Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Judge SHOOTS DOWN Trump’s LAST-DITCH Demand

Episode Date: November 28, 2023

After Trump Hotel’s Chief Financial Officer testified in the NY civil fraud case that the court appointed monitor looking at 2022 and beyond found no fraud when she took over, Trump’s lawyers sought to have the former judge take the stand. Michael Popok of Legal AF explains why Trump’s last minute request for the former judge’s testimony is NOT RELEVANT to the 2014-2021 time period at issue in the case, and why Judge Engoron risked reversal on appeal to deny the late request. Thanks to our sponsor HumanN! Get a free 30-day supply of SuperBeets heart chews and a FREE Full - Sized Bag of Tumeric Chews valued at $25 by going to http://legalafbeets.com Visit https://meidastouch.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown Lights On with Jessica Denson: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/lights-on-with-jessica-denson On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is Michael Popok, legal AF, another fight broke out. Where else the New York civil fraud case involving Donald Trump, because he wants to put the former federal judge who's been serving as the monitor sitting over all of his businesses and reporting back to the judge about all of the financial statements and reporting and assets and liabilities for this ongoing persistently fraudulent business that Donald Trump owns. abilities for this ongoing persistently fraudulent business that Donald Trump owns. They want to put her on the stand because the chief financial officer, not for the Trump organization because he went to jail, but for the Trump hotel group, right? He's already testified today in his capacity as the CFO for the Trump hotels and how he worked with Barbara Jones, the monitor

overall things. And he wanted to, and he did report to the judge in his testimony that she, the Barbara Jones never reported any fraud that she found, although there were material misstatements in certain areas of the business that she's already reported to the judge in the past, like related to Donald Trump's trust. The defense likes that testimony because they want to bring Barbara Jones on the stand to basically blast their operation and say, well, I don't know about 2014 to 2021, which is the heart of the civil fraud case.

But when she took over in 2022 and she got to look in all the nooks in the crannies, she didn't find any fraud. Now right now, it's a hearsay statement, right, which is given a less and is discounted more by the charge, judge is the trial. In fact, when Mark Hawthorne, the CFO for the hotel group says it, it's more powerful if the thinking goes, the Trump organization can get Barbara Jones, judge Barbara Jones to testify in court on their behalf, even inadvertently by saying, well, I looked everywhere and I really didn't find any fraud because

at the heart of this case is whether Donald Trump and a Trump organization in their statement of financial conditions, at least committed persistent fraud, at least in that aspect of their operation from 2014 to 2021. Now look, her testimony would be limited anyway. And the judge knows that she's only been there since 2022. She doesn't really have the ability completely to look back. And she wasn't given the remit, the scope of her engagement by the judge was not to go look at 2014 to 2021 and report back to the judge whether she found fraud. Her job was to take over a going concern from 2022 forward and then make sure the books and records were straight. So that's a mismatch, which I'm sure the judge was aware of, when today based on a last minute

request by Cliff Robert, a lawyer for Donald Trump, who asked to have Barbara Jones brought on the stand based on the testimony of Mark Hawthorn, they denied, he judge Angkoran denied that request. He denied that request for a couple of reasons. One, Alina Habba, who had been handling this case from the beginning two and a half years ago, and more recently, never put Judge Jones on her witness list. Again, an example of malpractice. I mean, even if you didn't think ultimately you're going to call her, how you don't list the person assigned by the court as an independent monitor over the finances of the company to maybe one day become one of your witnesses is mind boggling to me.

