╌>

Trump, children are ordered to testify in N.Y. attorney general probe

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  hallux  •  4 years ago  •  70 comments

By:   By Karen Freifeld, Jonathan Stempel

Trump, children are ordered to testify in N.Y. attorney general probe

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York judge ruled on Thursday that former U.S. President Donald Trump and two of his adult children must answer questions under oath within 21 days in the state attorney general’s civil probe into their family company.
Justice Arthur Engoron of the New York state court in Manhattan ruled in favor of Attorney General Letitia James in directing Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr and his daughter Ivanka Trump to testify.
Engoron said James had “the clear right” to issue her subpoenas and question the Trumps after having uncovered “copious evidence of possible financial fraud.”
Failing to issue subpoenas “would have been a blatant dereliction of duty,” Engoron wrote.
“Today, justice prevailed,” James said in a statement. “No one will be permitted to stand in the way of the pursuit of justice, no matter how powerful they are. No one is above the law.”
Lawyers for Donald Trump did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Alan Futerfas, a lawyer for Donald Trump Jr and Ivanka Trump, declined to comment.
The decision followed a two-hour hearing in which the Trumps’ lawyers accused James of doing an end run around their clients’ constitutional rights by seeking testimony she could then use against them in a parallel criminal investigation.
Alina Habba, one of Donald Trump’s lawyers,
…

visit seeded article for remaining content

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Hallux    4 years ago

In the meantime, John Durham is chasing parked ambulances.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  Hallux @1    4 years ago

the next fund raising scam du jour...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2  Vic Eldred    4 years ago

From the part of the article you have to go dig for:

"The judge also rejected the Trumps’ claim that James’ sometimes aggressive public statements about investigating Donald Trump, including a pledge that “we’re definitely going to sue him,” illustrated the “impropriety” of her probe."

That tells you all you need to know about Justice Arthur Engoron.

The Republicans will have a real criminal in Hunter Biden. They should prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law and make sure Joe & Jill have ringside seats!

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    4 years ago

Clicking a mouse button is digging? What's next from under your mattress of peeves? Hunter? How about finishing with the Clintons first, it's been what ... 25 years?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @2.1    4 years ago
How about finishing with the Clintons first, it's been what ... 25 years?

As Norm Macdonald once said we'll need Vince Foster for that.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
2.1.2  bbl-1  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.1    4 years ago

You are defending and shielding something.  What is it?  And why?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  bbl-1 @2.1.2    4 years ago

You tell me

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
2.1.4  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.1    4 years ago

I hear Vince is now a delivery boy for Comet Ping Pong, don't forget to tip him.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.5  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @2.1.4    4 years ago

I can still remember when Norm endorsed George W. He said we need a guy who tells the truth, doesn't cheat on his wife or commits murder!

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
2.1.6  bbl-1  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.3    4 years ago

You know.  Because if you didn't you wouldn't be here.

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
2.1.7  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    4 years ago

Norm had both comedic and poetic license.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @2.1.7    4 years ago

He was an original. A one of a kind.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Expert
2.2  Gsquared  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    4 years ago
They [the Republicans] should prosecute him

Comment 2 demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of American jurisprudence and/or a desire to politicize the criminal justice system.  If the author of that comment were to have his way, we can say farewell to the American way of life.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
2.2.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Gsquared @2.2    4 years ago

I've noticed that the right-wingers have picked up a new word for their anti-liberal put-downs - "melodramatic", and will use it in the absence of a logical disagreement. 

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Expert
2.2.4  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @2.2.3    4 years ago

There you go again.  Taking things out of context and mischaracterizing what was clearly stated.

Your comments are trolling.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
2.2.6  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Texan1211 @2.2.3    4 years ago

LOL. I really have to laugh at your comment's ridiculous interpretation of what I said.  I neither agreed nor disagreed with Gsquared.  I commented on the use of the word "melodramatic".  WOW, what a twist from reality.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Expert
2.2.7  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @2.2.5    4 years ago

Comment 2.2.5 is blatantly hypocritical.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
3  bbl-1    4 years ago

Eric 'the toothy one' Trump has already deposed.  He used The Fifth Amendment over 500 times.  That must mean something, right?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1  devangelical  replied to  bbl-1 @3    4 years ago

according to his dad, that means he's guilty...

