Trump: Set to declare 2024 presidential bid tonight; will indictments follow soon?

[Bob Armstrong]

Trump's Legal Problems

New York Civil Court Case # 1 (Of 2)

1. Trial

Alleged: Civil Fraud (Falsifying Corporate Documents # 2) - in order to get "ill-gotten gains," Trump issued false financial statements and false business records to inflate the value of his assets.Trump had fraudulently done this to obtain favourable loans and other benefits.

Prosecutor: New York attorney general, Letitia James

Criminal Court Conviction: Judge Arthur F. Engoron - convicted Trump personally of civil fraud: levied a financial penalty and other punishments - Trump personally to pay $ 454 million in disgorgement for "ill-gotten gains." Interest on the penalty is running.

2.The Posting of a Bond to Appeal

Trump Appealed to the Appeals Court (Monday, March 18): Pause the enforcement of payment of the penalty.

Initial Appeal Court Ruling: Trump must show financial viability - stay on paying a $464 million judgment IF Trump posts a $ 545 million bond (120% of the judgment) to confirm the penalty can be paid, if so found.

Deadline to Post Bond: Today (Mon., 24/3/25).

Trump's Motion to Appeal Court (Monday, March 18) - that the Bond be reduced to $ 100 million or the condition now be waived by the Appeals Court

Grounds:

1.Trump didn’t have enough cash to cover a bond while he appeals the verdict;

2. Trump would be forced to hold a “fire sale” of his assets to raise cash.

3. Trump has been unable to secure the full $ 545 million bond, despite “diligent efforts.” Those efforts included approaching about 30 companies, and yet, they said, he has encountered “insurmountable difficulties.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/18/n...d396a4debfd6ce

Appeals Court Decision (Today, Mon., 24/3/25): Bond amount is lowered to $175 million; Trump has10 days to post the reduced bond of $175 million; If he fails to do so, then enforcement by seizure to pay the judgment can proceed.

Consequence (If lowered bond is not filed by the deadline): New York Attorney General Letitia James may begin seizing some of Trump's assets today to finance his obligation to the state. Filings show New York officials are first preparing to try to seize Trump's golf course and private estate north of Manhattan, known as Seven Springs.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...n=openamericas

Mr. Trump - Public Statement re his Payment of Bond (Today, Tues., March 26): Trump undertakes to pay the $ 175 million within the time limit.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/cou...ent=top-news-1

24/4/5: Edited Addition

Newly Disclosed Fact re Bond Search by Trump (24/4/5):

Trump’s Lawyers Told the Court That No One Would Give Him a Bond. An appeals court reduced Trump’s bond by more than 60% after his attorneys claimed it was a “practical impossibility” to pay the full amount. (See above).

Then Trump Got a Lifeline at the last minute. Billionaire California financier, Don Hankey, said he reached out to Trump’s camp several days before the bond was lowered, expressing willingness to offer the full amount and to use real estate as collateral.Trump's lawyers did not so advise the appeals court.

The lawyers' failure to disclose the proposal from the billionaire financier may have violated ethics rules.

https://www.propublica.org/article/t...ontent=feature

Bond Filed (24/4/1)

$175 million bond - surety company, Knight Specialty Insurance Company (KSIC) - posted on Trump's behalf - allowed Trump to fend off a possible seizure of his properties or other assets following the $464 million judgment (including interest)

Update (24/4/21)

Bond Challenge (New York Supreme Court)

Application (24/4/19) to Justice Arthur Engoron: By New York Attorney General Letitia James -to declare the $175 million bond as “without effect” and to require KSIC to post a new bond that is sufficiently collateralized, while calling into question the firm’s credibility.

- challenging the “sufficiency” of the $175 million bond; Trump's defence: insisted that the company is well-capitalized and has enough collateral to back the bond.

But Ms. James has rejected that assertion, raising a number of arguments in opposition to KSIC’s claim; asks that the judge declare the bond to be “without effect” and order a replacement bond to be posted within seven days.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/let...lection-news-1

Bob A

[Fred Henderson]

LOL again. You proclaim loudly "what is happening, but you can never provide a decent example of your sweeping hyperbole and generalizations

[Fred Henderson]

Hi Pargat:

Well, maybe not a hypocrite.........just inconsistency all over the place.......and he doesn't realize it.

And it is important to note that Dilip is not one of the mainstream embodiments of Libertarianism......we need to know if we are dealing with a fringe, personal schema of Libertarianism.

Maybe Dilip could provide a few sources for his "Natural Law" and "not doing harm EXCEPT in "fair" competition" version of Libertarianism, to show he is not fringe?

