Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ Category

Trump’s Harsh Punishment Was Made Possible by This New York Law – The New York Times

The $355 million penalty that a New York judge ordered Donald J. Trump to pay in his civil fraud trial might seem steep in a case with no victim calling for redress and no star witness pointing the finger at Mr. Trump. But a little-known 70-year-old state law made the punishment possible.

The law, often referred to by its shorthand, 63(12), which stems from its place in New Yorks rule book, is a regulatory bazooka for the states attorney general, Letitia James. Her office has used it to aim at a wide range of corporate giants: the oil company Exxon Mobil, the tobacco brand Juul and the pharma executive Martin Shkreli.

On Friday, the law enabled Ms. James to win an enormous victory against Mr. Trump. Along with the financial penalty, the judge barred Mr. Trump from running a business in New York for three years. His adult sons were barred for two years.

The judge also ordered a monitor, Barbara Jones, to assume more power over Mr. Trumps company, and asked her to appoint an independent executive to report to her from within the company.

A lawyer for Mr. Trump, Christopher M. Kise, reacted with fury, saying the sobering future consequences of this tyrannical abuse of power do not just impact President Trump.

When a court willingly allows a reckless government official to meddle in the lawful, private and profitable affairs of any citizen based on political bias, Americas economic prosperity and way of life are at extreme risk of extinction, he said.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?Log in.

Want all of The Times?Subscribe.

See original here:
Trump's Harsh Punishment Was Made Possible by This New York Law - The New York Times

Trump ordered to pay over $350M for business fraud – POLITICO

The penalty caps a three-month trial in a lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Tish James. It comes just weeks after a federal jury in a separate case ordered Trump to pay $83.3 million in damages to the writer E. Jean Carroll over defamatory statements he made while president in response to her rape accusation.

And combined with the $5 million penalty Trump was ordered to pay to Carroll in a separate trial last year, it means the frontrunner in the Republican presidential primary now owes $443.1 million in judgments. (Trump is appealing the earlier Carroll verdict, and he has vowed to appeal the verdicts in both the more recent Carroll trial and the civil fraud trial.)

Its not clear if Trump has enough cash on hand to pay those penalties without selling any assets, especially because with the interest Engoron ordered Trump to pay, the total tab in the civil fraud case alone could amount to more than $450 million, according to the attorney generals office.

In addition to the penalties aimed at Trump himself, Engoron imposed measures that may significantly alter the operations of the Trump family business, known as the Trump Organization. Engoron banned Trumps two adult sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., who are executive vice presidents of the company, from running New York companies for two years and fined them more than $4 million each. And he ordered a court-appointed monitor to continue overseeing the companys operations for another three years, requiring the company to seek her approval prior to submitting any financial disclosure to a third party.

Engoron also fined former Trump Organization executive Allen Weisselberg $1 million.

Trump railed about the verdict on social media. A lawyer for Trump, Chris Kise, said the former president plans to appeal the verdict, calling the decision a tyrannical abuse of power.

The Court today ignored the law, ignored the facts, and simply signed off on the Attorney Generals manifestly unjust political crusade against the front-running candidate for President of the United States, Kise said in a statement.

James called the ruling 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.

In a pretrial ruling last fall, Engoron found that Trump systematically inflated his assets on financial statements, so the trial focused largely on whether those fraudulent statements were used as a basis for banks like Deutsche Bank to give Trump preferential terms on loans that he wouldnt have received if his net worth had been lower.

Because it was a bench trial, meaning there was no jury, Engoron alone decided the verdict and the scope of the penalties. James had asked the judge to issue a $370 million penalty and for a permanent ban on Trump doing business in New York.

In his written decision Friday, Engoron took aim not only at Trump and the other defendants actions, but also at their reaction to the accusations contained in the lawsuit.

Defendants did not commit murder or arson. They did not rob a bank at gunpoint. Donald Trump is not Bernard Madoff. Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways. Instead, they adopt a See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil posture that the evidence belies.

James case included accusations that Trumps financial statements overvalued several flagship properties, including his own triplex apartment in Trump Tower. According to evidence presented during the trial, Trumps financial statements claimed the apartment was 30,000 square feet, when the true size was just under 11,000 square feet. James lawyers introduced a document Trump signed in 1994 that provided the true size of the property.