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Expert
3.1.1  Kavika   replied to  devangelical @3.1    4 years ago

 "If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?"

Quote from DJT.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @3.1.1    4 years ago

and the hits just keep coming ...

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Quiet
3.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Kavika @3.1.1    4 years ago

I hope someone throws those words back in his fat face the first time "I take the fifth." comes out of his lying mouth.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  bbl-1 @3    4 years ago
That must mean something, right?

Is that how you reason?

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
3.2.1  bbl-1  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2    4 years ago

No.  That is not how I reason.  I was not the one that used The Fifth Amendment hundreds of times to hide whatever truths I was aware of.  That would belong only onto those you apparently support.  Reason does not qualify.  Only truth qualifies.  Is truth something to be feared?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  bbl-1 @3.2.1    4 years ago
I was not the one that used The Fifth Amendment hundreds of times to hide whatever truths I was aware of.

Did you read the article that Hallux posted?  Testimony given in one investigation can be used in another. There is also the matter of trying to frame people. Exhibit A is what the rogue FBI did to the national security advisor they wanted out of the way so Trump wouldn't know he was being spied on. Remember that?"



That would belong only onto those you apparently support. 

You mean it's a political prosecution?

I agree.

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
3.2.3  seeder  Hallux  replied to  bbl-1 @3.2.1    4 years ago
Is truth something to be feared?

Wretched stuff, in the wrong hands it's brown Play-Doh.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.2.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @3.2.3    4 years ago

It's called malicious prosecution.

Have a good night.

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
3.2.5  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2.4    4 years ago

And Judge Engoron dismissing Trump's lawyers interpretation as “reminiscent of Lewis Carroll” was delicious execution.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
3.2.6  bbl-1  replied to  Hallux @3.2.3    4 years ago

Emails and Benghazi?  You mean that kind of Play-Doh?

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
3.2.7  seeder  Hallux  replied to  bbl-1 @3.2.6    4 years ago

... and cookiegate.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
3.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  bbl-1 @3    4 years ago

Well, hopefully there's sufficient independent evidence that would convince a jury that their taking the 5th is in fact just to cover up actual guilt, and would therefore justify their agreeing on a guilty verdict. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
3.3.1  Snuffy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.3    4 years ago

It's my understanding that someone taking their 5th Amendment rights in a criminal trial cannot be used to assume guilt.  The issue here is that is not the same ruling in a civil trial and the Trump organization is undergoing both a criminal trial as well as a civil trial so Trump taking the 5th in this deposition for a criminal trial could be used against him in the civil trial.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  bbl-1 @3    4 years ago

I think it's because he didn't understand the questions. He always come across as dim. He looks dim, too

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
3.4.1  bbl-1  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.4    4 years ago

Yes, it does appear that Eric, the toothy one, is dim although it is reported that the 'orange old one' thought Don Jr. to be the----------shall we say, "Less equipped."

However, Eric understood the questions well enough but knew and realized that just being the specter of a Trump assured those whatever dealings and occurrences being discussed were at the least unethical and possibly illegal.  

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Quiet
3.5  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  bbl-1 @3    4 years ago

As it is a civil matter, the jury can indeed use all of his 5th's against him.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
4  Jeremy Retired in NC    4 years ago
Trump attorney Alina Habba accused James of “selective prosecution and prosecutorial misconduct that this country has never seen,” citing what she called Democratic attorney general’s “vile disdain” for Trump, a Republican.

The appearance of partisan politics is there.  This all started when Trump had won the election and Democrats targeted him with a fictitious allegations.  

