The New York Attorney General’s trial has definitely gotten under Trump’s skin. Yet he was far calmer at his arraignment on 30-plus counts of unlawfully retaining classified documents. Why is he stressing? 1/
Part of it is image. Trump’s self concept and public persona alike rest on his King of All Real Estate construct. Although the Attorney General has already exposed how much of it is a fiction, the trial will methodically unspool his legend, witness by email by letter. 2/
But it’s more than that. The remedies the AG is seeking — which Trump himself acknowledges constitutes a sort of “corporate death penalty” — are the only ones he can’t campaign away. If restored to the presidency, he can pardon himself for his alleged federal crimes. 3/
He can also arguably force the Manhattan and Fulton County DAs, who might not be able to try their cases against him before the election, to stop on the ground that prosecuting a sitting president is constitutionally verboten. 4/
But the only way out of Tish James’s civil suit is through (and then appeals). And before then, the court could impose serious penalties: bars on acquiring NY real property, borrowing from any NY-registered lender, or serving as an officer or director of any NY company. 5/
A monitor to direct (and correct) all financial reporting and controls; even a receiver to oversee the unwinding of his metaphorical trophy cases. And yes, maybe even the liquidation of his properties. 6/
And that’s before we get to any disgorgement of the profits from his fraud, which the AG estimates at “at least $250 million.” Collectively, for Trump, that smorgasbord of potential remedies is worse than any threat of prison. FIN.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
NEW: While the Department of Justice issued a statement last night about the criminal charges against Rep. McIver, a spokesperson for her legal team confirms that it did not receive the charging document for until this morning, 12-plus hours later. 1/
DOJ policy, as embodied in the Justice Manual, is clear: "DOJ personnel shall not respond to questions about the existence of an ongoing investigation or comment on its nature or progress before charges are publicly filed." 2/
There are exceptions, including "[w]hen the community needs to be reassured that the appropriate law enforcement agency is investigating a matter, or where release of information is necessary to protect the public safety," but neither is relevant here. 3/
Harvard researcher Kseniia Petrova has been charged criminally with smuggling goods -- e.g., frog embryos and samples thereof -- into the United States on the same day the judge overseeing her habeas case questioned the government's authority to revoke her visa. 1/
The administration told that judge, Christina Reiss, they intend to send Petrova back to Russia, despite her fear of arrest due to her support for Ukraine. Reiss scheduled a bail hearing on May 28, "potentially setting the stage for Ms. Petrova’s release." 2/ ...nytimes.com/2025/05/14/h
At some point today, the administration moved to unseal its criminal complaint against Petrova in a Massachusetts federal court and represented she has been arrested. 3/
There's been significant focus today on what the opinion dismissing the criminal case against Eric Adams says about Trump's DOJ. But what it says about the career prosecutors involved is as, if not more, significant. 1/
The Adams debacle resulted in the resignation of two prosecutors, then-acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon and AUSA Hagan Scotten, both former SCOTUS clerks and all-around superstars. And DOJ placed three other members of the core case team on administrative leave. 2/
In a now-public memo, DOJ told Sassoon they would be investigated by DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility and pursuant to Trump's executive order directing the A.G. to investigate "weaponization of justice" and to issue a report. 3/
I want to live in a world where we do not talk about judges as if they owe their allegiance, or their very existence, to a particular president. Based on my experience as both a litigator and a journalist, that describes the vast majority of the federal judiciary. 1/
And yet, Judge Aileen Cannon, for all of her credentials and pre-judicial experience, has consistently staged the hearing of motions in a way that favors Trump and his co-defendants, handpicked a theory of dismissal at the invitation-by-concurrence of Justice Thomas, and even exercised jurisdiction she did not have. 2/
Her actions concerning the Special Counsel’s report, for example, were premised on authority she had stripped herself of by dismissing the case and an eventuality she refused to acknowledge: that the indictment against the two people who would supposedly be prejudiced by the report’s release not only had been dismissed but that DOJ’s pending appeal of her ruling will soon disappear too.
NEW: Per @adamreisstv, Rudy Giuliani is now almost 90 minutes late for a one-day trial on whether his Palm Beach, FL condo can be taken to satisfy his $146 million debt to former GA election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. 1/
Rudy owes the women that money because his failure to participate in their defamation lawsuit was so complete that they won a default judgment on liability. And when they tried the issue of damages to a jury last December, that $146 million was the jury’s award. 2/
Since then, he has been playing games with several courts in an attempt to conceal or even exclude his assets from being seized to pay them. He first filed for bankruptcy, only to have his case kicked out of court for his obfuscation and withholding of information. 3/
🧵: In October 2024, @SenWhitehouse released a report about the FBI's supplemental investigation of Brett Kavanaugh after allegations that he sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford surfaced. 1/
And that report caused Whitehouse to find that the FBI's supplemental investigation was deeply flawed and manipulated by the Trump White House despite public attestations that the FBI had carte blanche to pursue all investigative leads. 2/
In his conclusion, Whitehouse noted, "Reliable background investigations of judicial nominees are crucial to the Senate’s constitutional duty to provide advice and consent," a statement with which I imagine most senators would concur, at least in a general sense. 3/