After Trump's lawyers asked for a mistrial, the judge asked the NY AG to respond to the motion. They asked for full separate hearing on the issue.
OAG’s position is that – putting aside the total lack of merit to Defendants’ application for a mistrial – it is preferable to have the Court hear and decide the application on full briefing pursuant to the OSC in the interest of judicial economy.
They asked for December 8th date because it's not urgent.
If the Court does order briefing, OAG requests until December 8, 2023 to submit its opposition given the demonstrable lack of urgency, the impending Thanksgiving holiday, and the fact that the ongoing trial necessitates considerable daily attention from OAG’s trial team.
Which got me thinking. We've seen all these cases thrown out because they lacked standing. One of the things required for a case to have standing is that there needs to be an injured party. In this case, there isn't one. So how did the state even bring the case? How did the state have standing if there is no injured party?
By their own rules, this case should not have standing.
Tucker Carlson interviewed Martin Shkreli the MSM branded "Most Hated Man in America", who was sent to prison on "financial fraud" in the hedge fund industry, where there were no victims and everyone legally benefited. Shkreli says To Tucker, they are doing the same thing to Trump. Watch this video from the 18:00 mark to hear this fro yourself. My point is Letitia James and the judge know what they are doing. This is a Star Chamber and I think Trump's attorneys are recognizing it.
I think any question of standing would have addressed a while back, this case has been going on for years.
In NY the AG has broad authority to investigate fraud. under a 100 year old law called the Martin Act. It's a "bluesky" anti-fraud law, it allows the AG to bring actions like this law suit to fight fraud it in the marketplace.
40 states have bluesky laws, but NY's is quite broad. This article is paywalled, but the summary gives a hint.
https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2022/12/21/the-attorney-generals-power-to-enforce-real-estate-regulations/
Other cases it's been used in
Cryptocurrency exchange pays $1.8 million https://www.reuters.com/legal/coinex-accepts-new-york-ban-pay-18-mln-resolve-attorney-general-lawsuit-2023-06-15/
Former AIG head admits role in $500M accounting fraud https://www.cbsnews.com/news/aig-maurice-hank-greenberg-accounting-fraud-settlement/ https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of-appeals/2016/90.html
Another NY Law that is explicitly named in the lawsuit is the Executive Law part of which give the AG the power to cancel the business certificates of business engaged in fraud..
Thanks.
I guess the thing that bothers me is, that might matter in a criminal case. This is a civil case. And there is no injured party. Even if the AG didn't already campaign on "getting Trump", it would look like that's all she was trying to do. There is no injured party. All loans are paid off, and it's not a criminal suit. There is really no reason for this case to exist. Anybody who wants to be intellectually honest can see that, but such a thing doesn't exist anymore.
Civil suits are often a way to address crimes like fraud.
The NY AG is asserting there is an injured party. Her assertion is, and they had a witness testify to this, that the Trump organization saved huge amounts of amount by getting cheaper loans.
The argument is something like if I lie on my mortgage application and get 2% loan when I qualify for a 6% or 8% loan, I've committed mortgage fraud. Even if I paid the mortgage off.
Trump is going to have to put on a defense against this. They are going to call his banker at Deutsch Bank. One of the issues in this trial is how much Trump will have to pay in what they call disgorgement. The AG put an investment banker on the stand to testify to $$$
I stand educated on it now. I appreciate it.
No problem.