The court throws Trump’s $ 500 million civilian fraud fine
Former American lawyer Andy McCarthy weighs after a court of appeal in New York President Donald Trump’s massive civilian fraud had thrown away penalty, with one judge calling it an ‘excessive’ fine and claims that it is violating the eighth amendment.
Lawfare is a political weapon disguised as legal. It is destined to fail when the investigation of the law ultimately catches it up.
That happened on Thursday when the New York Court of Appeal threw around $ 500 million civil judgment – including interest – against President Donald Trump in a politically driven case that was filed by the attorney -general Letitia James.
The punishment was outrageous and completely disconnected from the alleged error. It was an excessive cash sentence that violated the eighth amendment, the five lawyers said in the panel. A compliment for them for grabbing it obvious.
NY Professional Court throws $ 500 million a fine against Trump in Letitia James Civil Case
Unfortunately, they left the provisional exemption assignments of the court in recovery actions against the Trump organization, which will now be the subject of additional lawsuits and an appeal to the highest court in New York.
But the case should never have been submitted in the beginning. It was the definition of Lawfare. Together with the four criminal charges against Trump, the collective goal was to put the former president bankrupt, to prisoners and prevent him from looking for re -election in 2024.
The Lawfare campaign was so obvious that the Boemeranged against its democratic opponents. Voters did not see Trump as a villain, but as a victim of unscrupulous opponents. It helped him to a second term last November.
James campaigned on the unethical promise to get ‘Trump’. At that time she had no access to evidence or any knowledge of misconduct. But once in function, she searched all the corners and gaps to call a misleading case by mangling a status of a consumer protection – although no consumers have taken damage.
This case should never have been submitted in the beginning. It was the definition of Lawfare. Together with the four criminal charges against Trump, the collective goal was to put the former president bankrupt, to prisoners and prevent him from looking for re -election in 2024.
The engravings of her accusations was that Trump blown up the value of his assets to obtain real estate loans. Except that he didn’t. He hired external real estate experts, respected accountants and some of the best lawyers in New York to perform the ratings. During the process they were responsible for the accuracy of their work. They have fully complied with generally accepted accounting principles.
The attorney -general Letitia James of New York speaks during a press conference, September 21, 2022, in New York. (AP Photo/Brittainy Newman, File)
Judge who has imposed a fine of Trump $ 500 million, sees the ruling throwing
The banks that borrowed the money did their own due diligence by retaining other professionals who have kept individual and exhausting ratings. They all agreed with the Trump estimates as qualified, borrowed the money and gave hundreds of millions of dollars profit. Financial managers testified that they wanted to borrow him even more money.
So, who was damaged here? Nobody. There was no concrete injury. In a case that claimed fraud, the assumed victims were that they were never cheated.
In a civilian fraud case, the law requires proof of the intention to mislead – that someone knowingly has made knowingly false statements. That has been the set standard in the Common Law for more than a century.
But to bypass that fatal weakness, James ordered a poor conceived and rarely called on the law, executive law 63 (12), to pursue her unprecedented action against Trump. She tried to punish him for making alleged inaccurate statements without doing that.
NY AG’s office hires the lawyer who has reserved Hunter Biden to defend Letitia James against fraud allegations
It is as if you are prosecuting a customer for robbing a bank after wrongly accepting too much money from a counter. It also violates the constitution by punishing inaccurate speech that is protected by the first amendment.
Trump’s opportunities to rule in the remains of the case are good. If his liability is allowed, each company can be removed in New York if the owners are wrong – without negligence or intention – assets to secure loans.
It also ignores the typical inequality in real estate values. They are inherently subjective and bound to dynamic market conditions. Fluctuation is the fundamental nature of prices for real estate. Ask three professionals for their opinion and you get three different answers.
Ask a judge who is not trained in the issue and you will probably get an absurd opinion.
Click here for more the opinion of Fox News
The judge, Arthur Engoron, stated that Trump’s Palm Beach Estate was worth at least $ 18 million. “Accordingly, there can be no mistake that Donald Trump’s appreciation of Mar-A-Lago of 2011-2021 was fraudulent,” he wrote in an order issued on February 16, 2024.
Here is a news assessment for Engoron: $ 18 million in the Toniest part of Palm Beach gives you a Porta-Potty on a spit of dirt. That’s all. Apparently his honor does not understand the difference between an estimated value and a market value.
This year an empty party came to the market with $ 200 million in the neighborhood of Mar-A-Lago. Given the fame and history of Trump’s unique luxury property, some experts in the property in Florida think that it could achieve more than $ 500 million. Probably much more.
Outdoor view of Mar-A-Lago, the residence of President Donald Trump in Florida. (AP)
With Engoron on the couch, Trump never had a chance for a fair trial. The judge endorsed a brutal abuse of the law and taken him legitimate defenses. The expired status of limitations was shaken off.
Click here to get the Fox News app
By erasing the ridiculous judgment of $ 500 million, the Court of Appeal acknowledged the gross justice law. Although a part of the case continues to exist, Justice David Friedman argued that it had to be completely rejected. He castiger James for the persecution of Trump to derail his political career and to destroy his company.
The ruling justifies what the voters already knew: Wetfare is a corruption of the legal system and, when it is used to influence a presidential election, an attack on the principles of democracy.
Click here to Van Gregg Jarrett
