Image 01 Image 03

Trump Heading to Trial Over Trump University Fraud Charges

Trump Heading to Trial Over Trump University Fraud Charges

The Republican frontrunner’s legal woes

Hillary Clinton is not the only presidential contender muddling through legal battles this election season. An upcoming trial scheduled for May 6 could pull Donald Trump off the campaign trail.

Listed as a witness by both sides of the bench, Trump will likely be required to testify in a trial over the now defunct Trump University which has been accused of fraud.

Yahoo News reported:

Here’s a part of the political calendar that nobody in the Republican Party seems to have noticed: This spring, just as the GOP nomination battle enters its final phase, frontrunner Donald Trump could be forced to take time out for some unwanted personal business: He’s due to take the witness stand in a federal courtroom in San Diego, where he is being accused of running a financial fraud.

In court filings last Friday, lawyers for both sides in a long-running civil lawsuit over the now defunct Trump University named Trump on their witness lists. That makes it all but certain that the reality-show star and international businessman will be forced to be grilled under oath over allegations in the lawsuit that he engaged in deceptive trade practices and scammed thousands of students who enrolled in his “university” courses in response to promises he would make them rich in the real estate market.

Although the case has been winding its way through the courts for the past five years — and Trump has denied all wrongdoing — the final pretrial conference is now slated for May 6, according to the latest pleadings in the case. No trial date has been set, but the judge has indicated his interest in moving the case forward, the pleadings show.

Though Trump University didn’t issue degrees, the real estate seminar series didn’t live up to the advertisement’s guarantees, say plaintiffs, which include New York’s Attorney General. The Week reports:

While it didn’t grant degrees or have a campus, Trump University charged students expensive rates for what critics deemed “useless” real estate seminars. “I really felt stupid that I was scammed by Trump. I thought that he was really legit,” student Bob Guillo told The Washington Post after putting $34,995 on his American Express card — only to walk away with meaningless certificates of completion and a photo of him with a life-size picture of Trump.

Should he be required to testify in May, Trump will have to dial back campaigning at the worst of times. Nebraska, California, West Virginia, Oregon, and Washington have primaries in May and June.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


He’s facing a fraud suit in San Diego.

He’s a monumental and constant liar.

And he is a tyrant who’ll be a MUCH worse tyrant if he every gains the power of ANY elective office.

People need to wake up.

    Milwaukee in reply to Ragspierre. | February 24, 2016 at 5:27 pm

    Hey Ragspierre, you know any minute now Gerry Bart will come on and explain why T-Rumph is a Winner who can Win!

    Greg Bert will explain why you have it all wrong, people were lying about Trumph which is why is seems like he is lying but he is really Right because only Donald can beat Hilary. Or maybe it’s Craig Brat. What is that guys name? Y’know, the one who KNOWS Donald is like the chosen one. Any chance he’ll get a cell near Madoff?

“Hillary Clinton is not the only presidential contender muddling through legal battles this election season.”

Lets see you have a 5 year old civil case vs the FBI investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

And they both are muddling through legal battles?

Just a hit piece on Trump. I am sure the first of many!

    Ragspierre in reply to Common Sense. | February 24, 2016 at 4:54 pm

    “Lets see you have a 5 year old civil case vs the FBI investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

    No. You have a years-old (very common in federal courts) civil fraud case AND a bunch of THUS-FAR uncharged criminal causes against Hellary.

    You have TWO people who should not be considered viable candidates for POTUS, both of them Collectivist thugs. Just different in their approaches.

    Of course it’s a hit piece; the writer supports a Trump contender.

    Since when is a “witness” compelled to testify if they are a defendant? Since never.

Things that don’t matter to Trump supporters:
5)Authenticity (c’mon, that hair is worse than Hillary’s)

I could go on, but it’s almost happy hour. And I’ve got better things to do than to converse with the “poorly educated”. To you guys, Trump could kill 100 puppies, yet you would extol about how they were all chihuahuas anyways.

    A-Ranting He Will Gooo, A-Ranting He Will Gooo…

    High-Ho The Derry-O, A Ranting He Will Gooo…

    Trying to start a flame war ain’t cya, Kondor77?


    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Kondor77. | February 25, 2016 at 12:34 am

    Hillary and humpatrump are about the same age. To be fair, Hillary looks better for her age than humpie does. But that’s always been true, no matter their ages, because he’s one of the ugliest SOBs I’ve ever seen. Hillary’s never been a raving beauty, but the hump is just downright homely and there’s no fixing ugly when it’s THAT ugly. But plastic surgery on his mouth and a haircut MIGHT be a mildly successful start.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Kondor77. | February 25, 2016 at 12:43 am

    6). Shooting innocent people in the middle of Fifth Avenue
    7). Draft dodging

conservative tarheel | February 24, 2016 at 5:33 pm

need more popcorn ….

So… We’ve gotten to the gritty part of the election cycle where we start digging up all sorts of things about the candidates?

Awesome. Does this also mean we’ll get to hear more about the FEC going after Cruz for his possible illegal campaign funding? I mean, I haven’t read about it on this website, but I look forward to reading more about it here.

You’ve got to give it to Trump. He’s the only one who seems to actually be putting America first. He’s not a career politician. He’s not someone that is going to lie his way around policies in order to not be held accountable. He puts his money where his mouth is. And yes, he has a big mouth. I’d rather have him than the notorious flip-flops that sway with the wind and do what is politically expedient than actually try to do what’s best for this country.

Sorry, I know this comment isn’t “popular” around here, but you do have to realize that a large part of the Republican Party (and country) like what he is saying, how he is saying it, and are supporting him against establishment politics.

    Milhouse in reply to Mr. Izz. | February 24, 2016 at 8:41 pm

    Does this also mean we’ll get to hear more about the FEC going after Cruz for his possible illegal campaign funding?

    For his what? You can’t just make things up, you know.

    Sneaky Pete in reply to Mr. Izz. | February 25, 2016 at 10:21 am

    “seems to” is the operative phrase.

    Only one thing is “first” to Trump.

As to Der Donald NOT lying…

He lies constantly. Yuuuugely.

MOST of his business dealings involve lies, BTW. Or corruption. Or both. New York City values. Atlantic City mob ties. Really. Wake up.

As to your delusions about Cruz and campaign funding, don’t hold your breath. You won’t see anything because there isn’t anything.

All the sore losers from yesterday out in force today. I’m sure Mr. Trump is looking forward to this matter finally being put to rest.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 24, 2016 at 6:10 pm

    On the subject of sore loooosers, lies, fraud, and legal bullshit…

    Has Donald Ducks filed all those legal challenges in Iowa yet?

    Anything on his thuggish threats against Cruz, I mean in the world of real law? No? Just more lies, huh.

    Well, it’s what he does…

      No need for Trump to sue. Cruz KEEPS LOSING. Three third place finishes in a row. Plus there are already three lawsuits against Cruz and his NBC status already pending in Texas, New York, and Illinois.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | February 25, 2016 at 9:42 am

        But where is Donald Ducks’ suit, Gaghdad Bob? OR any of them…???

        BTW, give us you prediction on the suits pending now in Texas, Illinois, and anywhere else some moron filed.

        C’mon, Mr. Lying SOS, step up….

    Milhouse in reply to Gary Britt. | February 24, 2016 at 9:13 pm

    Put to rest?! The fraud case seems iron-clad. There really isn’t any way to defend this fake “university’s” business practices, except by claiming that suckers deserve to be fleeced. Which, of course, is your Donald’s guiding principle in life, and you are simply one of the latest batch of suckers.

