The Russia Investigations and other Trump-related cases

[N.E. Brigand]

While the Weisselberg news is potentially a big deal and could lead to more charges against Trump by Bragg's office (I'll believe it when I see it), I doubt it has anything to do with the delay in Ergoron's decision.

I see that Andrew Weissmann made the same suggestion as me, but I do take your point.

- - - - - - - - - -
In other news, Mike Flynn had sued Republican activist Rick Wilson for referring to Flynn as a "Putin employee" and saying "Flynn is Q."

Today a judge dismissed that defamation suit, finding that the former was approximately true and latter was hyperbole.

- - - - - - - - - -
Donald Trump’s lawsuit against Christopher Steele in the U.K. was dismissed today. Some commentators say this is because Trump sued under the wrong law and then the statute of limitations expired. (I haven't read the decision, which is at the second link.)

[N.E. Brigand]

Reports from The New York Times, CNN, and NBC about how newly released records show that the governments of China, Malaysia, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates spent more at Trump's D.C. hotel in 2017-2018 than was previously known, spending $10,500 per night totaling some $750,000 in that period.

And turning to domestic emoluments: a new report finds that Republicans spent nearly 40 times more at the Trump Hotel in D.C. during the five months leading up to the 2018 midterm elections ($1.5 million) than they did in the five months leading up to the 2022 midterm elections ($38,000) -- after the building was no longer owned by Trump.

[N.E. Brigand]

This is not a legal case, though it seems worth mentioning if not enough to resurrect the thread about Trump's administration.

James Mattis, the then recently-retired Marine Corps general who would be appointed as Donald Trump's first Secretary of Defense in 2017, was secretly hired in 2015 as a consultant by United Arab Emirates, advising them on the war in Yemen. He did not disclose this on any forms made public before now, and apparently most senators who voted on his appointment (which actually required two votes, the first to waive the usual requirement that the Sec. of Defense not have served in the military for at least seven years; this requirement was waived again for Joe Biden's Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin) were unaware of this, but Mattis did inform both the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee (John McCain) in a letter.

I assume Donald Trump knew this when he appointed Mattis. I wonder if someone connected to the UAE suggested to Trump that he appoint Mattis. I am reminded of the unexpected appointment of former Exxon chair Rex Tillerson as Trump's first Secretary of State. Tillerson reportedly was recommended to Trump by Condoleezza Rice, the former Secretary of State, but he had extensive ties to Russia. Both situations seem a little "swampy," to borrow a word frequently evoked in Trumpland, but in my opinion, Mattis and Tillerson acquitted themselves fairly well given the circumstances. I feel like they were willing to tolerate some corruption, and the State Dept. reportedly suffered from understaffing during Tillerson's tenure, but when Trump's awfulness went too far, they pushed back a little.

[N.E. Brigand]

While the Weisselberg news is potentially a big deal and could lead to more charges against Trump by Bragg's office (I'll believe it when I see it), I doubt it has anything to do with the delay in Ergoron's decision.

New York Times: "Judge in Trump's Civil Fraud Case Asks Whether a Key Witness Lied."

Donald Trump's lawyers have to respond to Judge Engoron by tomorrow evening in a way that "would not violate [their] professional ethics or obligations."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Interesting! I guess I was wrong. How refreshing!

[N.E. Brigand]

Interesting! I guess I was wrong. How refreshing!

The replies to the judge's inquiry were filed this afternoon (h/t Adam Klasfeld):

Letitia James's office says: We don't know if the reporting is true, and we don't think it matters.

Trump family attorney Cliff Robert says: It's inappropriate for you to be asking us to comment on media speculation.

Trump attorney Alina Habba says: Ethical guidelines prohibit me from saying anything about this.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I was surprisingly impressed with the reply by Habba (which actually says quite a bit in addition to pointing out that ethical guidelines limit what she can say because Weisselberg is her client), to the extent that I was wondering who had written it for her. I think she/they are right on the money in saying that Weisselberg has a presumption of innocence and that it would be inappropriate for the judge to take into consideration an unproven media report. Of course, that hasn't stopped some of Trump's other lawyers in other cases from basing entire motions on unsourced, unproven media reports, but that is another story.

[Jude]

Did you mean that hasn't stopped?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

That's what it says.

Thank you for pointing that out!

[N.E. Brigand]

Donald Trump’s lawsuit against Christopher Steele in the U.K. was dismissed today. Some commentators say this is because Trump sued under the wrong law and then the statute of limitations expired. (I haven't read the decision, which is at the second link.)

The Microsoft news feed keeps pitching a story at me titled "Trump Lawsuit Dismissed As Judges Conclude There’s 'No Compelling Reason' To Proceed." Clicking on the link reveals that it's an article from a week ago about Trump's suit against Steele (specifically against Steele's company) having been tossed by a British court. But apart from the headline, this is the complete text of the article at the link:

"Former President Donald Trump has been in multiple lawsuits throughout his career. Some were about settling corporate differences, while others were about criminal charges. Recently, he filed a lawsuit against Orbis Business Intelligence."

Why is the Hall of Fire, a little social group discussion board, better at explaining these things than an enormous company like Microsoft?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Why, indeed?

[Dave_LF]

Because HoF authors don't get paid per click?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Bang!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Judge Engoron did modify his previous order so that he no longer is cancelling the Trump Organization's business certificates.

[N.E. Brigand]

CNN reports that's $354.9 million plus interest, at a 9% annual rate and in part dating back as far as 2019, bringing the total owed to something like $450 million.

[N.E. Brigand]

Bang! [Reuters on Twitter: "Donald Trump must pay $354.9 million in penalties for fraudently overstating his net worth to dupe lenders, a New York judge ruled, handing the former US president another legal setback in a civil case that imperils his real estate empire."]

CNN reports that's $354.9 million plus interest, at a 9% annual rate and in part dating back as far as 2019, bringing the total owed to something like $450 million.

Based on the details in that CNN article, I would calculate as follows to the nearest hundred thousand:

$354,900,000 -- total disgorgement before interest
+$75,600,000 -- 9% interest on $168,000,000, dating to March 2019, for financial misstatements for loans from banks
+$19,800,000 -- 9% interest on $126,000,000, dating to May 2022, for imporper profits on the sale of his D.C. hotel
+$ 3,600,000 -- 9% interest on $60,000,000, dating to June 2023, for improper profits on the sale of Ferry Point golf course in N.Y.

That's $99 million in interest, bringing the total to $453.9 million in all.

Edited to add: I saw both $355 million and $364 million cited as the total owed in various news outlets' initial postings about today's judgement. Now I realize that the latter number includes the fines issued to Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump ($4 million each) and to Allen Weisselberg ($1 million).

[N.E. Brigand]

The Guardian has a new story by Sidney Blumenthal: "Trump's hubris has brought about the downfall of his family's business empire."

Blumenthal is a somewhat disreputable Democratic political operator and occasional journalist. (He was a top advisor in Bill Clinton's White House and was associated with Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign.) I would not trust everything he said to be correct. But there is one anecdote in that piece that I just have share here. After a short introduction about Judge Engoron's ruling, Blumenthal writes: "The Trumps were Democrats. They had always been Democrats. Fred Trump had made his fortune through the Democrats. There was no Trump Organization apart from the Democratic organization of Brooklyn." And he goes on to describe how an incident that happened when Fred Trump and his second son Donald "were listed as sponsors on the invitation for New York’s Salute to the President, a fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee held in the ballroom of the Waldorf Astoria" in 1977. (That would be for President Jimmy Carter.)

Fred was hardly an outlier among the powerful at [United Artists' chair Arthur] Krim’s townhouse [where the event was hosted]. He had helped make many of the New York politicians there. They were among his closest friends, some since the 1930s and 1940s. Donald trailed after Fred through the crowd until finally Fred located the DNC official with whom he had arranged his donation.

The DNC official, a friend of mine, recalled that Fred had asked him: “Wouldn’t it be great if Donald got experience in Washington?” Clearly, he wanted to get Donald a gig so that he could make national connections. Donald’s expression was unhappy. He opened his mouth, getting out only a couple of words: “Well, I … ”

Fred cut him off before he could say anything else. “Shut the f*** up,” he said sternly. “We didn’t f****** ask you. Who the f*** cares what you think?” And Donald shut up. The official told Fred he would look into it. But Donald wasn’t interested in Washington, at least not then.

It was also fascinating to read that Donald Trump in the 1970s said he hoped to become more powerful than "Harry Helmsley, the billionaire real estate developer, owner of the Empire State Building and other trademark properties," who in 1988 "was charged with financial fraud ... for inflating the value of his buildings and tax evasion, but was judged too frail to stand trial" (although he lived nine more years) -- but Helmsley's wife Leona did go on trial (and was quoted there by her maid as having said "only the little people pay taxes") and sentenced to sixteen years' imprisonment (but served far less).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I remember Leona Helmsley's trial very well. The Helmsleys were indicted by the then-U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. One Rudolph William Louis Giuliani.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

In order for him to appeal, he will have to file a bond in that amount.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This really puts things into perspective.