CONFIRMED: Spy Visited Biden White House

A new report at the Gateway Pundit explains how the judge in President Donald Trump’s civil case in New York, in which Attorney General Letitia James has claimed his properties have values other than what he said, admitted his own emotions affect his decisions.

It was during a speech a few years ago Arthur Engoron said, “Am I following the law or am I making the law?…I’m an impartial referee but it’s impossible for me to factor out my own emotions.”

A longer video:

The Gateway Pundit report noted that Engoron, a “leftist,” “brags about how he can flip jury verdicts based on emotion.”

The report said the video raises “alarm bells.”

The case involves claims by James, who campaigned for public office on a “get Trump” ideology, that President Trump inflated the values of his properties.

The case so far has, however, produced no evidence that anyone was harmed, that any loan was unpaid, or anything of the kind. And, in fact, real estate professionals have guffawed at James’ wild claim that Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in worth only $18 million.

The report called James’ legal action “another junk lawsuit hurled at him by Democrats.”

The judge, who was smirking and smiling for cameras as the case opened in the courtroom this week, had given a college lecture in 2015.

He said he makes decisions based on emotions – and then he uses a legal “tool” to issue a “judgment notwithstanding the verdict” when he wants to overturn a jury’s decision.

Trump’s trial actually has no jury and is before the judge alone, giving him much more latitude in basing a decision on his emotions.

On video, he says, “I’m going to say something controversial even though I know I’m being taped: juries get it wrong a lot (chuckling). That’s my own opinion. I only do civil trials…but I’ve had situations like oh my Heaven’s sake how could they have thought that? I have a tool that I can deal with that: it’s called jury … judgment notwithstanding the verdict. I can say there is no possible way a reasonable jury could have reached that conclusion.”

He continued, “Am I following the law or am I making the law?…I’m an impartial referee but it’s impossible for me to factor out my own emotions.”

A dispute also has arisen in the case as lawyers revealed that statute of limitations actually eliminates much of James’ case, yet Engoron hasn’t acknowledged that yet.

Trump himself said, “Why are we trying a case that the appellate division of New York state has just ruled recently that we won 80% of our case and this judge refuses to acknowledge the ruling, which is plain for all to see.”

via wnd

Latest Articles