‘Very dense fog’ in Delhi as visibility drops to zero; flight services impacted
Meanwhile, in view of the dense fog, the Delhi Airport issued an advisory for the passengers stating that there has been impact on flight departures.
Real Madrid defeats Mallorca to set up Supercopa final against Barcelona
European and LaLiga champions Real Madrid crush Mallorca 3-0 and will now play archrival Barcelona in the Spanish Super Cup final on Sunday. Jude Bellingham and Rodrygo struck to earn Real Madrid a 3-0 win over Mallorca and set up a Spanish Super Cup final clash with rivals Barcelona. Madrid have the chance to earn revenge for their heavy Clasico defeat in LaLiga in October after Bellingham’s clinical second-half strike sent them on their way to victory on Thursday in Saudi Arabia. Backed heavily by fans in Jeddah, Madrid never looked like letting the advantage slip and a stoppage-time own goal by Martin Valjent secured their win, with Rodrygo adding a late third from close range. Madrid coach, Carlo Ancelotti, was full of praise for the way his side claimed control of the match as an attacking force in the second half. “When those up front activate, anything can happen,” he said of his front three attackers and Bellingham. “The four [forwards] are very dangerous. That’s quite evident. Everyone can see it, the quality they have.” Real Madrid made the early running against last season’s Copa del Rey runners-up, with Lucas Vazquez and Rodrygo Goes coming close in the opening stages. Advertisement Kylian Mbappe appealed for a penalty after going down under pressure from Dani Rodriguez, but it would have been soft. Kylian Mbappe has endured a difficult start at Real Madrid after joining from Paris Saint-Germain at the end of last season [Yasser Bakhsh/Getty Images] Jagoba Arrasate’s Mallorca found their footing and did well to restrict the Spanish and European champions to no further clear chances in the first half. Madrid lost Aurelien Tchouameni early in the second half after he hurt his head in a challenge with Cyle Larin, although he appeared frustrated to be withdrawn. Madrid broke the deadlock in the 63rd minute through Bellingham after the post, and Mallorca goalkeeper Dominik Greif kept Rodrygo and Mbappe at bay. A blistering Madrid move bore fruit when Rodrygo’s header from Vinicius Junior’s cross hit the upright and Mbappe’s effort was parried by the scrambling Greif. Bellingham was in the right place at the right time to carefully slot home the rebound past defenders on the goal line, continuing a stunning run of individual form. Jude Bellingham, right, was a stand-out performer as Real Madrid lifted the domestic and European double last season [Pedro Nunes/Reuters] The England international has eight goals for Madrid in his last 10 games across all competitions. “Jude is a phenomenal player. He helps us win games all the time, with goals, assists or just his work,” Bellingham’s fellow midfielder Tchouameni remarked afterwards, adding that he was unharmed by the head collision that saw him withdrawn from the game. Advertisement Mallorca struggled to find a way back in and ended up contributing to Madrid’s second goal when Valjent stretched to cut out a pass but slid the ball into his own goal. Rodrygo wrapped up the win late on to set up a repeat of last season’s final, won by Super Cup holders Madrid. Madrid must wait on the availability of Luka Modric for Sunday’s final after the midfielder fell ill and missed Thursday’s match. “Our player Luka Modric is out of the game against Mallorca because of a viral illness,” said the Spanish champions in a statement only hours before the semifinal. Croatian midfielder Modric, 39, became Madrid’s oldest goalscorer when he netted last week against Valencia in LaLiga. Adblock test (Why?)
