Another rough day for Donnie as he loses his court appeal. He will now have to testify under oath. Can you imagine this pathological liar testifying under oath? He's a talking perjury case. Have fun Donnie!
Trump loses appeal in NY civil probe -- now he'll have to testify under oathA four-judge panel has ruled against former President Donald Trump in his attempt to get out of testifying under oath in a civil lawsuit filed by the New York State Attorney General.
Per The Associated Press, the panel upheld Manhattan Judge Arthur Engoron's ruling from earlier this year that enforced the New York AG's subpoena against the twice-impeached former president.
In their ruling, the judges shot down arguments made by Trump lawyers that he should not be forced to testify in a civil probe while a parallel criminal probe into the same instance was also ongoing.
"The existence of a criminal investigation does not preclude civil discovery of related facts, at which a party may exercise the privilege against self-incrimination," they wrote.
The investigation centers on whether the Trump Organization fraudulently misled investors and government officials about a wide range of its property values in an effort to minimize taxes.
Trump must answer questions under oath in the New York attorney general’s civil investigation into his business practices, a state appeals court ruled Thursday, rejecting his argument that he be excused from testifying because his answers could be used in a parallel criminal probe.
A four-judge panel in the appellate division of the state’s trial court upheld Judge Arthur Engoron’s Feb. 17 ruling, which enforced subpoenas requiring that Trump and his two eldest children — Ivanka and Donald Jr. — give deposition testimony in Attorney General Letitia James’ probe.
A message seeking comment was left with lawyers for the Trumps.
James lauded the ruling, which came just two weeks after the appellate panel heard oral arguments in the case. She tweeted that her investigation “will continue undeterred because no one is above the law.”
“Once again, the courts have ruled that Donald Trump must comply with our lawful investigation into his financial dealings,” James said in a written statement. “We will continue to follow the facts of this case and ensure that no one can evade the law.”
James has said her investigation has uncovered evidence Trump’s company, the Trump Organization, used “fraudulent or misleading” valuations of assets like golf courses and skyscrapers to get loans and tax benefits. Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. have both been executives in the Trump Organization and are among their father’s most trusted allies.
The appellate panel, in its ruling, described the investigation as focusing on whether the Trumps “committed persistent fraud in their financial practices and disclosures.”
Appellate Court Judge Rolando T. Acosta appeared to agree with that position, foreshadowing Thursday’s ruling as he questioned Futerfas from the bench.
Anything Trump says in a civil deposition in James’ investigation could be used against him in the criminal probe being overseen by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.
Last summer, spurred by evidence uncovered by James’ office, the DA’s office charged the Trump Organization and its longtime finance chief, Allen Weisselberg, with tax fraud, alleging he collected more than $1.7 million in off-the-books compensation. Weisselberg and the company have pleaded not guilty.
Thursday’s appellate court ruling was the latest in a flurry of legal activity involving Trump and the attorney general’s investigation in the last few weeks.
Last week, Trump paid $110,000 in fines and met several other conditions as he seeks to end a contempt of court order Engoron issued on April 25 after he was slow to respond to another subpoena from James seeking documents and other evidence.
On Monday, James’ office said it had subpoenaed Trump’s longtime executive assistant, Rhona Graff, and planned to question her under oath next week in the probe.
Since James’ investigation is civil in nature, she could end up bringing a lawsuit and seeking financial penalties against Trump or his company, or even a ban on them being involved in certain types of businesses
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS