One prediction about the 2024 political season has already come true. The election year, to the delight of Donald Trumps superfans and the dread of just about everyone else, is all about the former President: his trials, his feuds, his insufferable family. We learned this week that he wants his daughter-in-law, Lara, to become the co-chair of the Republican National Committeeshe loyally promises to spend every single penny of the Partys funds to elect him if thats what it takesand that Jared Kushner really doesnt want to go back to the White House for a second Trump term. On Thursday, a judge in New York ruled that Trumps criminal trial for allegedly paying hush money to a former porn actress and then lying about it will go forward in March, and a decision is expected any minute in a civil fraud case that could cost Trumps business hundreds of millions of dollars. (The judge is CORRUPT, Trump insisted in a social-media post, repeating one of his favorite claims, but theres so much else Trump-related going on, Im not sure anyone noticed.) In Washington, the federal special counsel Jack Smith pleaded with the Supreme Court to act swiftly to get the other cases against Trump moving, too: The public interest in a prompt trial is at its zenith where, as here, a former President is charged with conspiring to subvert the electoral process so that he could remain in office. The Nation has a compelling interest in seeing the charges brought to trial.
Legal cliffhangers aside, Trump has demonstrated his remarkable continued ability to hijack the national conversation, warping and distorting not only Americas politics but also its foreign policy to suit his toxic personal mixture of dictator worship, blustery nationalism, and deep-seated skepticism about U.S. engagement in the world. Over the weekend, he delivered an anti-NATO rant at a campaign rally that sparked days of news coverage and outraged responses from his opponents. I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want, he said, of Russiaall but inviting Vladimir Putin to attack European countries that did not, in Trumps view, spend enough on their defense budgets. You gotta pay! The Secretary-General of NATO weighed in; so did the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, who warned solemnly that U.S. credibility is at stake. Leaders from Poland and the Baltic states were officially alarmed; veterans of Trumps White House, including his former national-security adviser John Bolton and former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, cautioned, as they have many times before, that NATO is not likely to survive a second term of their former boss. In blistering remarks at the White House, on Tuesday, President Biden denounced Trump using some of his strongest language yet about his predecessor, whose threat to allies, he said, was dumb, shameful, dangerous, and un-American.
After days of this backlash, Trump appeared at another campaign rally on Wednesday night, where he, naturally, doubled down. He repeated his dubious account of having warned a fellow NATO leader about the consequences of not meeting the alliances commitment to spend two per cent of annual G.D.P. on defense. Look, if theyre not going to pay, were not going to protect. O.K.? he said.
As a matter of politics, none of it makes much sense. NATO is popular; support for Ukraine in its fight with Russia remains high even as Republicans have questioned how much aid to send. Americans loathe Putin, even after years of Trumps suck-uppery and the recent awkward attempt at reputation laundering by Tucker Carlson. In terms of timing, Trumps tirade could not have been worse, handing the gift of a major gaffe to Biden, at a time when the President is facing unwelcome questions about his age and mental fitness, thanks to the special counsel Robert Hurs report calling him a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. And yet the lesson of the Trump years is that the conventional metrics of politics dont apply to his actionshe is out to prove mastery over his party, not consistency in policy. He has shown once again that where he goes they will follow. When I went back and listened to his NATO remarks, the thing that struck me was the audiences response: they clapped and cheered.
The larger backlash to Trump was not just about his words, as ignorant and dangerous as they were, but about the actual effect they are already having on Republicans in Congress, many of whom have gone from being staunch supporters of Ukraine in its existential fight against Russian invasion to refusing to send any more assistance because of Trumps loud public opposition. (See: Graham, Lindsey.) When the Senate this week finally passed a bill requested by Biden months ago that would send nearly sixty billion dollars to Ukraine along with billions more for Israel and Taiwan, only twenty-two Senate Republicans voted for it. On the other side of the Capitol, Speaker Mike Johnson, a Trump acolyte who owes his job to the ex-Presidents backing, all but refused to bring the legislation to a vote, then adjourned the House for a two-week recess.