Bob A

LOL. Look who's talking about "fringe personal schemas"

[Bob Armstrong]

Legal Problems - Criminal # 1 (Of 4)

Charge: “Criminal Enterprise” to overturn the results of the 2020 election (Interference in Georgia Presidential Election Count)

Issue: Fani Willis, Georgia District Attorney - overseeing case against Trump; hired lead "Prosecutor", Nathan Wade - DA "Official" impropriety alleged by Trump lawyers. She cannot continue as DA.

Judgment: Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee - found an appearance of “impropriety,” but wrote that defendants “failed to meet their burden” in proving District Attorney Fani T. Willis’s relationship with lead prosecutor Nathan Wade was enough to merit her removal.
- But he ruled that either the special prosecutor must be terminated, or Ms. Willis must be removed.

Consequence - Nathan Wade Resigned as Prosecutor in Trump Case After Judge’s Conflict of Interest Ruling

Appeal to Georgia Court of Appeals by Trump: Ms. Willis must be removed.
- appeals court will decide whether to review the district attorney’s fate on the case.

https://www.nysun.com/article/judge-...0%202024-03-20

Update (24/4/16) - Fani Willis Application - Georgia Court of Appeals - LIVE | Fani Willis Fights Disqualification Appeal In Trump’s Georgia Case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a4QEOTB2P0

Update (24/4/16) - The Sarbanes-Oxley Law

USA S.C. Argument by Jack Smith, Special Prosecutor, against Trump

The 45th president could ...be sent to jail for as much as 20 years under the draconian law known as Sarbanes-Oxley.

Oral arguments in [another] case [Against another J6 accused] — known as Fischer v. United States — centered on Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s decision to charge more than 350 January 6 defendants with violations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was signed into law in 2002 in the wake of the implosions of Enron and WorldCom. The law is intended to punish crooks for “corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding.”

The Fischer Case

The Nine [members of the USASC] mulled whether a law that punishes anyone who “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record” is applicable to those who rioted at the Capitol, like Joseph Fischer, a police officer by trade. He pleaded guilty to multiple felonies, but contends that the Sarbanes-Oxley charges are instances of unlawful prosecutorial overreach. As his lawyer, Frederick William Ulrich, put it, that statute is “Enron-driven.”

The high court appeared open to that argument. Justice Clarence Thomas telegraphed that the government could be acting selectively, observing that “there have been many violent protests that have interfered with proceedings. Has the government applied this provision to other protests?” To that, Solicitor General Prelogar claimed that there has never been anything like January 6.

Justice Samuel Alito allowed that “what happened on Jan. 6 was very, very serious” but told General Prelogar that “we need to find out what are the outer reaches of this statute under your interpretation.” The solicitor general called one of the words at issue, “otherwise,” a “classic catchall.” Fischer’s counsel, though, finds it to be more of a “dragnet.” "

Analysis re Trump Case

"Even if the Nine dismiss the Sarbanes-Oxley charges against the January 6 defendants, Mr. Smith is likely to argue that they should stick against Mr. Trump, who did not himself set foot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Instead, the special counsel argues, he engaged in the kind of obstruction contemplated by the statute. Two of the four charges Mr. Trump faces are based on Sarbanes-Oxley.

The relevant subsection mandates that someone is criminally culpable if “he alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.” The special counsel argues that the certification of the results of the 2020 election were such a proceeding.

Mr. Smith’s accusation that Mr. Trump pursued a “conspiracy to corruptly obstruct and impede the January 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified” could insulate the special counsel’s case from a Supreme Court ruling that upends the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the other defendants similarly charged."

https://www.nysun.com/article/suprem...0%202024-04-16

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4)



Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James

Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1 - 34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper.Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

Interim Motions & Decisions (prior to trial): See Post # 231 (24/4/12)

Start of Trial (Mon. 24/4/15) - Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan

Update (24/4/17)

Expected Unfolding of Trial

1. Jury Selection - expected to take about 8 days; A panel of 12 New Yorkers and likely six alternates will ultimately be chosen. Court recessed today (Wed., Apr. 17). Jury Selection will continue Thursday.

More Than Half of First Panel of Jurors Excused on Monday & Tuesday - More than 50 the first batch of potential jurors were excused after being asked whether they believed they could be fair and impartial.

Around nine more were excused for not being able to serve for other reasons.

One juror who left the courtroom was heard saying, "I just couldn't do it."