    Nor is there any way to defend the threats he made against the lead plaintiff to get her to withdraw. There is very little that is more despicable than using the threat of lawsuits as a weapon. Barratry used to be a common law crime, and still is in some states. Trump should be charged with it.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Gary Britt. | February 25, 2016 at 12:49 am

    Put to rest? Don’t hold your breath. It’s gonna be like leprosy. 🙂

scorched earth….and william is a proud participant

Do his supporters care? Nope!

Considering the treason of the current president and the felonies and treason of the current the democrat frontrunner, who cares about this except the boehner, ryan, prebus and mcconnell subspecies of cockroaches?

    Treason?! That isn’t a term you can just sling around casually, especially in a legal context. It has a specific definition, and there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that either one of them has committed it.

      david7134 in reply to Milhouse. | February 24, 2016 at 10:04 pm

      Treason, giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Yes, that sums up Obama’s actions very well. In fact, Obama makes Benedict Arnold look good.

        Milhouse in reply to david7134. | February 24, 2016 at 10:17 pm

        Bzzzt. Thanks for playing. That is not the definition of treason.

          Constitution sez: Milhouse is ignorant.

          Section 110 of Article III. of the Constitution of the United States, it is declared that: “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

          Iran, Cuba, sending guns to drug cartels. Sounds like aid and comfort to anyone with a brain.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | February 25, 2016 at 8:47 pm

          Read your own quote, idiot. It doesn’t say what you said. Giving the enemy aid and comfort is not treason.

          Oh, and neither Cuba nor the drug cartels are enemies of the USA.

          Also, “section 110”?! Just how long do you think the whole constitution is?

      Logan1 in reply to Milhouse. | February 28, 2016 at 5:58 pm

      For some people, evidence is not proof positive when lacking in knowledge about the wrongdoings or responds with a long gibberish answer to justify the means. Remember, no indictment is not, not guilty just as much as an indictment is to guilty.

      With that said, I am providing the following links to corroborate my comment above.

      The 1st link is to a 30 page Interim Report in .PDF file format:

      This next link is to the location where publicly posted Interim report and other information sources,

      Impressive list of participating members for this Commission:

      * Roger Aronoff (Editor, Accuracy in Media)
      * Capt. Larry Bailey, (SEAL), USN (Ret.)
      * Lt. Col. Kenneth Benway, U.S.Army Special Forces (Retired)
      * Col. Dick Brauer Jr., USAF (Ret.)
      * Lt. Col. Dennis B. Haney, USAF (Ret.)
      * B/Gen. Charles Jones, USAF (Ret.)
      * Clare Lopez, former CIA officer
      * Admiral James Lyons (Ret.)
      * General Thomas McInerney (Ret.)
      * Col. Wayne Morris USMC (Ret.)
      * Kevin Shipp, former CIA officer
      * General Paul Vallely (Ret.)
      * Former Congressman and Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Allen West

      Advisory Members

      * Steve Emerson, Executive Director, Investigative Project on Terrorism

      * Pete Hoekstra, Senior Fellow, Investigative Project on Terrorism

Levin lays out a very pretty case, including history, showing that Rubio is the liar on immigration.

He incidentally screws the oft told lie Bierhall Britt tells about there being no difference between Rubio and Cruz.

T-rump (fraudster, NYC) would have you believe he’s a “changeling”. He’s not. He’s just a liar.

I wonder if these lawsuits will be filed against all universities where performance is not guaranteed and varies with individual merit. This could be a lucrative, untapped market for school bus chasers.

    Milhouse in reply to n.n. | February 24, 2016 at 9:40 pm

    This was not a legitimate university. It was a course in real estate investment that traded on Trump’s name and reputation, purporting to offer his hand-picked instructors teaching his tried-and-proven methods, when in fact it did no such thing. Here’s a summary.

    But there have in fact been suits against real universities that promised results they could not deliver, and there will be more.

      Ragspierre in reply to Milhouse. | February 24, 2016 at 9:56 pm

      Hell, it wasn’t even an legitimate college…or stinking trade school.

