THIS JUST IN:
Caren Morrison, an associate professor of law at Georgia State University, noted that Trump attorney Sadow had been in court for at least two of those removal hearings and likely concluded that his client’s chances of winning were slim. She also said that Trump probably would have had to testify, like Meadows, for him to have any chance of succeeding in showing he was acting as a federal official and not a candidate . AJC
Donald J. Trump’s civil fraud trial over accusations that he inflated the value of his properties by billions of dollars could begin as soon as Monday after a New York appeals court rejected the former president’s attempt to delay it.
The appeals court, in a terse two-page order Thursday, effectively turned aside for now a lawsuit Mr. Trump filed against the trial judge, Arthur F. Engoron. The lawsuit had sought to delay the trial, and ultimately throw out many of the accusations against the former president.
Thursday’s ruling came two days after Justice Engoron issued an order that struck a major blow to Mr. Trump, finding him liable for having committed fraud by persistently overvaluing his assets and stripping him of control over his New York properties.
Trump’s lawyers sued Engoron on Sept. 14, accusing him of ignoring the law and hindering their preparations by failing to comply with a June appeals court order that he narrow the scope of the trial based on the statute of limitations.
They filed the lawsuit under a provision known as Article 78, which allows challenges to some judicial decisions, and asked that the trial be postponed until that matter was resolved.
An appeals court judge, David Friedman, granted an interim stay of the trial while the full appeals court considered the lawsuit on an expedited basis. Thursday’s ruling lifted the stay, allowing the trial to proceed as scheduled. The appeals court did not rule on the defense’s underlying complaints about Engoron. Through a court lawyer, Engoron declined to participate in the appeals court process. Other proceedings in the case went on while the panel mulled a delay.
Trump lawyers are Now Begging Appeals Court to do Something About Judge Who Tossed ‘Bad Faith’ RICO Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton
Two weeks after a federal judge, for the second time, refused to step aside from Donald Trump’s “bad faith” racketeering (RICO) civil lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, the former president’s lawyers are asking a federal appellate court to step in.
A notice of appeal filed on Wednesday to the Trump v. Clinton docket shows that Trump lawyers Alina Habba, Michael T. Madaio, Peter Ticktin, and Jamie A. Sasson are adding two recent beatdowns by U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks to their growing list of appealable issues.
The lawyers, who are already appealing the dismissal of the case and a $1 million sanctions award in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, are now appealing Middlebrooks’ second refusal to remove himself from overseeing the case and the judge’s denial of the Trump team’s motion for an indicative ruling.
Justice Dept. Accuses Trump Lawyers of Dragging Their Feet in Documents Case
The accusation of deliberate foot-dragging by the prosecutors in the office the special counsel, Jack Smith, was the latest salvo over the schedule of the classified documents trial, which — after weeks of contentious arguments — is set to begin in May in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla.
In court papers filed to Judge Aileen M. Cannon, who is presiding over the case, the prosecutors accused Mr. Trump’s legal team of seeking to delay by at least three months a crucial step in how the government intends to prepare the classified documents at the heart of the proceeding for review by the defense.
That request for a delay, wrote one of the prosecutors, Jay I. Bratt, “threatens to upend the entire schedule established by the court” and “amounts to a motion to continue the May 20, 2024, trial date.”