New York, once the financial capital of the free world, a city that epitomized the best of American ingenuity and capitalism, dealt itself...
New York, once the financial capital of the free world, a city that epitomized the best of American ingenuity and capitalism, dealt itself a fatal blow with last week’s verdict against President Trump that would have him pay in excess of $350 million simply for having politics deemed forbidden by a rogue judge acting out the shrieking orders of a vindictive Attorney General. It is a tragic indictment of the Empire State – and really, America’s ongoing political crisis overall – that arguably its proudest son and most prolific developer since Robert Moses would be cannibalized by the legal matrix of a state now defined by its shrinking population, unmanageable illegal alien crisis, and skyrocketing crime that complements its equally skyrocketing cost of living.
The powers in charge of the state are literally driving it to the ground. New York’s political and legal establishment are both among the most corrupt in the country – which makes Arthur Engoron and Letitia James rife for exploitation to carry out the marching orders of Merrick Garland and Joe Biden, who are bloodthirsty to persecute the man they perceive to be their greatest political threat.
The verdict against Donald Trump violates both the letter and spirit of the law in every possible sense. Rather than allowing the law to impartially lead to whatever result may follow, Engoron and James have weaponized New York’s fraud law, § 63(12), which is designed to protect against fraud where there are identifiable victims (of which none exist in the Trump case), to bring down a political opponent. Thus, rather than have the law dictate a remedy, they both have unilaterally decreed Trump an enemy for his political views ipso facto and are using the law as a cover to destroy him behind the proprieties of the justice system. This is an extremely dangerous formula: and exactly how persecutions of political enemies were conducted under Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong.
Moreover, if the law is weaponized with such brazen disregard for bedrock constitutional principles like due process and the presumption of innocence, which neither Engoron nor James so much as feigned to care about, it will fully deplete the public’s remaining faith in the possibility of fair and equitable justice.
To the extent the law has any authority in a democratic society, that authority entirely depends on the people’s confidence in the fair administration of justice by those given the authority to carry out its prerogative. There is simply no other source of authority.
Where the public loses its authority, the justice system loses its legitimacy – where any claim to legitimacy by resort to the people’s will is abandoned, the only means to enforce the law become illegitimate ones: namely, through force. This is the defining hallmark of a system that has traded the principles that made American liberty possible for a kind of tyranny recognizable in the banana republics to our South: such as Chavez’s Venezuela or Castro’s Cuba.
Beyond those devastating realities for our justice system, Engoron’s verdict would also mean the destruction of capitalism in New York State. It is obvious that neither Engoron nor James are thinking through the long-term ramifications of their political gambit, as neither one has any experience building a business or creating a legacy that will long outlast them. They both will be forgotten the minute they drop dead, perhaps even once they leave public office. President Trump, by sharp contrast, has achieved enormous, otherworldly success – in business and politics – and has managed to do it better than any American in living memory.
Because he has been so successful, the Engoron’s and James’ of the world feel threatened at a visceral level. Both lack the capacity to grasp that the American system, at least in its original constitution, was designed to incubate greatness of the likes of Donald Trump. Rather than being a roadblock for creativity and growth, as it is so often conceptualized today, the law was originally intended to limit the harmful effects a bloated government, teeming with lawyers and bureaucrats, would have on the free market. That is it.
Alas, James and Engoron believe the law is supposed to prevent great business leaders from carrying out their visions, which is the diametric opposite of what the American system was structured to be Even worse, they believe the justice system, rather than being a check on government overreach, was actually designed to check the bold and trailblazing visions of great men in the private sector, like Donald Trump, from realizing their dreams. In short, they have replaced the spirit of free enterprise that once guided American law with the spirit of communism — and we all bear witness to those horrific consequences.
In this sense, Engoron and James believe the law is designed to limit greatness, rather than incubate the conditions by protecting those timeless principles that would allow such greatness to flourish in the first place. This is quite striking, especially since Engoron at the start of his opinion reiterates that New York is the financial capital of the world: “The City’s fabled Wall Street is synonymous with capital formation, investing, trading, lending, and borrowing.” The object of the law, then – and specifically, the anti-fraud law pretextually implicated in this decision – rather than being an impediment to those things, is meant to preserve the city’s “fabled” reputation for free enterprise.
But the practical effect of the decision, if allowed to take effect, will unquestionably destroy capitalism in New York, a city struggling mightily already to retain business, for good.
The reasons for this are so obvious they do not even need to be spelled out: one, a statute designed to remedy the victims of fraud has been weaponized to punish a businessman for comporting himself over decades in a manner that was completely faithful with the law. There were no victims at all in the course of Donald Trump’s dealings with any bank or the state of New York, ever. The lender in question – Deutsche Bank – was repaid in spades for providing loans to President Trump’s highly lucrative businesses. Evidence for this is found in the fact that not only did the lender not join as a plaintiff in the lawsuit, but it also never once filed a lawsuit against President Trump for its alleged losses, nor did it so much complain to him – again, over decades – at any time for conducting business in a way even remotely approximating the sort of fraudulent conduct alleged by James. It is so obvious that neither James nor Engoron live in the real world, or have any experience doing business whatsoever, let alone in a market as cutthroat as New York’s once robust real estate climate. If they did, they would see just how absurd their legal chicaneries are, too stupid to be believed if the debacle were not actually happening in real time.