US House votes to advance bill to sanction ICC over Israel arrest warrants
The United States House of Representatives has voted in favour of a bill to sanction the International Criminal Court (ICC) in retaliation for its arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the country’s former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. Legislators in the lower chamber of the US Congress passed the “Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act” by an overwhelming margin, 243 to 140, on Thursday in a signal of strong support for Israel. Forty-five Democrats joined 198 Republicans in backing the bill. No Republicans voted against it. The bill now heads to the Senate, where a Republican majority was sworn in earlier this month. The legislation proposes sanctions for any foreigner who helps the ICC in its attempts to investigate, detain or prosecute a US citizen or citizen of an allied country that does not recognise the authority of the court. Neither the US nor Israel are parties to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC. The sanctions would include the freezing of property assets, as well as the denial of visas to any foreigners who materially or financially contribute to the court’s efforts. Advertisement “America is passing this law because a kangaroo court is seeking to arrest the prime minister of our great ally, Israel,” Representative Brian Mast, the Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a speech before Thursday’s vote. The vote, one of the first since the new Congress was seated last week, underscored strong support among President-elect Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans for Israel’s government, despite its ongoing war in Gaza. That conflict has killed more than 46,000 Palestinians since it began in October 2023, many of them women and children. United Nations experts have denounced Israel’s methods in Gaza as “consistent with the characteristics of genocide”. That prompted ICC prosecutors last May to issue the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant. In response, US legislators threatened retaliation against the ICC. In a letter sent to outgoing US President Joe Biden in May, dozens of human rights groups urged him to reject calls for punitive action. “Acting on these calls would do grave harm to the interests of all victims globally and to the US government’s ability to champion human rights and the cause of justice,” the groups wrote at the time. This week, another group of human rights organisations issued another letter ahead of Thursday’s vote, denouncing the House bill as an attack on an “independent judicial institution”. Sanctioning the court, they wrote, will “jeopardize the ability of desperate victims across all the court’s investigations to access justice, weaken the credibility of sanction tools in other contexts, and place the United States at odds with its closest allies”. Advertisement The letter warned that imposing “asset freezes and entry restrictions” on ICC allies would bring the US “the stigma of siding with impunity over justice”. Nevertheless, the US Senate, under Majority Leader John Thune, has promised swift consideration of the act so Trump can sign it into law after he takes office on January 20. In 2020, during his first term in office, Trump sanctioned senior ICC leaders over the court’s investigations of US crimes in Afghanistan and Israeli crimes in occupied Palestinian territory. President Biden later lifted those sanctions. The ICC, based in The Hague, is a permanent court that can prosecute individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression. The State of Palestine has been a member since 2015, and the court first announced an investigation of crimes committed there by both Israeli and Hamas officials in 2019. Though Israel is not party to the ICC, the court has jurisdiction over crimes committed on a member state’s territory, regardless of the nationality of those committing them. The US has supported the court at times, for instance, when the ICC’s top prosecutor sought an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over alleged war crimes in Ukraine. Russia, like Israel and the US, is not a member of the court. Karim Khan, the prosecutor who issued the arrest warrant against Netanyahu and Gallant, has said that his decision is in line with the court’s approach in all its cases, and he indicated that the warrants could prevent ongoing crimes. Advertisement Adblock test (Why?)
Historians say Jimmy Carter’s human rights legacy includes grim failures
In South Korea, as well, historians say that Carter adopted the messaging of a military government facing human rights criticism. In May 1980, a student-led pro-democracy uprising in the South Korean city of Gwangju was met with a brutal crackdown. In a single day, 60 people were killed and hundreds injured. Journalist Timothy Shorrock, who has been reporting on US-South Korea relations for decades, said that the Carter administration was wary of losing a useful Cold War ally and, therefore, threw its weight behind the military government. He explained the US supported the South Korean leadership by freeing up military resources that allowed troops to put down the uprising. “Knowing that [military leader General Chun Doo-hwan’s] forces had murdered 60 people the day before, they still believed this uprising was a national security threat to the United States,” Shorrock said of the Carter officials. Antigovernment protesters carrying South Korean flags sit behind a city bus, used as a barricade in Gwangju on May 27, 1980 [AP Photo] He added that when a US aircraft carrier was sent to the region, some protesters convinced of US rhetoric on democracy and human rights believed that the US was coming to intervene on their behalf. Instead, the carrier had been deployed to bolster the US military presence so that South Korean troops at the demilitarised zone with North Korea could be reassigned to put down the uprising. Shorrock says that contingency plans even included the possible use of US forces if the unrest in Gwangju spread further. While there is no universally accepted death toll for the uprising, the official government figure is that more than 160 people perished. Some academic sources put the death toll at more than 1,000. Asked by a reporter if his actions had been at odds with his professed commitment to human rights, Carter said that there was “no incompatibility”. He asserted that the US was helping South Korea maintain its national security against a threat of “communist subversion”, mirroring the rhetoric of the country’s military leadership. It was the kind of rhetoric that South Korean leaders had long used to justify repressive and antidemocratic measures. When South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law in December 2024 in the name of combating “antistate forces”, many drew parallels to the traumatic events of Gwangju. “What he was saying at the time was what General Chun Doo-hwan was saying, characterising this as a communist uprising, which it was not,” said Shorrock. “He never apologised for that.” Adblock test (Why?)
Appeals court will not block partial release of special counsel Jack Smith’s Trump report
A federal appeals court rejected a bid to block the release of a portion of special counsel Jack Smith’s final report detailing his investigation and prosecution of President-elect Trump’s alleged 2020 election interference and alleged improper retention of classified records. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit denied a request from Walt Nauta, an aide to Trump, and Carlos de Oliveira, the former property manager at Mar-a-Lago, who were charged with obstructing a separate federal investigation into Trump’s handling of sensitive government records. The court left a three-day hold on DOJ’s release of the report. JUDGE GRANTS JACK SMITH REQUEST TO DISMISS JAN. 6 CHARGES AGAINST TRUMP, APPEAL DROPPED IN FLORIDA DOCS CASE Smith was tapped by Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2022 to investigate the alleged effort by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election and Trump’s alleged possession of classified documents at his Florida home. Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges. Nauta and de Oliveira also pleaded not guilty to federal charges that alleged they conspired to obstruct the FBI investigation into classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago.
Trump names latest Cabinet picks as Jan. 20 inauguration nears
President-elect Trump announced a series of Cabinet picks as his Jan. 20 inauguration nears and Senate confirmation begins. Trump nominated former Fox News contributor Leo Terrell, a civil rights attorney, as senior counsel to the assistant attorney general for civil rights at the Department of Justice. “He will work alongside Harmeet K. Dhillon, a fellow Californian, and our incredible Nominee for United States Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights in the Justice Department,” Trump wrote. “Leo is a highly respected civil rights attorney and political analyst. He received his law degree from the University of California, Los Angeles, and has defended many high-profile cases throughout his incredibly successful career. “Leo will be a fantastic advocate for the American People, and ensure we will, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” TRUMP CABINET PICK GETS BACKING FROM POWERFUL GROUP KNOWN TO BE POLITICALLY NEUTRAL In an announcement Thursday evening, Trump revealed Christine Toretti as his pick for ambassador to Sweden. He said Toretti is an “incredible businesswoman, philanthropist, public servant, and RNC Committeewoman.” “She is Chairman of S&T Bancorp, and a former director of the Pittsburgh Federal Reserve Bank,” Trump wrote. “Christine has been a tireless supporter of important causes as a Board Member of the International Medical Corps, former Chair of the Andy Warhol Museum, Director of the NCAA Foundation, founding Director of the Gettysburg Foundation, Trustee of the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and Chair of the Anne B. Anstine Excellence in Public Service Series in Pennsylvania, and the Dodie Londen Excellence in Public Service Series in Arizona. TRUMP NAMES LATEST WHITE HOUSE STAFF PICKS AS JAN. 20 INAUGURATION APPROACHES “Christine is one of fewer than sixty women who have received the Athena International Global Award.” Trump also announced retired Army Capt. Sam Brown would serve as the next Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs at the Department of Veterans Affairs. “Sam is an American HERO, a Purple Heart recipient, and successful businessman from Nevada, who has devoted his life to serving America,” Trump said in the announcement. “He fearlessly proved his love for our Country in the Army, while leading Troops in battle in Afghanistan and, after being honorably retired as a Captain, helping our Veterans get access to emergency medications. “Sam will now continue his service to our Great Nation at the VA, where he will work tirelessly to ensure we put America’s Veterans FIRST, and remember ALL who served.” The nominations come as Trump continues to round out picks for his Cabinet as Jan. 20 nears. The Republican-controlled U.S. Senate will soon begin holding hearings for Trump’s Cabinet nominees. Republicans will control the Senate with 53 seats to the Democrats’ 47 once Senator-elect Jim Justice of West Virginia is sworn in later in January and Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine appoints a senator to fill Vice President-elect Vance’s seat.
Ken Paxton files second lawsuit against TikTok for exposing minors to explicit content
The attorney general argues that the social media company violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act by listing itself as appropriate for children.
Court puts plea deal on pause for 9/11 mastermind KSM: 23 years later, justice for terrorists is delayed again
A federal appeals court has delayed Friday’s scheduled military court hearing where suspected 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and two co-conspirators were expected to plead guilty as part of a deal negotiated with prosecutors. The pause, though welcomed by the many who opposed the plea deals, prolongs a decades-long crusade for justice by the victims’ families. The plea deals, which would have three 9/11 terrorists avoid the death penalty and face life in prison, have drawn sharp outcry from the public and even prompted a dispute within the Biden administration to undo them. On New Year’s Eve, a military appeals court shot down Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin‘s effort to block the deal between military prosecutors and defense lawyers, saying Austin did not have the power to cancel plea agreements. Then, on Wednesday, the Department of Justice appealed that ruling. Specifically, the court opinion said the plea deals reached by military prosecutors and defense attorneys were valid and enforceable and that Austin exceeded his authority when he later tried to nullify them. The defense now has until Jan. 17 to offer a full response to the Department of Justice’s request to have the plea deals thrown out. Government prosecutors then have until Jan. 22 for a rebuttal, with possible oral arguments on the issue to follow. The plea deals, offered to Mohammed and two co-conspirators, were meant as a way to wrap up the quest for justice to those who have been waiting more than two decades to see the terrorists that killed their loved ones convicted. They would allow prosecutors to avoid going to trial. But why did the government settle for a plea deal after 23 years of building a case in the first place? BIDEN ADMIN SENDS 11 GUANTANAMO DETAINEES TO OMAN FOR RESETTLEMENT “I haven’t spoken to a single person who thinks these plea deals were a good idea. Most people are horrified,” said Brett Eagleson, president of 9/11 Justice. “It’s our thought that this was rescinded in name only and like it was done right before the election. So, Austin was trying to save any attempts at sort of a political loss on this,” said Eagleson. In its appeal this week, the government says, “Respondents are charged with perpetrating the most egregious criminal act on American soil in modern history — the 9/11 terrorist attacks. “The military commission judge intends to enforce pretrial plea agreements that will deprive the government and the American people of a public trial as to the respondents’ guilt and the possibility of capital punishment, despite the fact that the Secretary of Defense has lawfully withdrawn those agreements,” the appeal said. “The harm to the government and the public will be irreparable once the judge accepts the pleas, which he is scheduled to do in hearings beginning on January 10, 2025.” The appeal also noted that once the military commission accepts the guilty pleas, there is likely no way to return to the status quo. Defense lawyers for the suspected 9/11 perpetrators argued Austin’s attempts to throw out the plea deals that his own military negotiated and approved were the latest developments in the “fitful” and “negligent” mishandling of the case that has dragged on for more than two decades. If the plea deal is upheld, the architects of the attacks that killed 2,976, plus thousands more who died after inhaling toxic dust in rescue missions, will not be put to death for their crimes. “You would think that the government has an opportunity to make right, and you would think that they would be salivating at the opportunity to bring us justice,” Eagleson said. “Rather than doing that, they shroud everything in secrecy. They’re rushing to get these plea deals done, and they’re marching forward despite the objections of us. “We want transparency. We want the discovery that’s been produced. In this case, we want to know who are these guys they’re talking to? On what grounds does our government think that these guys are guilty? Why can’t they share that with us? It’s been 23 years. You can’t tell me that you need to protect national security sources and methods because, quite frankly, if we’re using the same sources and methods that we were 23 years ago, we have bigger fish to fry.” The government opted to try five men in one case instead of each individually. Mohammed is accused of masterminding the plot and proposing it to Usama bin Laden. Two others allegedly helped the hijackers with finances. In 2023, a medical panel concluded that Ramzi bin al-Shibh was not competent to stand trial and removed him from the case. Mohammed, Mustafa al-Hawsawi and Walid bin Attash, are all part of the plea agreement that will allow them to avoid the death penalty. One other will go to trial. “The military commission has really been a failure,” said John Ryan, a retired agent on