According to Mediaite, former President Donald Trump expressed his dissatisfaction with the absence of a jury in his fraud case, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, during a press interaction outside a New York courtroom. Trump asserted that the lack of a jury in this case marked “the beginning of communism,” suggesting a conspiracy to undermine his chances of winning the 2024 presidential election.
Trump argued that if he had been granted a jury trial, he believed he would easily prevail in the case. He criticized the handling of his legal defense but dismissed claims that procedural errors were responsible for the absence of a jury, instead citing Statute 63(12) as the reason for this unique situation. He claimed this statute, which pertains to consumer fraud, had never been applied in this manner before.
In Trump’s view, the case led by Letitia James, whom he criticized as incompetent, was a “witch hunt” and a tool for forcing businesses out of the state while crime rates surged. He insinuated that his strong polling numbers against President Joe Biden contributed to the ongoing legal actions against him and suggested collusion between state prosecutors and the White House.
Trump portrayed the trial as an unprecedented disgrace, alleging that it had never happened before. He defended his financial dealings, emphasizing that he had repaid loans in full and on time, and accused Letitia James of pursuing the case for political gain.
This witch hunt that’s going on using Statute 63(12) — which -is a consumer fraud statute, which may be unconstitutional — Doesn’t allow me a jury, doesn’t allow me anything. We have a prosecutor, Letitia James, who’s incompetent, what she’s doing to our state, forcing companies out by the thousands, Forcing people out. Forcing companies out by the thousands while crime and violent crime in particular, runs rampant. So this witch hunt does not allow me to do it.
A lot of people say, oh, that can’t be possible, somebody didn’t check a box. That’s nothing to do with it. Under 63(12), you are not entitled to a jury. It’s the first time it’s ever been used for a purpose like this. Never been used. They used it on me. The former president, the leading candidate. I’m leading Joe Biden by a lot, which is probably why this is still happening. No probably, it’s definitely. They’re Coordinating with Washington, 100%. But without that, do none of these cases would be going on. They’ve weaponized justice in our country. This trial is a disgrace. Never happened, a thing like this has never happened before. And it is simply – I put it in financial statements with a disclaimer. In other words, don’t even bother reading them, to the banks.
I borrowed money on leverage. I borrowed money on a building or something. Maybe a different thing. I borrowed the money. I paid back the money in full, 100%. There were no defaults. There were no letters of reprimand. The banks were extremely happy and in many cases I gave the money back early. And then I got sued years later, by this horrible attorney general, this woman that ran for governor and failed. You know, she did this because she was running for governor and then she ran and she failed. She had no balls and they forced her out. She came back and she became Attorney General again. And we got stuck with it.
So she brought the case under the statute that had never been used for a thing like this before, ever. We’re not entitled to a jury. Because if I had a jury, even though it’s in New York and I think I’d be fine with New York. But if I had a jury, we’d win this case very easily, but I don’t have a jury. And you see, what’s happening. This is a railroading. And it’s the beginning of communism in our country. This is the beginning of communism.
In conclusion, Trump’s comments outside the courtroom painted his legal situation as an unjust, politically motivated attack on him, and he used the absence of a jury as evidence of a broader conspiracy against him and the country.
