Skip to content

Watch: NY Appellate Court Weighs Tossing Trump’s 34 Felony Counts, Threatens Sanctions for Prosecutors Over Bogus Case, Election Interference

Will appeals court overturn Trump verdict and hand him a massive October Surprise exposing lawfare and weaponized justice system?

Watch: NY Appellate Court Weighs Tossing Trump’s 34 Felony Counts,  Threatens Sanctions for Prosecutors Over Bogus Case, Election Interference Image Credit: TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty Images
SHARE
LIVE
gab

A New York appellate court reviewing the $355 million guilty verdict against former President Donald Trump on civil fraud charges is leaning towards tossing the case and possibly sanctioning prosecutors for bringing it forward, according to a law-savvy social media user.

Examining the appellate court’s handling of the case, X user “The Older Millennial” explained that the five judges were skeptical of prosecutors’ arguments, repeatedly asking for precedent on charges where no one was harmed and the supposed aggrieved parties stated no damages were incurred.

“The Trump fraud case went before the appellate court this week and by the time it was over, the closing arguments of the Democrat lawyers were just them begging not to get sanctioned,” said Older Millennial.

The X user described the appellate court judges ultimately told prosecutors, “I don’t even know if this is a case that should have been brought.”

“They added, ‘Y’all might need to be sanctioned for bringing this case in a malicious manner.'”

“One of the judges actually said, ‘I have come to believe that since a case like this has never been brought in the history of the country—not only New York—that you have only brought this case because the person was running for president, which would put you afoul of not only multiple regulations regarding the law, but would also run you afoul of electioneering interference,'” the X user noted.

According to Older Millennial, New York state prosecutors’ closing arguments essentially begged the court not to sanction them.

“Instead of arguing the value of their case, instead of arguing that ‘We should have been able to bring this case because of X and Y,” they actually just said, ‘We hope that the court will take into account that lawyers need to be able to bring cases like this without the threat of sanction.’ Basically, they were saying, ‘We hope you decide we’re not going to get in trouble for bringing this bullshit case.'”

The Older Millennial’s breakdown was shared by X owner Elon Musk.

Parts of the appellate court’s ongoing deliberations last month were also documented by The Militant.com:

A five-judge panel of New York’s Appellate Division heard Trump’s appeal. Appeals Judge David Friedman made it clear he didn’t see any crime. He asked if there had ever been a prosecution under this statute, “where the supposed victim has the ability and legal obligation to discover the allegedly misrepresented matters by conducting its own due diligence; where the supposed wrongdoer advised the supposed victim, through written disclaimers, to conduct his own due diligence … and where the victim never complained about any fraud.”

New York Deputy Solicitor General Judith Vale defended the conviction, claiming Trump had benefited by getting lower interest rates. But Friedman wasn’t impressed. He pointed out Trump would have received “exactly the same” interest rates, even if he had “a different net worth.”

Judge Peter Moulton said, “The immense penalty is troubling in this case.”

The appellate court’s skepticism over the case suggests there may be an “October Surprise” legal victory on the horizon for former President Trump that will spotlight Dems’ insidious efforts to weaponize the judicial system against him.



Get 40% OFF our fan-favorite drink mix Vitamin Mineral Fusion NOW at the Infowars Store!
SHARE
LIVE
gab