Trump Foundation says NY AG's comments show lawsuit is political
Source: CNN
New York (CNN)Attorneys for the Donald J. Trump Foundation accused the New York attorney general's office of political motivation in its civil lawsuit against the nonprofit, citing recent comments made by Attorney General Letitia James, who took office in January.
"Newly elected New York Attorney General Letitia James ran on an anti-Trump campaign where she expressed grave antipathy and animus toward Mr. Trump," attorneys for the foundation, as well as President Donald Trump and his three eldest children, wrote in the filing Friday.
"Attorney General James has referred to President Trump as an 'illegitimate President,'" the filing states, "and has vowed to 'use every area of the law to investigate President Trump and his business transactions and that of his family as well.'"
The comments by James, a Democrat, drew scrutiny when she made them late last year. Prosecutors generally avoid implying that their office will pursue specific targets, in part because such comments can later be used by defendants to allege bias.
Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/11/politics/trump-foundation-new-york-attorney-general/index.html
Here is the 21 page filing.
http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/02/11/trump.foundation.pdf
Seth Abramson had this reaction:
Link to tweet
✔
@SethAbramson
This is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. Anyone who knows the Trump-Russia case even a little bit knows that Mukasey represents Joel Zamel, one of the central figures in the ENTIRE Trump-Russia investigation. The idea that Mukasey would represent the Trumps AND Zamel is... beyond insane.
erica orden
✔
@eorden
Replying to @eorden
The court filing also discloses that the foundation, Trump and his three eldest children (Eric, Don Jr. & Ivanka) have added an attorney (in addition to Alan Futerfas) to their legal team in this case:
Marc Mukasey, who has a close relationship w/Giulian
RAAD2
(95 posts)Buncha crooks.
Scammers.
iluvtennis
(19,912 posts)NCjack
(10,279 posts)Gothmog
(145,965 posts)They did not cover this particular legal defense in law school. The trumpsters are grasping at straws and making up new legal theories
Igel
(35,390 posts)Not because they violated sound policy, or even failed to comply with procedure, but because they demonstrated animus on the part of Trump against undocumented Latino immigrants.
The general attitude *here* was that since he'd demonstrated bias against them in his pre-election speech, anything he did afterwards was tainted by that bias. Even if he claimed evidence and justification on other grounds, the *real* reason was his bias and prejudice, and this was unacceptable.
(To be clear, a number of DUers have said how they'd be happy to bankrupt various Trumpsters or conservatives, even if in the end they show that the charges were false. Because they'd still be punished by the mere expense of defending for a year or two in court against a battery of government lawyers, plus the damage to their reputations. Now imagine that the prosecutor in one such case was shown to be one of those people. It's not for nothing that somebody coined the portmanteau law + warfare = "lawfare".)