      A “university” is a collection of colleges. Jeebus…!!!

      Hillsdale only calls itself a “college”, which is totally justified.

      “Trump University” was a fraud from the git….

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Milhouse. | February 25, 2016 at 1:23 am

      A guy named Garten, exec. VP of the Trump Organization, is quoted from your NR link:

      ‘The courses, he says, were “done in a first-class manner, and the materials were high-quality and first-rate.”’

      Of course I believe NR that this Garten guy said this, but WHO does Garten sound exactly like? LOL! King of the world’s yugest and vaguest superlatives!

And here

though the Defendant promised ‘Trump University’, he delivered neither Donald Trump nor a university.

a “university” bearing his name, which he marketed as being on a par with Wharton Business School.

Mr Cohen said he would not have signed up for the course if he had known that the mogul had no “meaningful role” in selecting the instructors.

students were misled into believing they were attending a bona fide academic institution by the use of a university-like seal on much of its promotional material.

instructors sometimes went even further claiming that a Trump degree is a “bit of a college degree” and that Trump University offered “graduate programmes, post graduate programmes (and doctorate) programs”.

JimMtnViewCaUSA | February 24, 2016 at 11:35 pm

OK. He’s the defendant.

Does this mean the millions of students with worthless degrees in “Womyn’s Studies” and “Social Justice” can sue the universities and default on the government loans?

    Milhouse in reply to Suzie. | February 25, 2016 at 8:57 pm

    Nope. They attended genuine universities, and no misrepresentations were made to them. They chose to study useless subjects, but they were taught those subjects professionally and competently (to the extent that such a thing is possible), and are well-equipped to do whatever those subjects can enable anyone to do. The Trump equivalent would have them watch a slideshow on how to spell “womyn” and “herstory”, an hour on all the different pronouns trans-people use, and a photo session with a cardboard image of Gloria Steinem.

What I don’t understand is why weren’t there criminal charges filed? The judge in the San Diego case has come within a whisker of accusing Trump of committing wire fraud and mail fraud in several of his rulings. Here’s just one example.

“…In response, Plaintiff argues the investigations are potentially probative of Trump’s knowledge and intent to defraud. (Dkt. No. 17 at 2.) The Court agrees. Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges Defendant committed mail and wire fraud as predicate acts of racketeering under RICO. (Compl. ¶¶ 84(a)-(b).) A claim for violation of the mail fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, requires a showing that “(1) defendant devised a scheme or artifice to defraud; (2) defendant used the mails in furtherance of the scheme; and (3) defendant did so with the specific intent to deceive or defraud.” Sun Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Dierdorff, 825 F.2d 187, 195 (9th Cir. 1987) (citing Schreiber Distributing Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co., Inc., 806 F.2d 1393, 1399 (9th Cir. 1986)). The gravamen of a mail fraud claim is the “scheme to defraud.” Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indem. Co., 553 U.S. 639, 647 (2008)…”

But I don’t see how it’s possible that Trump didn’t commit mail or wire fraud. He made specific statements in letters and other promotional materials that he knew were not true. In particular, comments about his intimate involvement in setting up the so-called university, designing the curriculum, and hand picking the instructors. In the promotional materials Trump likened attending his university as an opportunity similar to his TV show “The Apprentice” saying students would effectively be gaining real estate secrets from Trump himself.

Yet he’s admitted in court that none of what he said in those promotional materials (literally; they have video of him saying some of these things about his deep personal involvement)

Premature post.

To continue, none of those claims he made in those promotional materials were remotely true. He was completely uninvolved in everything. He never participated or interacted with the students (despite the fact the instructors would say otherwise, such as how Trump “often drops in”), in fact he had no idea what they even taught at Trump “University,” if anything, or if students even got a diploma or certificate.

For the life of me I can’t understand why there isn’t a criminal case against him, at least for mail and wire fraud.