Trump's New York Fraud Case Is A Stalinist Show Trial.
This is not about Trump, but about ending rights and the rule of law for all of us.
The latest Stalinist show trial against Trump kicked off this past Monday. So that there could be no doubt that this entire proceeding is a farce, just before the “trial” began, Judge Arthur Engoron granted the State of New York summary judgment, stating that Trump by law had committed fraud. You can read the entire opinion here. In lay terms, this ruling means that Trump is assumed to be guilty of the accusations the State made, so now all the State need prove is the amount of its damages.
Thus, in America in 2023, a governmental entity can accuse private citizens of “defrauding” the government and thereafter go straight to proving the amount of its damages. The notion that this could be “legal” in the formerly most free Country on Earth is alarming. However, part of the reason that this type of conduct continues unabated in the Trump era is that few look closely at the details to see if justice is being done and one side, the Left, automatically celebrates anything its side does without any contemplation of whether it is just or might come back to harm the Country, or even them. This case may well be the best example of how we have lost our Constitutional Republic.
You should not need more information to appreciate that this plainly is a show trial. However, a review of the relevant law is instructive to understand just how bad things truly are. New York’s Attorney General Letitia James claims that “no one is above the law,” but this clearly is not about the “law.” Indeed, before Ms. James campaigned for office on “getting Donald Trump,” one would not have thought a law such as New York’s fraud statute would be on the books in any State in America. The law reads:
Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal
acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the
carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general
may apply, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the
supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, for an
order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any
fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an
appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue
of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law
or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court
may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem
proper. The word "fraud" or "fraudulent" as used herein shall include
any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception,
misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false
promise or unconscionable contractual provisions. The term "persistent
fraud" or "illegality" as used herein shall include continuance or
carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct. The term
"repeated" as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and
distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than
one person. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies
recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state
official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject
to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law.
In connection with any such application, the attorney general is
authorized to take proof and make a determination of the relevant facts
and to issue subpoenas in accordance with the civil practice law and
rules. Such authorization shall not abate or terminate by reason of any
action or proceeding brought by the attorney general under this section.
One need not possess a law degree to understand that this “law” is void for vagueness and overly broad. Overbroad laws are ones that criminalize or chill constitutionally protected activity. Vague laws are those that subject citizens to unclear or arbitrary exercises of government power. This law is both. What is sad is that Judge Engoron not only shirked his duty to protect Trump and others from this ridiculous law, but joined the Executive Branch of New York in trouncing on Trump’s rights by reducing the trial to a damages hearing. Hopefully the New York appellate courts will right this wrong. If not, it will be left to the Federal courts to do so.
In the Trump era, we have learned that the courts often will fail in their duty to protect our Constitutional rights. If that occurs here, no one will be safe from having their property seized at the whim of a rogue political official.
While it is hard to believe that this is happening in America, this type of Leftist view of the “law” is quite common throughout the world. Arthur Kestler wrote about the Stalinist show trials in his fiction classic Darkness At Noon. Similarly, Ayn Rand wrote about them in Atlas Shrugged:
“Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.”
This is what the Left wants—everyone is guilty of breaking some law and politicians deciding whom to pursue. As it was in the old USSR. We must always remember the story of Lavrentiy Beria, the most ruthless and longest-serving secret police chief in Joseph Stalin’s reign of terror in Russia and Eastern Europe. He bragged that he could prove criminal conduct on anyone, even the innocent—“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” American constitutional government is precise opposite. Until now.
The New York “law” makes pretty much anything illegal and subject to prosecution if the Attorney General decides she wants to pursue you. It defines as illegal any “fraudulent or illegal acts.” Later, it defines those terms with the use of those terms, a tell for vagueness that renders it enforceable if Western law if observed. Thus, "fraud" and "fraudulent" are defined as “any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false
promise or unconscionable contractual provisions.” This is so broad that about everything everyone does each day could be illegal. In light of this fact, even before the facts of the Trump case are examined, it is astounding that this law has not been struck from the books before now.
An examination of the allegations in the Trump case reveal that the application of this “law” makes ordinary legal conduct “illegal” and subject to life ruining fines. Essentially, Trump is accused of falsely inflating the value of his assets to obtain more favorable deals with banks and insurance companies. Neither the banks or insurance companies are claiming that they were defrauded. Similarly, neither is claiming Trump owes them any money or failed to abide by their respective deals. More importantly, no entity is claiming that it relied on Trump’s supposedly exaggerated values in doing business with him and his companies. Indeed, no bank or insurance company ever would (or could) because, as everyone knows, these entities conduct their own diligence and do not accept a customer’s claims of value. In light of this, nothing inappropriate happened. This is why the law is written so broadly, however.
Which brings us back to Judge Engoron. In times past, the Judicial Branch and the Executive Branch did not operate as one unit. Democrats more or less have ended this. Thus, Democrat judges almost never check the power abuses of Executive Branch Democrats. Engoron’s summary judgment ruling is a perfect example.
A fair judge, properly applying the law, would have said that the law as written was unconstitutional as vague and overly broad. Alternatively, the judge might not have stricken the law generally, but examined Ms. James’ allegations and ruled that the law as applied in this instance was improper. He did neither. Instead, overlooked the obvious unconstitutionality of the law and determined that there was no dispute of material fact that Trump violated it. This is absurd.
As with most things the Left claims these days, their absurdity is self evident without the need of knowing history or possessing any specialized training. Plainly there is substantial disagreement as to the value of Trump’s assets. Importantly, in American common law that Judge Engoron undoubtedly knows, each property owner is qualified to testify as to the value of his or her property. Nonetheless, he issued a fraudulent order declaring that Trump had “undisputedly” inflated the value of his assets based on his preferred valuation from an appraisal by a government entity.
It is not an exaggeration to state that this is a Stalinist show trial. As described above, this is precisely the type of “trial” that was conducted in the former USSR. What is disturbing is that many Americans are unaware that this is happening. Many because the MainStream “News” Media will not tell them. Many others because they have been brainwashed into believing that Leftism is a good, no matter is obvious excesses and short term unfairness.
We shall see how this ends. If the rule of law still exists, even partially, any resulting damages award that New York obtains should be reversed. However, the fact that this case has gotten this far is warning sign that the United States is far down the path of losing its constitutional republic. Put simply, if it can happen to Trump, it can happen to anyone.