But she wasn't on the list. And there's a reason that you need to list people on your witness list in advance so that the court is aware of it. And if there needs to be a fight over who's going to testify, the judge can resolve that before trial. So that's another strike against Alina Habba and how she handled the case. Cliff Robert is now scrambling. He hears his client, his witness, Mark Hawthorne, the Trump hotel group CFO, testify at length about his relationship with Eric Trump, how he helped Eric Trump update all of the accounting software and bookkeeping software, taking I had a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of

a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little Mark by contrast, Mark Hawthorne, a CPA, a Certified Public Accountant who ran the hotel group slightly better in terms of modern software, modern bookkeeping entries, modern electronic ledgers in accounting. And so he tried to help Eric in 2022 after Weiselberg went to jail for his role in tax evasion, uh, bring them into the 20th century. And during his testimony, he mentioned his relationship with Barbara Jones that he reported to her financially that he had conversations with her and he got to that part of really being hearsay. I had a conversation with retired judge Barbara Jones and she reported she never said to

me she found any fraud. Uh-huh. Lawyers finally wake up over at the Trump organization, look at each other, poke each other and say, we should get Barbara Jones on the, on the stand. Now the judge ruled she is an officer or an arm of the court because she's a point, she's been appointed by him. Now, I've been involved with a lot of cases that have installed a receiver or a monitor or something akin to that, a trustee over a company that's going through hard times,

either because they're getting shut down by a governmental entity or because they're in bankruptcy or there's two fights between two shareholders in the company and the company has to go into receivership. And it's it is commonplace for the receiver, the monitor, the trustee to testify in a hearing involving that dispute. But the judge isn't having any of it. He's taking a very hard position, which is going to give the other side to be frank. I'm not going to blow smoke or sunshine here. It's going to give the other side a issue on appeal as to whether they should have been been able to put on the testimony of Barbara Jones about what she found at least in 2022, heart health and staying healthy, especially when you have a

family that you want to be able to spend as much time with as possible, is so important. We all have a heart felt reason to support our blood pressure. In fact, more than half the US population would benefit from blood pressure support. Superbeats heart-choose are an easy and convenient way to support healthy blood pressure. And they promote heart-healthy energy. Paired with a healthy lifestyle, the antioxidants and superbeats are clinically shown to be nearly two times more effective at promoting normal blood pressure than a healthy lifestyle alone. And with over 30,000 5 star reviews and counting, superbeats heart-choose are having their

moment. Superbeats heart-choose are incredibly delicious and so much better than any alternative supplements out there. I take my superbeats heart-choose each morning before my workout, and not only do I get a burst of just overall well-being, I also get the satisfaction of knowing I'm doing something amazing for my heart health. Superbeats Heart-choose support healthy circulation, so you not only get blood pressure support, you also get productive heart- healthy energy without the crash.

Support your heart health with superbeats heart juice. Get a free 30-day supply of superbeats heart juice and a free full-size bag of turmeric juice valued at $25 by going to legalafbeats.com. Get this exclusive offer only at legalafbeats.com. But the argument encountered to that is, it's no harm, no foul, because, and I think this is the thinking of the judge, because her testimony can only be about 2022 going forward.

She wasn't tasked with doing a lookback in the relevant time period for the case, which is only 2014 to 2021. If she was, I would say, oh, then she's got relevant testimony, right? Because she did a look back, but she didn't do a look back. She did a look forward. And that's different. In other words, how the Trump organization cleaned up behind the elephant and cleaned up their act behind the elephant and cleaned up their act is irrelevant to whether they committed persistent fraud by the fraudulent, cooked use of a false financial statement or series of financial statements by Donald Trump to get lending at higher amounts than he was entitled to. Insurance for properties

he wasn't entitled to. Transact business he wasn't entitled to transact business. He wasn't entitled to because of these fake financial statements 2014 to 2021. Talked a lot about statute of limitations in play in this particular case on legal AF. Some of their bad conduct fell outside the statute of limitations and aren't a part of the case. That's why Ivanka Trump is no longer a defendant in the case because whatever she did predated this time period that we're talking about, at least that's the argument, and the transactions that are at the core of the issue are outside of that.

So again, if Ivanka Trump is outside the statute limitations, certainly on the other end, retire judge Barbara Jones is outside the statute limitations, rendering her potential testimony irrelevant. Now I'm sure the lawyers for Donald Trump made a proffer, which is what you do when a judge denies your request for an attorney so that the appellate court can properly review on a record, on appeal, whether that testimony would have tipped the needle in their favor. And it's reversible error for that to have been denied.

So they will actually say, well, judge, we're going to make a proper. This is what barbard, we believe Barbara Jones's testimony would have established in court on our burden of proof. And then they'll list it. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, Judge says, five, you've made your record. That's for appeal about what you think Barbara Jones will, well, testified to, I find that to be irrelevant late untimely. She's an officer of the court. And I'm not going there. He may also be concerned about the slippery slope of how, of how since he sees Barbara Jones as an arm

of the court, who else are arms of the court? Staff like the principal law clerk. So what's next? They're going to ask to have the judge judge and go on who they continue to attack mercilessly and unrelentingly as a partisan hack with a bias that's infected the whole case. Why don't you put him on your witness list? Let's put the principal law clerk who you think is, you know, taking pictures by day with with Chuck Schumer and screw in your case by night.

Put him put her on there. You know, anybody who else, maybe somebody on the street is interesting. I mean, they have so little witnesses that support their case on street is interesting. I mean, they have so little witnesses that support their case on the Trump side. I mean, they're getting desperate. But I think that's, there's also that. The judge is concerned that if he sets the precedent of bringing Barbara Jones in,

although again, I've given you my view that if her testimony was more relevant, I think this would be a bigger problem for the judge because it could be reversible error, because I think she's outside of the relevancy, you know, sort of umbrella, then I think he's probably okay. Although the safer bet would have been, frankly, let her testify because he's the trial of fact. But again, I think we're back to the precedent setting, the line drawing that this judge

is doing, knowing exactly if he gives Donald Trump a finger, he'll take the entire body because he's done that frequently throughout this trial and in other court proceedings. So we'll continue to follow what happens next after Mark Hawthorne, CFO of the Trump hotels in his testimony about Eric Trump and his interaction with Barbara Jones. What happens next in the trial as it proceeds in week eight? in the trial, as it proceeds in week eight, it's hard to believe we're in week eight, as the New York Attorney General has revealed, it's gonna be a couple of more weeks probably,

based on how the pace of the Trump witnesses are going, she may or may not have a rebuttal case, which is another short case, maybe lasting three or four days, where she recalls certain witnesses and focuses on certain bits of evidence, because she gets the final word as the attorney general prosecuting the case or in this case, bringing the case on a civil fraud basis.

And then that's it. Everybody, all the lawyers, mouths go quiet, all the talking stops and the judge who is the trial. In fact, finishes what I'm sure is a half written opinion already, likely finding persistent fraud on six more counts against Donald Trump and then getting to remedy, remedy, remedy, discouragement of all the money that was ill-gottenly obtained by the Trump organization. All the property they should not have been able to buy and the dollar values they borrowed

on. Yet all that up, we're talking probably a half a billion dollars worth of potential damages that they could be awarded as part of the New York Attorney General case, putting Donald Trump's companies out of business, dissolving them, having the assets sold, because if they are found to be a persistent fraudulent company with the intent to defraud on the material standards of the 63-12 statute in New York, the New York Attorney General and the judge have the power to put them out of business. We don't allow in New York, persistently fraudulent companies to continue to do business except

money, transact, borrow money, and buy property. And the people that are the head of the company would be barred permanently under the New York Attorney General's request from being officers and directors of New York companies in the future. It would be a devastating blow to Donald Trump, and it's now in the hands of Judge Angkoran, somebody that Donald Trump mercilessly attacks in the streets on the internet, social media, and appellate filings all over the country almost not a daily, if not hourly basis. We'll continue to follow on the Midas Touch Network. One place, legal AF, the curated podcast at the intersection of law, politics, injustice,

we do every Wednesday and Saturday at 8 p.m. Eastern time. And then on hot ticks like this one, about every hour, it's one of the leaders of legal AF doing it, updating you in these areas, care for your minic niflo, bend my salis or me. If you like what I'm doing, give me a thumbs up and leave a comment. It really does help with the ratings, keeps this stuff coming to you on the air. Until my next hot tick, until my next Legal AF, this is Michael Popeye. Hey, MidasMiddi.

Love this report. Continue the conversation by following us on Instagram. At MidasTouch, to keep up with the most important news of the day. What are you waiting for? Follow us now.