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
4.1  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4    4 years ago
Alina Habba

The parking garage lawyer?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.1    4 years ago

She's not a very good lawyer

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Participates
4.1.3  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.2    4 years ago

I thought Trump only hires the best people … until he has to fire them.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
4.1.4  sandy-2021492  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @4.1.3    4 years ago

I predict she will be fired within two Scaramuccis when it becomes clear that "But what about Hillary" turns out to be an entirely ineffective legal defense.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
4.1.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Hallux @4.1    4 years ago

You're taking offense with WHO it is?  That's something you should take up with them and the author.  It doesn't change my statement at at all.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
4.1.6  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.5    4 years ago

You really expect anybody to expect that a lawyer working for Trump is NOT going to be partisan?  That the partisanship is all on the part of prosecutors?

Do you believe every lawyer of every convicted prisoner who says "My client is innocent!  It was all a witch hunt!"  Or do you think that maybe they know their paycheck depends on them being (or pretending to be) biased in favor of their client and against the prosecution, cuz, you know, that's their job.

Or do you only believe them if their clients were Republicans?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Quiet
4.1.7  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @4.1.3    4 years ago

They usually just quit.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
4.1.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.6    4 years ago
You really expect anybody to expect that a lawyer working for Trump is NOT going to be partisan?

I expect a lawyer to be committed to their client.  Doesn't matter if it's Trump of Jeff Dahmer.

That the partisanship is all on the part of prosecutors?

Isn't that what I said?  

Do you believe every lawyer of every convicted prisoner who says "My client is innocent!  It was all a witch hunt!"

And here is where you start chasing squirrels.  

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
4.1.9  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.5    4 years ago

You shouldn't change any of your statements, they're (fool's) gold.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
4.1.10  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.8    4 years ago

So you expect them to be partisan, but will also accept as true their partisan accusations that others are partisan.

Noted.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
4.1.11  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  sandy-2021492 @4.1.10    4 years ago

Did you miss where I stated I expect a lawyer to be committed to their client?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
4.1.12  sandy-2021492  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.11    4 years ago

No.  Nor did I miss the part where you present the partisan ramblings of a partisan lawyer as evidence that the prosecution is partisan.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Silent
4.1.13  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.8    4 years ago
I expect a lawyer to be committed to their client.  Doesn't matter if it's Trump of Jeff Dahmer.

Do you think Trump would go good with some Fava Beans and a Nice Chianti, cause Trumps Silence  and or constant refusal to release records, makes one need question why hes going to look so damn guilty out on the Lamb, when he and his family members invoke the Fifth, they should have drunk, like the Kool Aid they distribute and never dilute, cause it can never refute what so many don't or can't refute here, hear, or see, hear....?

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
4.1.17  bbl-1  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.1.7    4 years ago

Some of them lose their license and a few of them have served time in jail.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
4.1.18  bbl-1  replied to  Tessylo @4.1.15    4 years ago

Ivanka for pole dancer.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
4.1.19  bbl-1  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.11    4 years ago

Actually, a lawyer is an officer of the court.  His only commitment is to the letter of the law. 

 
 
 
Veronica
Professor Participates
5  Veronica    4 years ago

I guess Trump will have to find a new fall guy since they are leaving him like rats from a sinking ship.

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
5.2  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Veronica @5    4 years ago

The USN DeSantis is their neo-liferaft. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
PhD Silent
5.2.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Hallux @5.2    4 years ago

they all deserve to go down with their Shit ! Hell Stormy should have brought that Shit down.

The Trump Family and organization has been an Anchor around US for far too long and the conspiracies and lies run oh so deep....but not so deep, as to we could not hear his cries and pleas for HELP, i'm a mental midget who is more like Gidgette, goes to Washinton, to Steal the Art of The Democracy Deal, with a bunch of ignorant knumb sklullz a tempting to close US, and the Deal of a Trumped up Card, Shark, Tanked Retardation , upon our fckd up nation

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Silent
7  bbl-1    4 years ago

A summation of the MAGA and even 'The Orange One' himself could be summed up as simply beginning with a Stormy Who and ending with a Hang mike Pence.

 
 

Who is online