Another Trump defeat of Lawfare Democrats

Back in the 20th century, Timex ran a series of ads featuring the punchline "Takes a licking but keeps on ticking." That punchline might need to be revitalized for what I'm calling Lawfare Democrats, who can't seem to defeat Donald Trump in the courts. In that sense, Lawfare Democrats have taken a licking in NY's appellate courts but they still persist.

The NY Post is reporting this morning that "Donald Trump was granted some reprieve as an appeals court drastically cut the $454 million bond he was required to post in his New York civil fraud case Monday. A five-judge panel reduced the massive amount to $175 million and gave Trump 10 days to come up with the funds, according to a brief decision handed down by the Appellate Division, First Department Monday morning."

Adding insult to injury

The Post is also reporting "The First Department put on hold other parts of Engoron’s decision, including the portions barring Trump, his two eldest sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr, and other top Trump Organization executives from running New York companies. The appeals court also paused the part of the ruling that banned Trump and his family real estate holding company from applying for loans in the Empire State."

Jonathan Turley offers his thoughts on the ruling:

Then there's this: This is definitely a defeat for Judge Engoron and NY AG Letitia James. They could've been reasonable from the start but they they acted like a bull seeing a waving red cape in front of them. They couldn't resist the temptation. Now they're dining on a healthy dose of humble pie:

Is there a single part of Judge Engoron's ruling that wasn't significantly altered? If there is, I didn't see it. The appellate judges didn't just order up a healthy dose of humble pie. The 5-judge panel sent Judge Engoron and NY AG Letitia James back for seconds and thirds. While $175,000,000 is a ton of money, it's a significant drop from $454,000,000. Now that this phase is mostly behind us, let's see how many more defeats the Lawfare Democrats suffer. BTW, let's view this as a major victory for the rule of law and the upholding of the Bill of Rights.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue...
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp...
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio...
Read more