In interviews after the Senate passage, the Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, was strikingly open about the reason for his struggle to get even half of his fellow G.O.P. senators to go along with the bill: Trump. Its a political reaction led, obviously, by the likely nominee for President having a view and expressing a view on this, he told CNNs Manu Raju. Thats why we are where we are. He told The Hill that this weeks vote recalled the Senates 1941 vote to approve the Lend-Lease Act, which sent assistance to countries fighting Nazi Germanyand that, then as now, a majority of his partys members had voted with the wrong side. In the early days of the Second World War, the problem was the Ohio senator Robert Taft, who was the leader of the Republicans considerable isolationist wing; today, its Trump.McConnell said that, with the ex-President actively making calls and lobbying senators to vote down the bill, the twenty-two Republican votes he managed to secure seemed like a landslide. Yeesh.
McConnell, whose own leadership has come under fire from a loud and growing minority of his increasingly Trumpified caucus, has famously not spoken with Trump since the violent aftermath of the 2020 election. And yet he and the dwindling remains of the Party establishment who refuse to get on board with Trumps 2024 campaign repeatedly failed to act decisively against Trump when it might have matteredby voting to convict him in the Senate impeachment trial that followed his efforts to overturn his 2020 defeat, or, more recently, by pushing through assistance to Ukraine months ago rather than agreeing to hold the aid hostage to far-right demands for a border deal that Trump was never going to agree to in an election year anyway.
McConnells willingness to complain publicly about Trump now, alas, is the tellnot a sign of an incipient battle for the soul of the Party but of a fight that has already been lost. This is also the explanation for the increasingly loud criticisms being lobbed at Trump by his one remaining opponent in the Republican primaries, the former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley, whose longshot campaign faces a death blow next week in her home states primary, where polls currently give Trump around two-thirds of the Republican vote. With little to lose, Haley has begun bashing away at Trump with a lacerating intensity that was missing from her earlier efforts. On Tuesday, she told NBCs Today show that he was diminished and unhinged. That same day, she released a new ad showing Trump shaking Putins hand and smiling. The ad warns about the consequences of electing Trump to a second term: from more record-breaking debt to a Russian victory that will bring more war. With Trump, its just more chaos, the spot concludes.
A year ago, it might have appeared unthinkable that so many Republicans would abandon Ukraine just because Trump urged them to do so; a year from now, there is the not-implausible chance that when a relected President Trump demands that they make concessions to Putin, or pull back from commitments to our treaty allies in Europe, they will follow him in that, too. Consider yourself warned.
See more here:
Trump's Threat to NATO Is the Scariest Kind of Gaffe: It's Real - The New Yorker
Former U.S. President Donald Trump and his lawyers Christopher Kise and Alina Habba attend the closing arguments in the Trump Organization civil fraud trial on Jan. 11 in New York City. Shannon Stapleton/Getty Images hide caption
Former U.S. President Donald Trump and his lawyers Christopher Kise and Alina Habba attend the closing arguments in the Trump Organization civil fraud trial on Jan. 11 in New York City.
A New York judge has ordered former President Donald Trump and executives at the Trump Organization to pay nearly $364 million in a civil fraud case, handing a win to New York Attorney General Letitia James, who sued Trump and his associates after a three-year investigation.
The Friday decision from Judge Arthur Engoron orders Trump and his flagship organization to pay the bulk of that amount: nearly $355 million. Trump's two sons and co-defendants, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., are each liable for $4 million. Allen Weisselberg, a former Trump Organization executive, is liable for $1 million. The total is even higher with interest more than $450 million overall, according to the attorney general's office.
"Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological. They are accused only of inflating asset values to make more money. The documents prove this over and over again. This is a venial sin, not a mortal sin," Engoron wrote in the court filing. "Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways."
