The Trump legal team lost a major motion in San Diego that could have political consequences when U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel refused to move the planned November 28th trial date in the Trump University fraud case. Trump attorney Daniel Petrocelli wanted the trial moved to January 2. Petrocelli argued that it was his not Trump’s schedule in November that needed to be accommodated due to another trial.
You will recall Judge Curiel from the infamous attack by Trump on his Mexican heritage, even though he was born in the United States.
The denial of the five-week delay is by no means unexpected. With a trial this close, many judges look with disfavor on motions for new trial dates, particularly when opposed by the other party. The judge had already accommodated the presidential election in delaying a trial.The class action has now been six years in the making.
The fraud case is actually quite interesting. The claims are based primarily on alleged assurances or indications that Trump University was an accredited university, that Trump handpicked top experts in the field to teach them, and they would receive a year of mentoring. However, the case does raise the long-standing warning of caveat emptor (“buyer beware”) for consumer to separate puffery from promises in such arrangements. Many were sold after watching what was clearly an infomercial. The Trump team insists that these students were unsuccessful due to their own failings and many actually gave the course high marks for satisfaction. I have long been a critic of such commercial “educational” products, even with accredited online universities. Students often pay huge amounts and receive sub par courses or educations. While the base course only lasted 3 days and cost $1,500, the gold or elite mentored courses could go as high as a shocking $35,000.
Trump University was incorporated in 2004 and Donald Trump owned 93% of the company. Notably, however,
in June 2010, “Trump University” dropped the educational reference and changed its name to “The Trump Entrepreneur Initiative.” It then shutdown in 2010.
I agree with Judge Curiel that there is enough to go to trial despite the motions by the Trump team to the contrary. A hearing is now planned for jury instruction just two days after the presidential election. That raises some interesting issues. Trump would be called to testify, but he could be elected president on November 8th and inaugurated on January 20th. The trial would occur in the middle of those dates when he would normally be putting together a cabinet and laying the foundation for his new administration. Testifying in a fraud trial (as one of the alleged defrauding agents) is a brutal task and usually requires considerable preparation by such a party. What is interesting is that a trial on January 2 would seem to be even worse timing for Trump in putting the trial right at the very doorstep of his possible inauguration.
The trial date now would seem set in concrete . . . it is everything else remains unpredictable.
“I’m certainly no Clinton supporter but I do feel The Donald could use a little more tact in his approach to situations he faces.”
Absolutely. He needs the Secret Service to tackle him while he counts to 10 before responding. He is his own worst enemy at times. On the one hand, he hired and promoted women and minorities into the upper echelons of his business at a time when very few did. On the other hand…that mouth!!! Step away from Twitter! He is certainly no slick, oily politician. You pretty much know what you’re going to get with Trump.
Every student of that so called University needs to chime in.
Years back there was a woman named Leona Helmsley. During her trial she made some pretty inflammatory remarks(Taxes are for the Little people). If I remember right this irritated a judge on her case. I think what I am saying is that maybe if Mr. Trump had approached this judge with his hat in his hand, maybe the judge would have been a little more lenient towards Mr. Trumps situation. I’m certainly no Clinton supporter but I do feel The Donald could use a little more tact in his approach to situations he faces.
It’s funny how Hillary Clinton broke the law (again) with her Email Gate, and her aides are taking the 5th, meanwhile Trump is getting sued for an online educational course not making everyone a millionaire.
I don’t know anything about the case, other than the course got mostly positive reviews. Enough that it does not seem to have been a scam. Instead of postponing the trial, it would have been better to have sped it up and gotten it over with years ago. No matter what, it will interfere with the election regardless of whether he wins or loses in court.
I am curious how the case turns out. Maybe Trump should start wiping his servers with Bleach Bit. There is a precedent for that to be allowed, after all.
Meanwhile, the Clinton Foundation just had another $250,000/head fundraiser, in spite of the pay-to-play allegations. But it’ll be the last one! Swear!
An animus, not a animus.
Bam Bam-
One more comment, quickly, before my latest continuance motion is denied.
You claim bias by the Court because the Court failed to continue the trial to accommodate Trump. But, per the newspapers, Trump never asked to move the trial date to accommodate Trump. The continuance was sought to accommodate Petrocelli’s schedule, not Trump’s schedule. While Trump presumably gave his blessing to the motion to continue, that motion was not filed because Trump wanted the trial moved to accommodate Trump’s schedule. Petrocelli wanted the trial moved because he has another trial. Trump wanted the trial moved to possibly avoid losing Petrocelli as his trial attorney. This continuance motion had NOTHING to do with the fact that Trump is running for President. It as based on a conflict in Petrocelli’s schedule. And Petrocelli can go file a motion to move the trial in his other case.
But please, carry on. You are not familiar with the practices of federal judges in SoCal and this Judge in particular, haven’t read the motion for continuance or the opposition or any written ruling issued on the motion, and have not focused on the basis for the motion for continuance. If you are able to determine that the Judge is “biased” against Trump under these circumstances, based on the fact that continuance motion was denied, you have powers of discernment that are far beyond mine.