Engoron also found that Trumps valuation of his Florida property Mar-a-Lago was fraudulent from 2011 to 2021 because his financial documents based the valuation on the premise that it could be sold to an individual as a private residence, even though its deed prohibited such use. There is no legal gray area surrounding the permanent nature of the deed restrictions, Engoron wrote.

Trumps primary defense, which he has repeated publicly and which he invoked during an angry and rambling turn on the witness stand, is that his financial statements contained very, very powerful disclaimers and therefore werent intended for use by banks or insurers.

The trial in state court in Manhattan was the first trial Trump attended since leaving office and the first at which he testified. Trumps adult children, Eric, Donald Jr. and Ivanka, also testified.

The trial was at times a raucous affair, punctuated by Trump and his lawyers repeated criticism of the judges principal law clerk, whom they disparaged as an improper influence on the judge and biased against the defense. Those criticisms, particularly a social media message Trump posted featuring a photo of the clerk, prompted the judge to implement a pair of gag orders one barring Trump from speaking about the clerk and the other preventing his lawyers from doing so.

The judge found Trump violated the gag order twice, fining him a total of $15,000. In evaluating the second violation, Engoron called Trump to the witness stand to testify, an unexpected turn that resulted in the judge finding that Trump was not credible as a witness.

In addition to his focus on the clerk, Trump frequently attacked Engoron himself throughout the trial, both in social media messages and to the judges face. During his testimony, Trump suggested one of Engorons pretrial rulings was very stupid and told him, Its a terrible thing youve done. You know nothing about me. Trump continually ignored the judges repeated instructions to provide direct answers to questions, instead giving rambling responses that often sounded more like clips of Trumps campaign rallies.

In his written decision on Friday, Engoron said he also found Trump testimony about the case itself to be unpersuasive.

Overall, Donald Trump rarely responded to the questions asked, and he frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial, Engoron wrote. His refusal to answer the questions directly, or in some cases, at all, severely compromised his credibility.

The trial also featured testimony from Trumps former fixer-turned-foe Michael Cohen, who said that at Trumps instruction, he and Weisselberg reverse engineered Trumps net worth to meet their bosss demand for inflated figures.

Though Trumps lawyers took aim at Cohen, questioning him at length about having pleaded guilty to campaign finance crimes and perjury in federal cases, Engoron gave him the benefit of the doubt. In what, financial penalties aside, might inflict the biggest blow to Trumps ego, Engoron wrote that he found Cohens testimony credible.

A less-forgiving factfinder might have concluded differently, might not have believed a single word of a convicted perjurer, Engoron wrote. This factfinder does not believe that pleading guilty to perjury means that you can never tell the truth. Michael Cohen told the truth.

At the end of the trial, Trump even delivered his own unsanctioned closing argument in defiance of Engorons efforts to corral the former president, accusing Engoron of having his own agenda and berating the judge.

But in his ruling, Engoron got the last word and seized the opportunity to finally curtail Trump.

Defendants refusal to admit error indeed, to continue it, according to the Independent Monitor, Engoron wrote, constrains this Court to conclude that they will engage in it going forward unless judicially restrained.

Read the original:
Trump ordered to pay over $350M for business fraud - POLITICO

After Report of Navalny Death, Haley Attacks Trump Over Past Praise for Putin – The New York Times

Many Republicans lined up to condemn President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia on Friday after Russian authorities reported the death of Aleksei A. Navalny, the outspoken opposition leader.

But Nikki Haley went further, using criticism of Mr. Putin to attack former President Donald J. Trump, her rival in the G.O.P. primary, for his past remarks that praised Mr. Putin.

Putin did this. The same Putin who Donald Trump praises and defends, Ms. Haley, a former governor of South Carolina who served Mr. Trumps ambassador to the United Nations, wrote on the social media platform X on Friday.

She referenced comments that Mr. Trump made in 2015, during his first run for president, when he told ABCs George Stephanopoulos that, In all fairness to Putin, youre saying he killed people. I havent seen that.