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/tru...ghlight-news-1

Update (24/4/16)

2. Among the witnesses expected to testify are Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime fixer turned major accuser, whose credibility will be a big issue; Hope Hicks, Trump’s former press secretary, who could help corroborate Cohen’s testimony; Stephanie Clifford (Stormy Daniels), the porn star who received $130,000 in payments Trump is charged with laundering through Cohen; Karen McDougal, a former Playboy playmate of the year who also received hush money; and David Pecker, the National Enquirer chief testifying for the prosecution, whose catch-and-kill scheme to bury dirt on Trump will open a window on how tabloid journalism, well, changed world history.

Trump claimed on Friday (24/4/12) that he’s willing to testify, but that may be just his usual posturing. If he rejects the pleading of his attorneys and takes the stand, cross-examination about his many lies would be admissible.

The trial overall is estimated to take about 8 weeks.

https://messaging-custom-newsletters...d396a4debfd6ce

Live Trial Updates : https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

Elon Musk Comments: Elon Musk Calls Trump Trial ‘Obviously a Corruption of the Law’ - ‘This case is obviously a corruption of the law,’ Mr. Musk said. ‘Lawfare.’

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/elo...tent=us-news-3

Note: - This is the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. It may be the only one of the 4 current criminal cases against Trump where the trial gets started in 2024.

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4)



Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James

Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1 - 34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper.Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

Interim Motions & Decisions (prior to trial): See Post # 231 (24/4/12)

TODAY (Mon. 24/4/15) - Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan: Criminal Trial Begins: Jury selection (Expect a number of days); trial estimated to take about 8 weeks.

Live Trial Updates : https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

Note: - This will be the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. It may be the only one of the 4 current criminal cases against Trump where the trial gets started in 2024.

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

[Fred Henderson]

<snip>

If people generally mind their own business (as in Libertarianism), rather than enjoy minding other people's business (as in Marxism), there is less for everyone to complain about...

LOL.

[Bob Armstrong]

Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4)

Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James

Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1 - 34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper.Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

Trial Date by Manhattan Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan: Monday, April 15,2024

Prosecutor Motion (24/2/22): impose a limited gag order on Mr. Trump. In a court filing, Mr. Bragg wrote that “the need for such protection is compelling.” He also said: " [Trump's past] remarks [about court proceedings], as well as the inevitable reactions they incite from defendant’s followers and allies, pose a significant and imminent threat to the orderly administration of this criminal proceeding and a substantial likelihood of causing material prejudice.”

https://www.nysun.com/article/alvin-...0%202024-02-26

Decision on Prosecution Motion: Reserved

Trump Application (Mon., 24/3/25)

1.That the criminal trial be adjourned indefinitely - because the Supreme Court of Canada has an appeal on "Presidential Immunity" re the Jan. 6, 2023 Insurrection allegation. The trial has to await the prior decision of the US Supreme Court.
2. the disclosure of evidence by the prosecution to the defence only recently is "prosecutorial misconduct". Judge Merchan must delay the trial 90 days, indefinitely or throw out the case altogether!

Decision on Application (24/3/25)

1. Judge Marchan suggested that Mr. Trump’s lawyers were dragging their feet and scolded them for accusing Manhattan prosecutors of misconduct without seeming to substantiate their allegations. For roughly an hour, the judge, Juan M. Merchan, slammed arguments from Mr. Trump’s lawyers that his case should be pushed back any longer because of newly disclosed documents from a related federal investigation. Then there was a 45-minute break.
Judge Merchan then returned to the courtroom, said that no harm had been done to the former president by the delayed disclosure, he was not adjourning the criminal trial, and confirmed the already set trial date of Mon., April 15, 2024.
2. Decision on "Immunity Delay": Reserved

Supplementary Order on Prosecutor's earlier Gag Order Motion (Tues., March 26/24)

There will be imposed on Mr. Trump a gag order that prohibits him from attacking witnesses and prosecutors in the case [This is in public for sure, but I don't know if it includes "in private". Anyone know?].

Final Decision on Earlier "Immunity Delay" Application (24/4/4):[/FEN] There is no reason to delay the criminal trial until the Supreme Court determines Trump's "Immunity" claim. Trial will proceed on Mon, April 15 as already ordered.

Trump Application to Manhattan Appeals Court Judge Lizbeth Gonzalez: that the criminal proceeding be paused, and the trial be moved to a different location.

