Podcast Summary
Court-Appointed Monitor's Testimony in Trump Civil Fraud Case: Defense seeks to call monitor with no fraud findings since 2022 to testify, but her hearsay testimony may not sway the outcome in the ongoing civil fraud case against Trump's businesses.
The ongoing New York civil fraud case against Donald Trump and his businesses hinges on allegations of persistent fraud from 2014 to 2021. A key witness in the case is Barbara Jones, a monitor appointed by the court to oversee Trump's businesses and report any financial misstatements or fraud. The defense wants to call Jones to testify on their behalf, as she has stated in the past that she did not find fraud during her tenure since 2022. However, her testimony would be limited in scope and is currently considered hearsay, which can be discounted by the judge. The defense hopes that Jones' testimony, even if indirectly, could bolster their argument that there was no widespread fraud during the relevant time period. Ultimately, the case rests on whether the court believes there was fraudulent activity during this period, and Jones' testimony, while potentially helpful, may not be enough to sway the outcome on its own.
Lawyer's oversight raises questions about handling of Trump case: Failure to include independent monitor Barbara Jones as a witness in Trump case questioned lawyer's competence, adding confusion to the investigation.
During a recent court hearing, a request was made by Donald Trump's lawyer to bring in Barbara Jones, who was appointed as an independent monitor over the Trump Organization's finances, as a witness. However, Alina Haba, the lawyer who had been handling the case for the past two and a half years, had failed to include Jones on her witness list. This oversight raised questions about Haba's handling of the case and was seen as an example of malpractice. Additionally, during the hearing, Mark Hawthorne, the Trump Hotel Group CFO, testified about his relationship with Eric Trump and his efforts to help Eric update the accounting software and bookkeeping after Allen Weiselberg, who had been managing the finances for decades, went to jail for tax evasion. The mismatch between Jones' engagement and the scope of the investigation, as well as Haba's failure to include her as a potential witness, added confusion to the case.
Testimony of Barbara Jones in Trump Hearing: Retired judge testified about financial relationship with Trump Organization, found no fraud, attempted to call as witness but ruled against it, could create appeal issue. Discussed importance of heart health, introduced Superbeats heart chews as effective supplement.
The testimony of Barbara Jones, a retired judge who served as a monitor for the Trump Organization, became a contentious issue during a recent hearing. Trump's former associate testified about their financial relationship and conversations, but Jones reported that she never found any fraud. The Trump Organization's lawyers attempted to call Jones as a witness, but the judge ruled against it, stating that she is an officer of the court and therefore should not testify. This decision could potentially create an issue on appeal. Separately, the discussion touched upon the importance of maintaining heart health, especially with over half the US population benefiting from blood pressure support. Superbeats heart chews were introduced as a convenient and effective way to support healthy blood pressure, with antioxidants that are clinically shown to be nearly twice as effective as a healthy lifestyle alone. With thousands of positive reviews, Superbeats heart chews have gained popularity as a heart health supplement.
Heart health benefits vs Legal case against Trump Organization: Using Superbeats heart chews supports heart health, while the legal case against the Trump Organization focuses on alleged financial fraud between 2014 and 2021, with some defendants no longer involved.
The use of Superbeats heart chews can provide heart health benefits and overall well-being, while the ongoing legal case against the Trump Organization focuses on alleged financial fraud using false statements between 2014 and 2021. The testimony of retired judge Barbara Jones, who looked forward rather than back during her testimony, is considered irrelevant to the case due to the statute of limitations. The transactions at the core of the issue are outside this timeframe, and some defendants, such as Ivanka Trump and Judge Jones, are no longer involved due to their actions predating the relevant period. Therefore, focusing on heart health with Superbeats heart chews is a positive step, while the legal case progresses with a narrow focus on the specified timeframe.
Lawyers attempted to call Barbara Jones as a witness through a proffer: Judge denied lawyers' request to call Barbara Jones as a witness through a proffer, raising concerns about setting a precedent for irrelevant witnesses and the safer bet being for the judge to allow Jones to testify directly as the trier of fact.
During the legal proceedings regarding the Trump case, the lawyers made a proffer to the judge when their request for an attorney was denied. A proffer is a statement made outside of court regarding what a witness would testify to if they were present. In this case, the lawyers were attempting to establish what Barbara Jones, an officer of the court, would have testified to regarding their burden of proof. However, the judge denied the request, finding it irrelevant and untimely. The lawyers also suggested that they could potentially call other court personnel as witnesses, but the judge's concern was setting a precedent that could lead to an influx of irrelevant witnesses. Ultimately, the safer bet would have been for the judge to allow Barbara Jones to testify directly as the trier of fact. The lawyers' desperation for witnesses and the judge's concern about setting a precedent were key factors in the decision.
Potential consequences for Trump Organization if found persistently fraudulent: If found guilty of persistent fraud, Trump Organization could face significant damages, dissolution, and asset sales under New York law
Learning from the ongoing New York attorney general case against Donald Trump and the Trump Organization is the potential for significant damages and consequences if the judge finds the companies to be persistently fraudulent. The trial, now in its eighth week, may last a few more weeks, with the New York attorney general potentially presenting a rebuttal case. If found guilty, the companies could face damages totaling potentially half a billion dollars, dissolution, and the sale of assets. This is because New York law does not allow persistently fraudulent companies to continue operating. The stakes are high for the Trump Organization as the judge prepares to deliver a final opinion.
New York AG's request could bar key Trump company officials from NY business roles: The New York attorney general's request could permanently prevent top Trump company executives from holding officer and director positions in New York businesses, impacting Trump's organization significantly.
The New York attorney general's request could permanently bar key people at the head of Donald Trump's company from holding officer and director positions in New York businesses. This would be a significant setback for Trump, who frequently criticizes the judge presiding over the case. The decision is now in Judge Ang Goran's hands, and the legal team at Midas Touch will continue to provide updates on this and other legal, political, and justice-related topics through their podcast and social media channels. If you find the content valuable, please show your support by liking and commenting. Stay informed by following Midas Touch on Instagram.