Trump himself called the decision a "Complete and Total SHAM" in an emailed statement and repeated his accusation that the justice system overall is politically biased against him.
James, however, declared that "justice has been served."
"This is a tremendous victory for this state, this nation, and for everyone who believes that we all must play by the same rules even former presidents," the state attorney general said in a statement.
The judge also decided to limit Trump and his co-defendants' ability to do business in the Empire State. Trump and his companies are prohibited from serving as an officer or director of any New York business or applying for loans for three years. His sons are limited from similar leadership roles for two years.
Jeffrey McConney, ex-controller of the Trump Organization and also a defendant, was not ordered to pay any amount, but he and Weisselberg are permanently barred from serving in the financial control function of any New York corporation or similar business entity registered or licensed in New York state.
"This Court is not constituted to judge morality; it is constituted to find facts and apply the law. In this particular case, in applying the law to the facts, the Court intends to protect the integrity of the financial marketplace and, thus, the public as a whole," Engoron wrote.
The ruling comes at a crucial time for Trump, the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination. Engoron's decision comes a day after another judge set the date for what could be Trump's first criminal trial, related to hush money payments issued during the 2016 election.
He is facing a combined 91 state and federal charges, including several related to his role to stay in office after he lost the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden. But the charges have done little to dent Trump's popularity among his base. Instead, the charges appear to have bolstered his credentials, potentially setting up a rematch with Biden.
Trump and his two older sons are accused of knowingly committing fraud by submitting financial statements that inflated the value of their properties and other assets. The lawsuit alleges that from 2011 to 2021, Donald Trump and his organization created more than 200 false valuations to inflate his net worth by billions of dollars with the goal of getting better business, insurance and banking deals.
Engoron had already determined that there was fraud and that the former president, his sons and other executives were liable.
Throughout the trial, legal teams argued whether the value of notable Trump properties, such as Manhattan's Trump Tower and 40 Wall Street, were inflated deliberately.
Documents shown during trial ranged from spreadsheets to signed financial statements. In one example, the attorney general's legal team showed that Trump's triplex in his eponymously named Manhattan building was marked as being almost 11,000 square feet in 1994 and later as 30,000 square feet. A Forbes magazine article in 2017 originally shed light on the discrepancy.
The former president and three of his children, Donald Jr., Eric and Ivanka, who is not a defendant, all took the stand to testify about the valuation process and their involvement in the Trump Organization. Testifying in November, Trump argued that the estimated property values were actually conservative, and he said that he relied on others to compile the statements. His sons also testified that they relied on others, including their accounting firm, to come up with the numbers even as emails and documents showed the Trumps ultimately approved them.
In closing briefs, Trump's team doubled down on the argument that the three members of the Trump family did not have knowledge or involvement in the creation, preparation or use of the fraudulent financial statements.
Witnesses included former Trump allies such as Michael Cohen and Weisselberg, who was also a defendant.
Cohen testified that it was his responsibility, along with that of Weisselberg, "to reverse-engineer the very different asset classes, increase those assets in order to achieve the numbers" Trump had asked for.
Weisselberg, however, testified that he couldn't remember whether he discussed the financial statements with Trump as they were finalized.
The decision on Friday comes as Trump continues to campaign for the presidency. He will likely appeal this ruling, as he has in the other cases where he has suffered legal setbacks. It may take years before he parts with any money in the case.
Read the original:
N.Y. judge orders Trump and executives to pay $364 million in civil fraud case - NPR
During closing arguments at Donald J. Trumps civil fraud trial, Arthur F. Engoron, the judge who has overseen the case for more than three years, made what might have been an unusual comment for any other jurist.
Justice Engoron, a lean 74-year-old with an unruly mop of white hair, acknowledged that his control of the courtroom had not been perfect.
He had allowed repetitive objections from Mr. Trumps lawyers, despite protests by the New York attorney generals office, which brought the case. He had often ignored Mr. Trumps violations of courtroom decorum. At one point, the judge recalled, he had even let a witness answer his mobile phone while on the stand.