Russian authorities announced on Friday that Mr. Navalny, an anticorruption activist who was openly critical of Mr. Putin and was serving multiple sentences that would likely have kept him in prison until 2031, had died in a prison inside the Arctic Circle. President Biden said on Friday afternoon that U.S. officials did not have a full understanding of the situations circumstances, but that he believed there is no doubt that the death of Navalny was a consequence of something that Putin and his thugs did.

Mr. Trump has not yet commented publicly on Mr. Navalnys death, prompting Ms. Haley to also seize on his silence. In another post to X, she wrote that, Putin murdered his political opponent and Trump hasnt said a word after he said he would encourage Putin to invade our allies. He has, however, posted 20+ times on social media about his legal drama and fake polls.

Since reports of Mr. Navalnys death surfaced Friday morning, Mr. Trump delivered posts on Truth Social that criticized Fani T. Willis, the prosecutor in his Georgia election interference case; said that the world had experienced misery, destruction, and death during Mr. Bidens term in office; and promoted his appearance at Sneakercon in Philadelphia on Saturday. But as of Friday afternoon, there was no mention of Mr. Putin or Mr. Navalny.

Ms. Haley has been increasingly critical of Mr. Trumps approach to foreign policy, and specifically his attitude toward Mr. Putin. She told voters at recent stops in South Carolina that Mr. Trump had taken the side of a thug, after the former president said in South Carolina last weekend that he might encourage Russia to attack N.A.T.O. allies delinquent on payments to the military alliance.

Her campaign issued a statement later on Friday that attempted to further connect Mr. Trumps past praise to his recent comments.

Donald Trump continues to side with Vladimir Putin a man who kills his political opponents, holds American journalists hostage, and has never hidden his desire to destroy America, Ms. Haley said. Trump continues to side with Putin over our allies and our military service members.

Continue reading here:
After Report of Navalny Death, Haley Attacks Trump Over Past Praise for Putin - The New York Times

Why Don Jr. and Eric Are in Trouble in the New Trump Rulingand Ivanka Is Not – Slate

The massive fine announced Friday for the civil fraud trial against Donald Trump wasnt just a major financial blow for the former president. Two of his adult children were hit hard, too.

In his ruling, Justice Arthur Engoron, who previously had found that the Trump organization committed fraud by inflating Trumps net worth, decided that Trump and his top associates at the Trump Organization owed an astounding $355 million in damages. On top of that, Trump was banned from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity in New York for a period of three years.

It was a devastating result for the former president in what was arguably the most personal of his legal challenges. The outcome fell only a little short of the $370 million penalty the prosecution had pushed for.

For the Trump children, this was bad news, too. Both of Trumps adult sons, Eric and Don Jr., who are executive vice presidents of the Trump Organization, wound up owing more than $4 million each in damages. They, like their father, were also banned from doing business in New Yorkthough their ban is for two years, one year less than their father.

One Trump child turned out fine: Ivanka Trump was not a defendant in the case, as she had left the Trump Organization in 2016. But that didnt mean this was a painless situation for her. Like her two other adult siblings who were active in the Trump business (the ever-forgotten Tiffany was blessed to escape getting involved in any of this), Ivanka was still forced to testify, an ordeal that threatened her composed image.

The three Trump children all testified in November. Ivanka Trump, who had the least to fear, took the stand on Nov. 8. She was polite and stuck to her talking points: Though she was an executive vice president of the Trump Organization from 2005 to 2016, she had not had any personal insights into the financial statements. She reiterated her fathers PR claims: The Trump Organization had taken dingy properties and turned them into works of art. She was calm, she smiled often, and she remained quiet on social media.

Donald Trump Jr. took a slightly different tack, going for a strange sort of bro-ish charm inside the courthouse, but acting as an outraged firebrand on the outside. In the courtroom, Don Jr. similarly testified that he had had nothing to do with the records and cracked a few jokes. On social media, he was more aggressive, accusing the prosecutors of being corrupt and having a brazen political mission. Still, he was more astute than his father, choosing not to antagonize the judge in the case (instead only going after New York Attorney General Letitia James).

Eric Trump mimicked his elder brother, to slightly less impressive effect. He similarly shared posts about James. But in his testimony about his personal culpability, he came off more bungling. Like his brother, Eric Trump said he never had anything to do with the financial statements. He then had to change his tune when the prosecution showed him an email in which Eric had clearly indicated he looked at a spreadsheet about them.

