Former federal prosecutor Robert Mintz discusses Trump's defense in the civil fraud trial, while First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh talks about the prosecution of men accused of robocalls with false information to Black voters. They explore defense strategy, witness recall, the contentious relationship between defense attorneys and the judge, robocalls' legality, AI in business, voter privacy concerns, and challenges to laws against robocalls in the political context.
The defense in the civil fraud trial against Donald Trump aims to portray him as a visionary real estate developer and downplay accusations of inflating asset values.
The prosecution of two men accused of voter intimidation through robocalls in Michigan raises concerns about the intersection between protecting voters and the First Amendment rights of political speech.
Deep dives
Defense presents Trump's real estate genius
During the defense's case in the New York State civil fraud trial against former President Donald Trump, his eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., testified about the family's real estate assets and praised his father's talents as a real estate developer. The defense aimed to portray Donald Trump as a visionary who accurately predicted real estate trends and downplayed accusations of inflating asset values in financial statements.
The disclaimed financial statements defense
The heart of the Trump Organization's defense in the civil fraud trial revolves around the disclaimer in their financial statements. The defense argues that the statements were legally worthless, and banks like Deutsche Bank, who lent money to the organization, did their own due diligence and did not rely solely on those statements. The defense maintains that there was no harm done, as the loans were repaid in full and on time, and that the inflated asset values were subjective and not intentionally fraudulent.
Judge's rulings and pending penalties
The judge in the civil fraud trial has already found that fraud occurred and a judgment of liability has been made. The remaining issues revolve around intentional fraud and determining the penalties, which could include fines up to $250 million and potentially barring Donald Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization from operating in New York. The defense's ongoing focus suggests they are preparing for an appeal, seeking to establish bias on the judge's part and potential reversible errors that could add weight to their case.
Broadness of Michigan's election misinformation law challenged
Republican operatives Jack Berkman and Jacob Wall are challenging charges of felony voter intimidation in Michigan. They claim that their misleading robocalls, seeking to deter black voters by spreading misinformation about the use of mail-in voting data, are protected under the U.S. Constitution's freedom of speech. The case highlights the conflict between protecting voters from intimidation and the First Amendment rights of political speech. The Michigan Supreme Court, examining the broadness of the state law, raised concerns about its potential impact on political statements and misleading claims within election campaigns.
Former federal prosecutor Robert Mintz, a partner at McCarter & English, discusses the Trump defense in the New York Attorney General’s civil fraud trial against the former president. First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh, a professor at UCLA Law School, discusses the prosecution of two men accused of sending tens of thousands of robocalls containing false information to Black voters in Detroit prior to the 2020 election. June Grasso hosts.