‘Good day at trial today … see you in Court on Tuesday morning!’
Former President Donald Trump indicated on social media he would attend the second day of his New York civil trial, in a series of posts recapping day one and explaining the legal issues in the case against him.
“People are starting to see what a great company I built through the trial started by the Racist Attorney General of New York State, Letitia ‘Peekaboo’ James. It was all supposed to be private, but in many ways it is exposing great success. Incredible assets, lots of cash, and it only gets better,” he wrote.
However, he said, the case would only drive businesses away from New York, describing the ordeal thus far as “heartache.” A partial ruling last week already stripped the former president of his business certificates, and he may yet lose his flagship properties like Trump Tower in New York State.
“It is also stating, loud and clear, ‘don’t move your company to New York, and if you are already here, move out fast. Too much work and ‘heartache’ dealing with the Radical Left Democrats, Marxists, and Fascists!” he added.
“Good day at trial today as the judge will be honoring the Appellate Court’s unanimous decision on the Statute of Limitations! This reduces the case by approximately 80%. See you in Court on Tuesday morning!”
Last September, Ms. James sued President Trump, arguing he defrauded the state by inflating his net worth to obtain more favorable loans. She is seeking $250 million in penalties and barring him and his adult sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., from doing business in the state.
New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, presiding over the case, had already ruled in a pretrial summary judgment that President Trump was liable for fraud, inflating his net worth between $812 million and $2.2 billion from 2011 to 2021.
Reversal
President Trump’s legal team has clashed with Justice Engoron several times during the course of the case, being sanctioned with large monetary penalties for repeatedly making what he called “frivolous” arguments.
By Catherine Yang