Despite all that, he warned the lawyers, I dont want you to think Im a pushover.
No one is likely to think so now. Justice Engoron on Friday ruled against the former president, finding that he had orchestrated a conspiracy to inflate his net worth, penalizing him $355 million and instituting a three-year ban from running his family business. Despite his absurdist humor and good cheer, the judge showed himself in the end to be a very serious man.
It was the culmination of what was surely one of the more intense periods of Justice Engorons professional life. During the trial, he contended with repeated anonymous antisemitic attacks on his family and on his law clerk, Allison Greenfield, and with threats to his own life. Last month, he was roused early one morning to find that a bomb squad had been dispatched to his Long Island home to respond to a report that turned out to be a hoax.
But despite the attacks, and his own clear desire for harmonious proceedings, Justice Engoron consistently came down hard on the former president. On Friday, he continued his streak of lacerating rulings.
Read the original:
Who Is Arthur Engoron, the Judge Who Penalized Donald Trump? - The New York Times
Former President Donald J. Trump was penalized $355 million and banned for three years from serving in any top roles at a New York company, including his own, in a ruling on Friday by Justice Arthur F. Engoron. The decision comes after the state Attorney General Letitia James sued Mr. Trump, members of his family and his company in 2022.
The ruling expands on Justice Engorons decision last fall, which found that Mr. Trumps financial statements were filled with fraudulent claims. Mr. Trump will appeal the financial penalty and is likely to appeal other restrictions; he has already appealed last falls ruling.
The New York Times is annotating the document.
Download the original PDF.
Next
1
A 20-year veteran of the New York judiciary, Justice Engoron oversaw the monthslong trial. Due to a powerful state law requiring that the matter be handled as a bench trial, there was no jury in this case.
2
This ruling is a result of a 2022 lawsuit filed by New Yorks attorney general, Letitia James, against Donald J. Trump and the Trump Organization; his adult sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump; the companys former chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg and former controller Jeffrey McConney; and several of their related entities. Mr. Trumps daughter, Ivanka Trump, was also initially a defendant until an appeals court dismissed the case against her.
Previous Next
3
The law under which Ms. James sued, known by its shorthand 63(12), requires the plaintiff to show a defendants conduct was deceptive. If that standard is met, a judge can impose severe punishment, including forfeiting the money obtained through fraud. Ms. James has also used this law against the oil company ExxonMobil, the tobacco brand Juul and the pharma executive Martin Shkreli.
Previous Next
4
Justice Engoron is now providing a background of this case. This ruling comes after a three-year investigation by the attorney generals office and the conclusion of a trial that ended last month. But this likely wont be Mr. Trumps last word on the matter he will appeal the financial penalty and is likely to appeal other restrictions, as he has already appealed other rulings.
5
In late 2022, Justice Engoron assigned a former federal judge, Barbara Jones, to serve as a monitor at the Trump Organization and tasked her with keeping an eye on the company and its lending relationships. Last month, she issued a report citing inconsistencies in its financial reporting, which may reflect a lack of adequate internal controls.
Previous Next
6
Here, Justice Engoron is laying out the laws he considered in his ruling beyond 63(12). The attorney generals lawsuit included allegations of violations of falsifying business records, issuing false financial statements, insurance fraud and related conspiracy offenses.
Previous Next
8
For over 50 pages, Justice Engoron describes his conclusions about the testimony of all of the witnesses who spoke during the trial.
Previous Next
9
For more than a dozen pages, Justice Engoron provides background on specific assets that Mr. Trump included in his annual financial statements.
Previous
10
The judge is clarifying that Ms. James had to prove her claims by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning she had to demonstrate it was more likely than not that Mr. Trump and the co-defendants should be held liable. This is a lower standard than that of a criminal trial, which requires that evidence be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Read more from the original source:
The Civil Fraud Ruling on Donald Trump, Annotated - The New York Times