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.”

  • pixxelkick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ah, thats right.

    Well, in that case its extra going to be a bad hand for Trump, I guess.

    Everytime the Judge extends him an olive branch to shut the fuck up and Trump proceeds to double down on his rhetoric, I imagine the Judge is bumping up the amount owed he has in his head already as the trial continues.

    Like it’s absolutely wild when you have this judge as the sole delegate as to just how hard you are going to get dinged, and you decide “ah yeah lets talk shit about this person”

    Thats… not going to go well at all… lol

    • WHYAREWEALLCAPS@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      He’s likely hoping one of his nutjob followers kills the judge. It also lines up to imprison the judge if he gets back into the White House.

    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It may go better than you think.

      There are reports already out that the judge in this case undervalued at least some of Trump’s properties when making his fraud ruling. Now if Trump can goad him into making any kind of personal comments that even give the appearance that the judge is biased, he can use all of that on appeal in hopes of getting the whole thing thrown out.

      “This judge made numerous factual errors in his original ruling of fraud, grossly undervaluing the Trump brand and the value of our properties. And during the trial, he said X, Y, and Z in response to me exercising my First Amendment rights under the Constitution. He would not allow us to file for a jury trial even though amended filings are commonplace in our court system. Therefore, we ask the appeals court to throw the entire case out entirely.”

      Adjust for legalese as necessary, but that’s pretty much what Trump is going to go for. And keep in mind that, contrary to the beliefs of some, Trump’s record in these cases isn’t nearly as bad as some claim. Will it work? At worst, I’d say the chances are nonzero. But those chances significantly increase if this judge actually does anything that an appeals court rules as even slightly improper. And that’s what Trump is trying to goad this judge into.

      Our system of justice is not really designed to balance the First Amendment rights of someone who is expressing an opinion or otherwise just venting frustration when that same person’s word can literally cause nationwide violence. How do you handle someone like Trump when attempting to silence, gag, or jail him could spark nationwide violence at any time and put everyone involved with the case and their families at risk, but not attempting to do so only emboldens him and causes him to make even more violent threats?

      • 2piradians@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The judge is not in real estate, he’s a judge. He didn’t dream up figures to fry Trump. James would have gotten them from sources who are real estate experts, and at this level the sources must have been deemed independent and unbiased by the judge to use them.

        As long as the case took to build, and as it all rests on these figures, the people who matter must have full confidence in them under scrutiny.

        Any suggestion that the figures are flawed likely comes from Team Trump, and would be in line with their long list of dubious claims both in and out of court.

        • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Any suggestion that the figures are flawed likely comes from Team Trump, and would be in line with their long list of dubious claims both in and out of court.

          Actually, it’s coming from articles such as this.

          Even if the judge had a good-faith reason to believe the values that he was presented with, those values being wrong could easily be enough to have the case thrown out regardless of who’s fault the error was. (This assumes that the properties were undervalued in the first place, of course).

          If the arguments made in that article are accurate, it becomes a question of whether an appeals court believes that the judge jumped the gun in issuing his ruling of fraud instead of giving Trump’s legal team an opportunity to make their case that the properties were undervalued. (IMO, this should have been done anyway, as there’s no way he can make this case without admitting to even more serious tax fraud charges, as he was simultaneously under-valuing the properties himself for tax evasion purposes.)

          If these property valuations really are wrong, there’s a case for an appeal here. Now add Trump’s usual spin to it and the fact that eventually the case is going to end up in front of a Trump-friendly panel of judges (even if he has to appeal all the way to the SC to get there), and you end up with a case that may be messy and incoherent because it’s Trump after all, but still a case who’s chances of being successful are still uncomfortably above zero.

          • 2piradians@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              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
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                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.