Judge Gonzalez' Decision (24/4/8): Application Dismissed

Trump Notice (24/4/8): Trump intends to file an unusual type of lawsuit against the criminal trial judge overseeing the case, Juan M. Merchan. It will be an attempt to have the trial judge removed. Judge Merchan has ordered that the criminal trial proceed in one week (Mon., April 15/24)

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/08/n...d396a4debfd6ce

24/4/12 Update

Further Trump Application (Last-Ditch Attempt): Trial should be delayed due to bias of Judge Merchan (His daughter is a Democratic Party operative)

Single Appellate Judge, Ellen Gesmer: Decision (Wed., 24/4/10): Application Dismissed

Trump Response: Denounces ‘Lawfare, as his 3rd application for delay during the week is rejected.
[Wikipedia: Lawfare is the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual's usage of their legal rights.]

https://www.nysun.com/article/trump-...0%202024-04-11

Criminal Trial: Mon., April 15, 2024 - will begin with jury selection; estimated to take about 8 weeks.

Note: - This will be the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. It may be the only one of the 4 current criminal cases against Trump where the trial gets started in 2024.

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4)

Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James

Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1 - 34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper.Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

Trial by Manhattan Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan: Monday, April 15,2024

Past & Future of this criminal case

Your Questions About Trump’s Hush-Money Trial, Answered

https://time.com/6965419/trump-hush-...lctg=206908353

Bob A

[Dilip Panjwani]

Hi Pargat:

Well, maybe not a hypocrite.........just inconsistency all over the place.......and he doesn't realize it.

And it is important to note that Dilip is not one of the mainstream embodiments of Libertarianism......we need to know if we are dealing with a fringe, personal schema of Libertarianism.

Maybe Dilip could provide a few sources for his "Natural Law" and "not doing harm EXCEPT in "fair" competition" version of Libertarianism, to show he is not fringe?

Bob A

There is nothing 'fringe' about the Natural Law. Supreme Court judges in the USA have declared that it is their guiding light!
What is indeed fringe is creating a political party, Ontario's DM party, and being the only member in it!

[Bob Armstrong]

Trump's Associates" Legal Problems (Criminal)

Trump’s Ex-Finance Chief Is Sentenced to 5 Months in Rikers for Perjury

"Allen H. Weisselberg admitted that he had lied about helping Donald J. Trump inflate his net worth to win favorable loan terms."

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/10/n...d396a4debfd6ce

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Pargat:

Well, maybe not a hypocrite.........just inconsistency all over the place.......and he doesn't realize it.

And it is important to note that Dilip is not one of the mainstream embodiments of Libertarianism......we need to know if we are dealing with a fringe, personal schema of Libertarianism.

Maybe Dilip could provide a few sources for his "Natural Law" and "not doing harm EXCEPT in "fair" competition" version of Libertarianism, to show he is not fringe?

Bob A

[Dilip Panjwani]

So cooking the books is OK......nothing to see here........deception is fine.........certainly not a mainstream position, as far as I know.

If the issue was just whether Trump had an affair, I think no law applies except the divorce law (Melania could sue on the ground of irreconcilable differences; or she can incorporate it into her idea of a successful marriage). Some might think deception of Melania is a moral problem Trump has, but apparently that also is of no concern to you and Libertarianism generally.......nothing to see here!

Frankly, I find your "Natural Law Morality/Ethics" quite baffling.

Bob A

The Libertarian Morality is just fine, Bob A. If politicians make stupid/corrupt laws, and breaking those laws harms no one, you do not have a problem, do you, despite you being a lawyer losing unnecessary business? And before you comment on anyone else's marital deception or not, you should realize that some in our society have 'open' marriages, and Melania-Donny could be one of those...
Using stupid/corrupt lawfare against your political opponent is what is morally bankrupt, Bob A. Is this how you dream of DM winning elections?

[Pargat Perrer]

So cooking the books is OK......nothing to see here........deception is fine.........certainly not a mainstream position, as far as I know.

If the issue was just whether Trump had an affair, I think no law applies except the divorce law (Melania could sue on the ground of irreconcilable differences; or she can incorporate it into her idea of a successful marriage). Some might think deception of Melania is a moral problem Trump has, but apparently that also is of no concern to you and Libertarianism generally.......nothing to see here!

Frankly, I find your "Natural Law Morality/Ethics" quite baffling.

Bob A

Bob A, you must realize that Dilip is NOT speaking on behalf of Libertarianism as put forward by various Libertarian parties. They do not mention Natural Law or "fair competition".

Dilip is speaking for his own cultist vision, and there may be some few others with that vision but they are a tiny minority and should not be given any credence.

As such, Dilip shows no understanding of politics or of how the world works. The biggest example is that he finally defined the "fair" in "fair competition" to mean not using any means that harms others. Which basically means Libertarianism, according to Dilip, is against use of fossil fuels, is against pesticide chemicals in agriculture, I could go on and on. But of course, he is NOT against any of that because he is a hypocrite.