Holy crap I got so wound up in all the RICO and defamation and stealing classified documents that I forgot that Trump was in court for bank fraud too. Summary judgment today; looks like it went poorly for him. Let's talk about it.
to translate: TrumpCo tried to dismiss the complaint. Trial court said nope. TrumpCo appealed. Appellate court said "we're going to file off a couple rough edges and let Ivanka off the hook and THAT IS FUCKING ALL."
the judge: "do not make me turn this court around"
this is . . . look, none of this is good.
also special honorable mention to this right here
i mean, the shade of it all
y'all we are on page seven. SEVEN! and we're already into the patently-falses and fatally-flaweds!
for context: the Trump team is apparently so out of good arguments that they are recycling bad ones, and the judge is calling them on it with the relish of a badly-treated lover cataloguing their partner's sexual inadequacies.
this is where the bass gets real loud on the soundtrack
Allow me to remind y'all: this is an order on cross-motions for summary judgment and partial summary judgment, we're on page 11 of 35, the judge is spitting nails, defendants' counsel are looking at four-figure sanctions each, and we haven't even gotten to the motions yet
Just the fact that the court feels the need to -- or CAN -- distinguish this is so, so, so bad
"How did the deposition go? Deposition went FANTASTIC."
--Nick Rekieta, June 26, 2019
I'm skipping through a lot of these arguments because it's late and a lot of it is just the court finding new and different ways to call the defendants incompetent and unethical frauds. Here's the order again, in case you want to read those for yourself s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2399…
This is legalese for "You lose! You get nothing! Good day, sir!"
but now. . . now we get to the good shit.
back in a sec, I'mma pour myself a drink.
ok, I have a root beer float, I'm back.
So why is this the good shit?
The OAG brought seven causes of action against TrumpCo. The first was for repeated and persistent fraud. The next six were also for repeated and persistent fraud, but each one was limited to a specific type of fraud.
If the Court finds for the state on the overarching fraud claim, that's basically the ball game; it would essentially wrap up liability and mean that the trial would primarily be about damages.
I've done some cut-and-pastery here to put the footnotes right next to their arguments, because it's too good. The Court cuts right to the chase, pointing out that TrumpCo's only defense is "Well, but what if numbers didn't mean anything?
More cut and pastery. The emperor, sayeth the court, has no clothes. Future value does not affect present value; time is linear; Trump is a grifter on a scale beyond even that which this lawsuit contemplates.
I'mma need this hearing transcript immediately. (more cuttery pastery)
Last cut-and-paste job for a while (just keeping paragraphs together): and there it is. TrumpCo is liable for fraud.
It goes on and on. TrumpCo was found liable for fraudulently inflating the value of Seven Springs, Trump Park Avenue, 40 Wall Street, Mar-a-Lago, and Aberdeen. The order itself is brutal but the footnotes are frequently a delight, frex:
I mean, look at this. That's gold.
In addition to the above, TrumpCo has also been found liable for fraudulently overinflating the value of the US Golf Clubs, the Vornado partnership, their intra-company licensing deals, and several other loans.
Oh look ALL the crooked little lads are liable in their individual capacity -- not just Pops, but Speedy and Lumpy, too! Plus Allen and Jeff, who should really find better friends.
Not to be outdone, all the entity defendants are ALSO liable.
And while damages are for trial, injunctive relief is something the judge can take care of right now. . . and he does so with a brutal axe swing. TrumpCo can't do business in New York any more, and all the defendant entities are dissolved.
And babies, that's all she wrote. (Well, he.) Liability on the other six claims, plus damages overall, is left for trial, but it's all over but the shouting.
How sweet it is.
@Mitchell10500 Not AG, Court. Sorry, it’s late
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is an amazing thread, which you should read. It links to a long-form piece on the topic of lawyer training, which you should also read. But I also wanted to offer my perspective as a paralegal who graduated from an ABA-certified two-year-degree program.
“Lawyer” is a profession, and a discipline, but it’s also a job and a business, and if law school prepares its students poorly for the first two, it prepares them not at all for the second two. AFAICT, the ABA certifies paralegal programs in part to make up for the lack.
When I tell working lawyers, including folks who have been in practice for decades, about what my paralegal courses covered, they almost inevitably say “Fuck, I wish I had learned that in law school.”
Nick Rekieta of @RekietaLaw, a small law firm in Central Minnesota, is bad at personal jurisdiction.
Let me give a little background here. Nick's talking about Jamie @marchimark Marchi's motion to compel in the collection efforts against Vic Mignogna, who has been ordered to pay her $100k+ in legal fees as a result of filing a meritless defamation suit against her.
I am thrilled, although not a little surprised, to see the Fifth Circuit so explicitly recognizing the reality that online speech so frequently consists of high-context communications, and the importance of understanding and evaluating that speech within that context.
High-context language has been a thing since forever — Cockney rhyming slang is a good example — but in the era when nearly all human communication was done orally, it was almost always delivered and received in an environment where everyone understood the context.
We’re in an era now when a lot of human communication, including the ephemeral personal and community speech that establishes and nurtures interpersonal relationships, happens in text. And, well, text is forever.
But first, a little background. As we know, Vic filed the SLAPPiest of SLAPP suits against Funimation, Inc., Monica Rial, Ron Toye, and Jamie Marchi way back in April 2019. drive.google.com/file/d/1J8bhhk…
House Bill 2282, codified at RCW 19.385.010 et seq., is a net neutrality law. Read the whole thing at . https://t.co/IEWaVFKPYlapp.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.as…
@JulieMFaenza @endomorphosis @Lormif1 @riScorpian @chadcmulligan @col_bosch @schwatd2 @JosephPoulin175 Although that seems to be kind of a theme for him
@crowder @endomorphosis @Katerationopia @schwatd2 @Lormif1 @Eodyne1 @chadcmulligan @riScorpian @col_bosch @JosephPoulin175 @NoLongerBennett Ah wait, no, this is a co-plaintiff who was convicted of the same crime. REMARKABLY similar story though.
Good afternoon! I'm taking a moment to highlight a win we got yesterday on behalf of @Bungie, who sprang into action to ensure the safety of an employee who was targeted for racist harassment and threats last year.
After working with MANY outstanding professionals to identify the culprit, a racist shitstain of a human being named Jesse James Comer, we filed a complaint in King County Superior Court to hold him liable for the damages Bungie suffered due to his sociopathic conduct.
Comer didn't show the same enthusiasm for showing up to argue his case as he did for causing the intial harm, lol. Yesterday the Court granted our motion for default judgment, making him liable for the nearly $500K Bungie accrued in investigation, protection, and legal costs.