In Which Trump Proves He Doesn't Know What "Big" Is

 It's behind a paywall:

In a post to Truth Social this Wednesday, Donald Trump pointed to an article published in the New York Law Journal that suggests the judge in Trump's civil fraud case in Manhattan may have misunderstood "the scope of the New York State Executive Law provision which he relied upon to call for such 'cancellation' and dissolution of the former president's LLCs."

The NY Law Journal article, I mean.  And that "journal" is not a law review.  The lead article at that link is that the "law is murky enough" that Trump's belated demand for a jury "warrant[s] litigation."  That's a statement almost any lawyer could make, if she didn't value her standing with the local judges.  Or just wanted to milk a client. A lot if issues “warrant litigation,” but that doesn’t mean the litigation effort is worthwhile. 

The website reads like Trumpian posturing to me, IOW. And it means that the article saying Judge Engoron may have "misunderstood" the law, is pretty much some lawyer’s opinion based on....what, exactly?

Law review articles have dubious value in judicial reasoning.  Even though they are well-researched and often written by law professors (who have the time to spend on such arcana), aside from creating the bewildering “Rule Against Perpetuities,” they seldom amount to much.  Indeed, the rare exceptions more than prove the rule.

The only case I know of where a law review article was significant to the case is Roe v Wade, where the majority opinion uses a law review article prominently to find the "right to privacy" announced by that decision that overrode state laws on abortion.  That reasoning was roundly criticized and finally rejected by Dobbs (wrongly, IMHLO), but relying on law review articles is dicey, at best.

A "law journal" article from a publication that is about New York practice and opinions from people with opinions?  

"The respected New York Law Journal writes that the “Dissolution Ordered in “‘People of the State of New York v. Trump’” Appears Unwarranted," he wrote.

"Wow, that’s BIG."

No.  It's a horse laugh. But I'm sure his lawyers can attach it to their appellate brief.

And I like Digby, but:

Trump, she continued, has "decided that stalking around and glowering like his mug shot will make his followers see him as defiant and courageous in facing down his accusers." And he's further decided that, "if he becomes president again there will be ample opportunities to regain his fortune."

Is Trump that delusional?  Probably.  I don't think the full scope of what's happened to him has sunk in yet.

And Trump is holding up well in the courtroom, too:

As reported by The Messenger's Adam Klasfeld, the former president "audibly groaned" when Engoron scolded one of his attorneys for purported "performative questioning" by reminding them that there is no jury during the current bench trial.

Shortly after this, reports Klasfeld, Trump could be heard "noisily... complaining about the judge's remarks throughout the questioning," although the reporter added that he could not hear Trump well enough to make out the nature of his complaints. 

But he's going back to Florida, which is probably for the best:

Sources told Marc Caputo and Adam Klasfeld of The Messenger on Wednesday that Trump will soon depart for Florida despite telling New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron he would attend the trial all week.

The sources said they believed Trump's trip to New York had been a success because he was able to amplify claims that the trial was unfair.

Which gave AG James a chance to take her shot:

With Trump gone, NY Attorney General Letitia James used the opportunity to respond to the disgraced ex-president's recent threats. "I will not be bullied, and so Mr. Trump is no longer here. The Donald Trump show is over. This was nothing more than a political stunt," James told reporters.

Trump really has no clue what's going on. The trial will continue for a month, maybe longer. No one is going to remember what he said about it for only two days. Although his attorneys seem to want to make it take longer:

While cross-examining Bender, Suarez went through a lengthy list of individual Trump properties and asked Bender about whether each one was listed at its proper value.

At one point, Engoron cut Suarez off and asked him how long it would take for him to go through all of the properties, and Suarez estimated that he would be able to wrap it up by the end of the day.

This drew an incredulous response from both Engoron and an attorney representing the New York Attorney General's Office, writes Klasfield, and Engoron instructed Suarez to start lumping properties together to speed things up.

When Suarez went right back to listing each item individually, reports Klasfeld, Engoron started "pounding the bench at one point and saying: 'This is ridiculous.'"

Who does that in a bench trial? I mean, I guess they want to increase their billables (I’ve seen lawyers do that in court), but why antagonize the judge and finder of fact?

It’s not like Trump is watching anymore…