Legal Experts Say Summary Judgment of Fraud Against Trump by NY Judge Contains Legal Abuses
New York Judge Arthur Engoron, a registered Democrat, granted summary judgment against Donald Trump last week in a case alleging real estate fraud by the former president. Not waiting for the trial to begin, where evidence would be produced, experts would testify, and discovery would conclude, Engoron revoked the licenses for Trump’s key properties, including Trump Tower and the Trump International Hotel, and set up a fast timeline to dissolve the Trump Organization and its connected entities. Engoron said Trump and his associates inflated the values of his properties, but several legal experts disagreed.
Viva Frei, a lawyer who hosts a show with fellow lawyer Robert Barnes called Sidebar, broke down his assessment of the case with Barnes in an 18-minute video on Monday.
“It would seem that the REAL fraud is coming from the Court and from the corrupt Attorney General,” he said. “A breakdown of the absurdity coming out of New York from last night’s stream.”
It would seem that the REAL fraud is coming from the Court and from the corrupt Attorney General…
A breakdown of the absurdity coming out of New York from last night’s stream. https://t.co/AWsz2752eO pic.twitter.com/2WLMxtkPGy
— Viva Frei (@thevivafrei) October 2, 2023
Viva Frei noted that the state is bringing the case for fraud against Trump, not a victim such as a bank. He said prosecutors accused Trump of overvaluing the worth of properties to obtain more favorable loans — but Trump then turned around and paid the loans off on time.
“The corrupt state of New York thinks they’re the victim,” he said.
Viva Frei pointed out that to grant summary judgment, there must be agreed-upon facts. There wasn’t — Trump didn’t agree that Mar-a-Lago was only worth $18 million, he said.
Barnes declared, “The case has no grounds, whatsoever, no legal or factual grounds whatsoever.”
He said, “It’s a threat to everyone’s civil rights and civil liberties, because what the state is saying is if we don’t like you politically, we’ll weaponize one of our many vague laws on the books to go and destroy your business, and destroy your family.”
Barnes said what was disturbing was that the state can bring these types of charges without showing “that the state has ever been defrauded.”
He said, “It shows you what a joke the standing doctrine is. They don’t allow the vaccine injured to sue, because somehow they don’t have standing … but if you have not been defrauded a penny, nickel, dime, or dollar, you have no complaining victim, the state has lost no money, in fact the state has gained money, then you get to sue and destroy someone’s business?”
Barnes expressed concern that not only did the state sue the Trump Organization, but they sued Trump and his kids personally.
“His kids had nothing to do with this. … It’s pure retaliation,” the lawyer said.
He said it’s “overweaponization, where you’re locking up your political opponents … then you don’t have a country, a rule of law at all.”
He said the case should have been transferred to the commercial division, but the judge refused to transfer it since “he’s a rogue, partisan hack.”
He said New York probably has the most corrupt judges per capita in New York, followed by Washington, D.C.
Barnes said it’s because “the judges are in on it.”
The lawyer said the fraud statute allows “the state of New York to steal people’s businesses whenever they feel like it.” He said it was “utterly preposterous” that the “world’s most sophisticated banks” would have lent money without knowing the worth of the Trump brand. He said that “they would have had their own independent appraisers.”
Barnes said part of the problem is “Republican judges” have covered up for “corrupt prosecutors.”
He said, “The left today in power thinks like the Soviets, old-school communists. … Don’t think 1960s, think 1930s. … It’s New York pretending they’re North Korea.”
He added, “What the judge is trying to hide, is that the banks came in with the exact same valuation as Trump did.”
Addressing the judge’s premature ruling, he said, “It’s a denial of right to trial by jury.”
Barnes explained that the property value assessed by the government is not related to the market value. He said prosecutors used the low-end real estate tax appraisal which has little to do with market value. Barnes said the judge “lies by omission.” He added, “Judges lie every single day in America. Probably no one lies more than judges do to get the conclusion they want to.”
Barnes and Viva Frei discussed how they looked at comparable nearby real estate properties, which were far higher even though they weren’t located on the waterfront with the Trump name brand. Barnes said he believed the actual value of Mar-a-Lago “should be half a billion easily.” That is the estimate Trump provided, which Barnes said he thinks is low.
Legal scholar Alan Dershowitz said Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James shouldn’t be leading a case against Trump due to her campaign promises to go after him. “You can’t have prosecutors even civilly prosecuting a defendant if they made a campaign promise that they have to fulfill. They are not neutral and objective,” he said.
He added, “Why can’t the biggest banks sue him and take care of themselves … this doesn’t pass the test of a legitimate civil complaint, and I think they should challenge this vigorously.”
The trial began on Monday. Trump did not request a jury trial, which a legal expert told The Arizona Sun Times was because his legal team expects the judge to taint the jury instructions so they can only come to one conclusion. Without the cover of a jury’s decision, the expert said, it will be easier for an appeals court to pinpoint the flaws in the trial coming from the judge.
– – –
Rachel Alexander is a reporter at The Arizona Sun Times and The Star News