You are the one claiming powers of discernment as to what I have read, with what I am familiar and unfamiliar, with the extent of my knowledge regarding this judge, in which courts I practice, etc. You are the one wearing the Karnac hat, not me. Continue on. Which lottery numbers shall I play? You are the one making a fool of yourself but supposing to know the knowledge and experience possessed by others. This is a blog for those who wish to state their opinions. You, obviously, don’t have the capability to ascertain what I, or anyone else contributing, for that matter, know or don’t know. I stand by my opinion that this judge, whose credibility and character were both questioned and belittled by Trump, is in no way, whatsoever, capable of being an unbiased and impartial judge. There. Not such a difficult concept to grasp. If you don’t get that, no amount of convincing will suffice. This judge has a animus against Trump, and I highly suspect that a motion requesting permission to withdraw as counsel for Trump would also be summarily denied. If not, I suspect that a short and insignificant two week window would be granted to alternate counsel, which would not be enough time for new counsel to get up to speed. Either way, it is unfair to Trump, who is feeling the wrath of a Hispanic judge, whose fitness, temperament and powers of impartiality, due to his heritage and lineage, have been questioned on the world’s stage.
That certainly is not the judge’s fault that Trump see’s a problem with this particular federal judge’s
ethnicity and then has the unmitigated gall to publicly insult and demean him. The issue is not about
the judge as in all likelihood, the judge did not request this specific case, it simply fell within his jurisdiction
and wound up on his court docket. Additionally, Mr. Trump has a long record of being particularly
litigious in his own right and is very adept at getting various courts to grant lengthy trial continuances
on his behalf. These continuance’s are nothing more than a ploy to wear down the plaintiff to the
point to where they will agree to settle out of court, with of course, no public admission of guilt on
Mr. Trump’s part. The problem is not Judge Curiel, the problem is of Mr. Trump’s own making, of which
I will agree, was further exacerbated by his unsolicited and unwarranted negative and bigoted comments
about a federal judge, one who was going to be trying his case, no less. Never-the-less, I am confident
Mr. Trump will be given a fair hearing insomuch as he is willing to remain civil in a federal court of law.
There was no doubt this judge wasn’t going to cooperate. A Clinton appointee.
The judge postponed the trial until after the election. The case has been six years in the making. So, how is this judge working against Trump. Trump has a legal arsenal that is more experienced, more knowledgeable, and more seasoned than any judge, anywhere, at anytime. And some lapdogs have the hypocrisy to infer and in fact state that Trump is getting a short end of some stick here. That goes to illustrate just how mindless Trump supporters/defenders are. Half of America, shameful.
The charges against Trump’s former university sounds like a variation on El Ron Hubbard’s college of hubris knowledge and Barber technology.
Dr. Jill Stein says Trump has cognitive problems and memory problems.
Jill Stein is an internist who retired 10 years ago. She’s never met Trump.
Is that a fact? Stein is probably more competent that the quacks he uses.
Fist of all….I’m SHOCKED that JT posted anything about Trump and his many many legal problems over the years. That being said and calling a spade a spade as some people say……If you loved former acting President Cheney, you will love acting President Mike Pence…….Be careful of what you wish for…..
Pence might want to become a vp like Cheney. The problem for Pence is that he is not all that bright.
he is not all that bright.
You’re not in a position to criticize anyone else’s intelligence.
Yes, one can criticize can criticize the homophobic dolt, Pence. He is no Dick Cheney although he claims him as a roll model. Cheney might be evil but is not a dumb homophobe. Something tells me his extremism will not play well in the debate.
Whether he is “bright” or not, he lacks principle and character. He wobbled through a milquetoast “endorsement” of Cruz which probably did more harm than good in its faint praise, then jumped the net to sell his services to Trump for the VP slot. A less prepossessing figure I cannot imagine. We’d be little better of with Pence than with Trump. A boat with a hole in it is arguably no boat at all, but a piece of driftwood.
I’m a 77-year old authentic spastic [UCLA ’62; USC ’68]] who gave up dreams of learning the TANGO. Your screen name reignites old hopes. Doing a SLAM DUNK is the other.
Best,
Trump goes to trial and Cankles skates.
The judge gave Trump a gift when he previously postponed the trial until after the election. We may all rue that decision quite soon. Trump bribed officials in Texas and Florida (and other states?) to avoid trials at all and for a few thousands avoided claims in the $millions. He’s a cesspit.
We may all rue that decision quite soon
If you mean Trump may win the election, you couldn’t be farther from the truth.
This is not an election, appearances to the contrary. This is the coronation of an American queen, part of an American dynasty. It has been scheduled to take place and it is going to take place.
In the meantime, there is nothing perceived as wrong with the media selling this at enormous profit as an election and even a close election at that. After all, they deserve to make back some of the money they spent nurturing and maintaining one of the most gullible citizenry in the world.
Trump bribed officials in Texas and Florida (and other states?) to avoid trials at all
Claudia’s a convicted pedophile.
See how easy that is?
Convictions of pedophilia are documented.