Ivanka came out the most unscathed. Even if she never works in politics or the Trump business again, her husband, Jared Kushner, has made a career of working out business deals with oligarchs in the Middle East. But its unclear how the two elder Trump sons will fare while theyre locked out of New Yorks business world for two years. Sure, theyll be involved in their fathers political career, but if he fails to win the 2024 election, that wont carry them. They can, for a while at least, keep going on podcasts. And Don Jr. has his hunting magazine.

Trump Sr. is still facing four criminal trials: charges of falsified business statements over hush payments to Stormy Daniels; charges he mishandled classified records; charges in Georgia over his meddling in the 2020 presidential election there; and federal charges over his efforts to overturn the election. The first trial, over hush money payments, is currently set for March 25.

Read the original:
Why Don Jr. and Eric Are in Trouble in the New Trump Rulingand Ivanka Is Not - Slate

Trump has been ordered to pay $447 million in damages. Can he afford it? – Vox.com

Two recent verdicts have now left Donald Trump on the hook for nearly half a billion dollars.

On Friday, a New York judge handed the former president a $355 million penalty, and banned him from serving in a leadership position in any business in New York for three years, for fraudulently inflating his net worth to lenders in order to receive more favorable loan agreements. And in January, a Manhattan jury ordered Trump to pay the writer E. Jean Carroll $83.3 million for defaming her after she accused him of raping her. (A separate jury in May had found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in the 1990s.)

Together, the damages from these two lawsuits are worth more than the amount of cash Trump claimed to have on hand last April, potentially putting him in a financial bind as he also faces debt repayments and mounting legal fees. Even if he appeals these decisions, as he is expected to do, he still likely will have to front the money while that process runs its course, or secure a bond, which would come with its own conditions.

For a well-connected billionaire, that might usually amount to nothing more than a temporary inconvenience; after all, Trump could always liquidate some of his assets or borrow even more money to cover his short-term obligations.

But Trump isnt just one of the countrys richest men, with an estimated net worth in the low billions; hes also running to serve a second term as president of the United States. And for any candidate for public office let alone the presidency being cash-strapped while owing such significant amounts of money could be a serious liability.

Its pretty scary from an ethics perspective, said Virginia Canter, the chief ethics counsel at the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonpartisan watchdog group that has chronicled Trumps abuses of power and filed lawsuits against him.

You dont have to look far to find the reasons why. Trumps first term was riddled with conflicts of interest, and thats in no small part because of his financial well-being (or lack thereof, depending on how you look at it). At the time that he tried to overturn the 2020 election, he was hundreds of millions of dollars in debt, largely stemming from loans to help rehabilitate his struggling businesses, and most of which would be coming due over the subsequent four years. Throughout his presidency, he refused to divest from his businesses, which made millions of dollars in revenue from taxpayers and continued to do work with other countries while he was in office a practice he indicated he would repeat in a second term.

The fact that he has so many entanglements with big businesses and other nations leaves plenty of room for things to go awry. Thats why a 2020 New York Times expos uncovering his staggering debt during his first term wasnt just embarrassing for Trump, who has a tendency to claim hes richer than he actually is. It also raised fears about how his debt could implicate national security.

As the former head of the Justice Departments National Security Division told Time magazine in 2020, For a person with access to U.S. classified information to be in massive financial debt is a counterintelligence risk because the debt-holder tends to have leverage over the person, and the leverage may be used to encourage actions, such as disclosure of information or influencing policy, that compromise U.S. national security.

As Trump campaigns for a second term, his personal finances are becoming increasingly relevant, especially now that he has to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages from the two civil lawsuits.

And with his criminal cases still looming, things could get even worse for him. His debt makes him prime for corruption and really exploiting his office for his own personal gain, Canter said.

Trump is known for many things, but a penchant for transparency is not one of them. He famously didnt release his tax returns when he was running for office, and because his company is not publicly traded, its finances are often opaque. As a result, his personal net worth and his business empires earnings have always been shrouded in mystery.

But lawsuits, media reports, and his occasional, if narrow, public disclosures have made clear that Trumps often rosy descriptions of his wealth are far from accurate.

Its particularly unclear just how big his cash reserves are. In a deposition last year, Trump claimed to have $400 million in cash. That is a lot of money, but if its accurate, the former president likely would not have much of it left after paying the damages from his recent lawsuits. (While he can, in some cases, dip into campaign cash to cover certain legal expenses, he generally cant use those funds to pay the damages he owes.)

Lawsuits aside, Trump also has plenty of debt on his hands. His financial disclosures filed with the Federal Election Commission last year showed that he has at least $200 million in debt. And according to Forbes, his business owed roughly $1.3 billion in 2021.

Thats not as dire as it sounds, especially because Trump has been steadily paying down the money he owed when he was leaving the White House three years ago. For example, hes paid off most of the $295 million he owed Deutsche Bank a major source of his debt. But some of Trumps debts warrant more scrutiny.

Ultimately, its impossible to know exactly how financially stable Trump is at any given moment. While some signs like his ability to repay some of his debts or, say, him being a very wealthy man with very wealthy friends indicate that hes doing just fine, there are still some warning signs for his campaign. Trump has faced a steady stream of hefty legal bills that stem from his four indictments, and that has drained much of his campaign cash. In fact, Trumps campaign has spent more than $50 million on legal fees in the past year alone. According to the Associated Press, 84 percent of spending from Trumps Save America political action committee has gone toward covering legal expenses.

Those arent exactly the typical spending habits of a normal campaign. But then again, Trump isnt a normal candidate.

One of the most explosive details in the New York Timess 2020 report on Trumps leaked tax returns is that despite being incredibly rich, there were years that he paid little to no federal income tax. In 2016, when he first won the presidency, he had paid a grand total of $750 in federal income taxes. That could help explain why Trump refused to release his tax returns in the first place, though doing so has been the norm for presidential candidates since the 1970s.

As serious as it is that Trump (and other wealthy Americans) can pay virtually no federal income taxes, there are even bigger consequences to his lack of transparency. Trumps web of business deals also provides ample opportunity for special interests and foreign governments to attempt to buy influence in his administration. Foreign governments, for example, spent millions of dollars at Trumps businesses during his presidency. A Chinese state-owned bank paid $7 million to rent space in Trump Tower in New York during the four years Trump was president. The company stopped renting out space when Trump left office.

To believe that the potential for that kind of revenue could not influence Trumps agenda, or even travel itinerary, would require an extraordinary level of trust in the former president something most voters dont have.

After all, how could a president fairly pursue a trade deal, for example, with a country hes doing personal business with? Its that kind of behavior that led to accusations that Trump violated the emoluments clauses of the US Constitution, which bar presidents from receiving money from foreign governments, as well as US states or the federal government outside their salary, in order to avoid undue influence.

During his presidential term, Trump also had many hidden debts, and while a lot of his creditors were big financial institutions, some were unknown. According to Forbes, for example, Trump had a previously undisclosed loan from a foreign creditor when he became president, owing nearly $20 million to a South Korean company. While Trump paid off that loan within the first six months he was in office, its just one example of how his potential conflicts of interest are tricky to keep track of.

In the runup to 2016, Trump misleadingly touted his wealth as a key advantage that furthered the public interest. He promised to self-fund his campaign, saying that he wouldnt be beholden to anybody, but he failed to keep that pledge.

But the problem for Trump isnt just his inability to self-fund his White House bids. The fact that he is constantly on the lookout for new loans or sources of income gives special interests a vehicle to curry favor with him. After his former lenders cut ties with him in the aftermath of the January 6 insurrection, for example, Axos Bank, whose CEO is a Republican donor, swooped in and loaned the former president some $225 million, helping Trump shore up his finances. (Trump has also reported new income from foreign entities, like a new deal he struck with a Saudi-based firm.)

While Trumps lack of transparency might have served him well until now, shielding him from potential legal and political liabilities, it also could have far-reaching consequences should he win a second term this November.

A lot of people thought Bernie Madoff was rich, Canter said. There are a lot of characters who portray themselves as rich, but when you look into the cookie jar, theres nothing there.

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

Read more here:
Trump has been ordered to pay $447 million in damages. Can he afford it? - Vox.com