Otherwise, if either one did, they would immediately understand how remarkable it is for a developer to sustain an amiable business relationship with a lender for as long as President Trump did – and still does – with Deutsche Bank. And that does not even get into the fact that the developer in question is Donald John Trump, the most scrutinized and controversial real estate developer in the world, carrying out some of the most high-profile deals anywhere and longer than virtually anyone.
Two, arguably the even more disastrous implication of the decision, something that risks getting belied by all the discussion of New York business fraud law, is the actual reason for this lawsuit. Letitia James campaigned on a platform of “getting” Donald Trump. What she wanted to “get” out of him was unclear all throughout the campaign and remained foggy even months into her tenure as Attorney General. All the public knew was that her politics were not aligned with those of the 45th President. And hence, the need to exact political revenge, no matter the cost – even if it meant bringing down America’s system of free enterprise.
James, much like Fani Willis in Georgia, is no legal or constitutional mastermind: far from it. She is an obedient rule follower who carries out the orders of her master – namely, Biden’s weaponized Justice Department – like a good little operator. That is all she can ever be. That is why she was handpicked by the powers that be.
In that sense, she is no different from Willis, Alvin Bragg, or any other district attorney or special prosecutor selected to wage judicial warfare against the leading presidential candidate. She has no convictions that guide her, other than envy and rage – which drive her motives, something that is so apparent to anyone with any semblance of commonsense left. She has no understanding of America’s justice system, its Constitution, and what the rule of law historically and actually means. If she is lucky enough to be able to spell “due process of law” without stammering, she most definitely cannot define it. If she could, she would never be a party to this charade. She, much like Bragg and Willis, almost certainly does not write her own decisions herself, even though she enriches herself, quite handsomely, at the public’s expense for the responsibilities of the office in which that requirement was once a bare-minimum threshold for holding the post.
James believes the universe boils down to her own exceptionally close minded view now playing out in the court system: one that, no matter how much training, would never be able to get in the same ballpark of Donald Trump’s grand visions. These are visions that led to the developments of such modern marvels as Trump Tower, Mar-a-Lago, and Bedminster Golf Club. Being that she is a modern lawyer indoctrinated by the corrupt New York State judicial system, she thinks the object of the law is not as it was designed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, to limit the hand of a tyrannical government – but rather, to quash the possibility of freedom and liberty – specifically the freedom to speak and liberty to pursue one’s dreams without hindrance. Specifically, in her case, it is to punish Donald Trump — for what, exactly? Rebuilding New York from near desolation? Creating a world renown brand from scratch? Winning the presidency? Achieving the American dream for himself and his family? For being a successful white man in an age that actively seeks to destroy the towering achievements of Western civilization? What?
Neither Engoron or James have any appreciation for the value of the dollar: how much toil it requires, over decades, to earn the kind of money they now seek to rob from President Trump in one fell swoop. Nor, more broadly, do they grasp the logical implications of this judgment for business in New York, which will certainly be a chilling effect (to put it mildly), or their fellow Bolsheviks in the legal profession.
Despite plunging headlong into socialism, New York’s lawyers, the vast majority of them unwitting spiritual communists (if not self-proclaimed in fact), nevertheless take advantage of the Big Apple’s bustling business environment – indeed, this is what allows New York lawyers to make so much money in the first place. But if they sign onto suicidal judgments like the one Engoron just handed down against President Trump’s businesses, indirectly it will be the death knell for their own profession. A trickle that will open the dam, certain to put the dagger to the heart of capitalism in the Empire State.
Without the ability to commence free enterprise unencumbered by the law, it will only accelerate the bloodletting of business out of New York. What business would ever want to risk continuing to operate in a state that could arbitrarily punish it because one of its executives once said something that the state’s dimwitted attorney general found offensive?
“Well, it will only apply to Donald Trump!” those defending what is currently unfolding in the court system might irresponsibly and blithely respond.
Yeah, ok.
With the extreme precedent now being set, the floodgates have been unleashed to allow the law to be conveniently weaponized against any and all political opponents deemed “enemies of the state.” Those familiar with history know that radical movements have no limiting principle: they are invariably emboldened by each political prosecution to the point until they eat their own.
During the French Revolution, Robespierre, who began as the persecutor, perished by the guillotine.
May that be a harrowing reminder for those who think they can remain silent in the face of blatant political persecution without incurring its harmful effects — for they are unfortunately bound to be next on the chopping block, unless and until they put their foot down, God willing before it is too late.
No comments