I had no money,” Trump said. “You sued me on the basis that Trump had no money and he wrote up phony things and he defrauded bank. And even though these banks were paid back in full, there was no harm, no anything, everybody got their money in full, there was no victim,” Trump also said. “The banks don’t even know what they’re doing in this case.”
“Mr Kise, can you control your client?” Engoron interjected (to Trump’s lawyer). “This is not a political rally. This is a courtroom .”
Judge Engoron has lost his patience with Trump repeatedly failing failing to answer questions without rambling.
“Mr Kise, that was a simple yes or no question,” Engoron said. “The question was whether he believed that was an accurate number. We got another speech.”
Engoron threatened to boot Trump from proceedings and urged Kise to control his client or else. “If you can’t, I will. I will excuse him and draw every negative inference that I can.”
Kise said that it was only right for Engoron to hear Trump out. “No, I do not want to hear everything that he has to say,” said Engoron with increasing annoyance. “He has a lot to say that has nothing to do with the case or the questions.”
Another Trump attorney, Alina Habba, voiced opposition. Engoron eventually told them “sit down already.”
Amazing scenes from a courtroom - Trump still thinks that he’s in charge … 
I fully expect Judge Engoron to bang his gavel and order Trump to STFU … 
The trial continues with Trump’s elaborate description of his wealth, property and plans, inevitably, finishing with an attack on his nemesis, Letitia James. Anyone of sound mind must conclude that Trump is off his trolley …
He’s now gone into a full-scale rant against Engoron … 
There’s been a lunch-break.
Trump’s return to the stand is more subdued
He’s mostly answering prosecutor Kevin Wallace’s questions with brief, on-topic responses - just like Judge Ergonon repeatedly asked him to do all morning.
Some opinion is that he was baiting the judge into saying something he could use on appeal.?
1 Like
A tricky ploy … he may get himself into more trouble … 
1 Like
Seemingly, there were fewer Trump “distractions” in the afternoon and his testimony was finished after 4 hours.
Donald Trump’s lawyers said they want to make a motion for a mistrial, getting into an extended debate with Judge Arthur Engoron about how they can raise the conduct of his clerk that’s subject to a gag order.
Initially, Engoron told Trump’s lawyers they should not file such a motion that referenced his staff, saying he put the gag order in place to protect them. Trump’s attorneys, who have complained about Engoron’s note-passing with his clerk, claim it’s a sign of the trial’s bias and have urged Engoron to reconsider.
Trump attorney Alina Habba told the judge, “Obviously are going to be moving for a mistrial, that is part of the plan. We need to have an opportunity to be heard on those things that have not been yet heard,” (1) Habba said.
After conferring with his clerk, Engoron changed course and said that Trump’s attorneys could file a motion, but he asked them to do it in writing.
The New York attorney general’s office said they will rest their case after Ivanka Trump’s testimony. Former President Donald Trump’s daughter is set to testify on Wednesday. There is no court Tuesday, due to Election Day. The attorney general’s office expects to finish the direct examination of Ivanka Trump by 2 or 3 p.m. ET in the afternoon Wednesday.
Trump attorney Chris Kise said if that’s the case, they’ll question her on cross-examination through Thursday morning. Judge Arthur Engoron told Trump’s attorneys they can plan to start the defense case on Monday.
(1) “those things that have not been yet heard” … they may have not been yet heard but, I’m sure, they will still be the ramblings and whinings of a deluded and demented psychopathic narcissus.
I’m going to slightly revise my earlier speculation that Trump’s rants are all about shaping a post-trial narrative. I still think that is true but rather than simply to have this narrative to take to the presidential campaign, I now think he primarily intends these rants to become the basis of an appeal. He aims to taunt the judge into statements or decisions that can afterwards be used for an appeal - demonstrating bias, or rash decisions, or unreasonable decisions. This is typical Trump behaviour. Delay the trial then appeal the outcome, then appeal the failed appeal. Ideally this can continue beyond his planned re-election.
I’d not think for a minute that these are simply ramblings of the deluded. Psychopathic narcissus, yes, but more like targeted jabs.
1 Like
Alina Habba, one of Trump’s attorneys, told reporters during the lunch break that Engoron is “unhinged” and had “predetermined” that Trump was guilty. (1)
“I don’t want to hear what he has to say,” Habba said, quoting the judge’s admonishment to Trump’s lawyers this morning after Engoron asked Trump to give more succinct answers during his testimony.
“That was what rang true loud and could not have been more honest, coming from the judge who was already predetermined that my client committed fraud before we even walked into this courtroom,” Habba said.
Habba went on to say that the country is “falling apart” and there is “corruption in courtrooms where attorneys are gagged.”
“You have a right to hire a lawyer who can stand up and say something when they see something wrong. But I was told to sit down today, I was yelled at, (2)” Habba said.
(1) Now I’m no lawyer but, IIRC, in this civil case, no-one is adjudged “guilty”. In the pre-trial summary hearing (3), Trump was found “liable” for business fraud which meant that the trial itself is solely to determine the extent of damages that he has to pay to the City of New York.
(2) Poor little rich girl … 
(3) In the hearing, the judge denied the Trump team’s request to throw out the case, and separately fined five Trump attorneys $7,500 each for making “preposterous” arguments already rejected by the court and fuelling what he called their clients’ “obstreperous” conduct. A history of persistently disruptive court appearances is hardly like to do Trump any favours, either in his appeals or, indeed, in future court cases.
There’s nothing in the Constitution that would stop someone convicted of, or jailed for, a crime becoming president.
The exception might be if he were convicted for a role in the January 6 riots at the US Capitol. If Trump was guilty of insurrection, there is a possible constitutional ban on him holding political office.
But again, this is untested territory and legal scholars disagree on how it might work in practice.
It all sets up a series of extraordinary legal battles that will play out in coming months, which could ultimately determine who holds the most powerful office in the world.
Scary or what?
1 Like
Ivanka Trump claimed she could not remember property deals she handled at her father’s firm, as she testified in a civil fraud case that threatens his business empire.
A judge has already found Donald Trump and two adult sons, Eric and Donald Jr, liable for fraud, ruling they inflated assets to secure favourable loans.
Ivanka Trump, 42, was initially a co-defendant, too, until an appeals court ruling in her favour this year. She fought hard to avoid testifying. The mother-of-three had argued she could not leave her children in Florida during a school week. But a New York judge and appeals court ruled she must take the stand as a witness.
During four hours of testimony in the New York Supreme Court in lower Manhattan on Wednesday, Ms Trump spoke softly into the microphone, sitting upright with her hands in her lap, at times smiling brightly. In composed and succinct responses, she repeatedly said she did not recall specifics, or was not aware.
Ty Cobb, a lawyer who represented Mr Trump early in his presidency but has since spoken out against him, told the BBC he thought Ms Trump would have “zero impact” on the ultimate outcome.
“Her testimony has added not a single fact, as far as I can tell, other than she received one call while she was nine months pregnant,” he said.
If anything, Mr Cobb said, her appearance on the stand - something she fought hard to avoid - may hurt the prosecution in the court of public opinion.
“I think it’s a little bit of a dangerous decision by the attorney general, in the sense that it plays into the Trump theme of: this is just a political witch hunt,” Mr Cobb said. “Her being forced to testify, given the absence of any seemingly relevant testimony, sadly feeds into Mr Trump’s fantasies,” he said.
Quite … her appearance seemed to be pointless … 
Speaking outside the court ahead of today’s evidence, Ms James said Ivanka Trump secured and negotiated loans “to obtain favourable terms based on fraudulent statements of financial condition”.
“She will attempt today to distance herself from the company, but unfortunately the facts will reveal that in fact, she was very much involved,” she said.
1 Like
What? A Trump lying? Surely not…
1 Like
I’ve been looking into this and some of commentary suggests that Ivanka’s testimony has been key to establishing that fraud took place with her involvement but back before the statute of limitation. Hence she is a witness and not a defendant. But the financial statements she concocted were then used as the basis of later business performance / value claims when her two hapless brothers were in charge. So her contribution may well prove valuable.
BTW is it just me or is there a bit of an inconsistency in Trump jnr court statements and his subsequent claims to cameras outside the court. In court he basically said “dunno - others did all that”. Outside court to the cameras he was very clear - this is witch hunt. So now he does know and knows enough to be sure of his families innocence. Sorry, can’t be ignorant and very certain at the same time!
Ivanka Trump testifies to New York fraud trial she cannot recall loan details - BBC News
New York’s attorney general said on the courthouse steps on Wednesday morning that Ivanka Trump was “very much involved” in the family enterprise.
From 2011-17, she was a top executive at the Trump Organization alongside her brothers Donald Jr and Eric. As head of development and acquisitions, she played a key role in the types of real estate deals and loans at the heart of the case, say state attorneys.
Like her two brothers in their testimony last week, Ms Trump distanced herself from documents central to the case - her father’s financial statements, in which assets were allegedly inflated to secure better loan deals. “I wasn’t involved in his statement of financial condition,” Ms Trump said. “That would have been the company.”
As they did with her brothers, lawyers for the state attorney general’s office showed Ms Trump a series of emails meant to bolster their case, asking if she recognised the messages.
They pressed her on her role in securing loans from Deutsche Bank for the Trump National Doral Miami, the Old Post Office in Washington DC and Trump International Hotel & Tower Chicago. At one point state attorneys produced an email she wrote to then-Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg about a loan.
“It doesn’t get better than this,” she wrote. She said she did not remember that message.
Totally unhelpful … nevertheless:
During four hours of testimony in the New York Supreme Court in lower Manhattan on Wednesday, Ms Trump spoke softly into the microphone, sitting upright with her hands in her lap, at times smiling brightly. In composed and succinct responses, she repeatedly said she did not recall specifics, or was not aware.
so I don’t think the judge will hold memory loss against her … but that just leaves any documentary evidence …
One lawyer’s take is that Trump is closer to losing Mar-a-Lago with his testimony in this case.
2 Likes
That link didn’t work for me.Is it the using the place as a club not a home tax dodge thing?
1 Like