the FBI’s joint terrorism task force in New York. TOP REPUBLICANS ROLL OUT BILL THAT WOULD UNDO 9/11 PLEA DEALS Hundreds of people have been convicted of terrorism charges in the U.S. Ramzi Yousef, the perpetrator of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was convicted in 1997. But the military commission’s 9/11 case has faced a revolving door of judges, who then each take time to get up to speed with the 400,000 pages and exhibits in the case. Col. Matthew N. McCall of the Air Force, the fourth judge to preside over hearings in the case, intends to retire in the first quarter of 2025 before any trial begins. McCall was assigned to the case in August 2021, and he held only two rounds of hearings before suspending the proceedings in March 2022 for plea negotiations. Another judge would have to get up to speed, and it could be another five to 10 years before a conviction, according to Ryan, who observed many of the hearings at Guantánamo. “You have parents and grandparents [of victims] that now are in their 80s, you know, and want to see justice
Trump says he respects Supreme Court’s decision to deny his request to stop sentencing, vows to appeal
President-elect Donald Trump said he respects the Supreme Court’s decision to deny his request to stop his sentencing in New York v. Trump from moving forward, but said Thursday night he will appeal, while stressing that “lawfare” has been an “attack on the Republican Party.” Trump’s comments came just moments after the Supreme Court denied Trump’s emergency petition to block his sentencing from taking place on Friday, Jan. 10. The sentencing was scheduled by New York Judge Juan Merchan. SUPREME COURT DENIES TRUMP ATTEMPT TO STOP SENTENCING IN NEW YORK V. TRUMP Merchan, last week, said he would not sentence the president-elect to prison, but rather issue a sentence of an “unconditional discharge,” which means there would be no punishment imposed. “I’m the first president and probably one of the first candidates in history that’s under attack with a gag order where I’m not allowed to speak about something,” Trump said during a meeting at Mar-a-Lago Thursday night with Republican governors. “This is a long way from finished and I respect the court’s opinion.” Trump said he thought the court’s ruling was a “very good opinion for us,” noting that the justices “invited the appeal.” “We’ll see how it all works out,” he said. “I think it’s going to work out well.” But Trump reflected on the “lawfare” that he has been victim of, saying that it “was an attack on the Republican Party.” TRUMP FILES MOTION TO STAY ‘UNLAWFUL SENTENCING’ IN NEW YORK CASE “This was an attack on the Republican candidate who just won an election by record numbers—the highest number of Republican votes by far ever gotten, and we won all the swing states, we won the popular vote by millions of people,” he said. “They tried to stop that from happening—they tried to stop this election from happening or to bloody somebody up so badly they couldn’t win.” Trump said that “the people got it and we won by the largest number.” Trump filed an emergency petition to the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday in an effort to prevent his Jan. 10 sentencing, scheduled by Judge Juan Merchan, from taking place. “The application for stay presented to Justice Sotomayor and by her referred to the Court is denied for, inter alia, the following reasons. First, the alleged evidentiary violations at President-Elect Trump’s state-court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal,” the order states. “Second, the burden that sentencing will impose on the President-Elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial in light of the trial court’s stated intent to impose a sentence of unconditional discharge’ after a brief virtual hearing,” the court ruled. NEW YORK COURT ASSIGNS NEW JUDGE IN TRUMP CIVIL FRAUD CASE STEMMING FROM AG LETITIA JAMES’ PROBE The order also noted that “Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh would grant the application.” Trump needed five votes in order to have his request granted. The note on the order suggests Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett voted with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Katanji Brown Jackson. Trump’s sentencing is now expected to move forward, with the president-elect expected to appear virtually for the proceeding, scheduled for 9:30 am Friday. Merchan set Trump’s sentencing in New York v. Trump for Jan. 10 after a jury found the now-president-elect guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree, stemming from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation. Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges and has appealed the ruling but was rejected last week by Merchan. Trump will be sworn in as the 47th President of the United States on Jan. 20. Trump has maintained his innocence in the case and repeatedly railed against it as an example of “lawfare” promoted by Democrats in an effort to hurt his election efforts ahead of November.
Court names new judge in Trump civil fraud case before reassigning previous judge hours later
FIRST ON FOX: A New York Court assigned a new judge to preside over the civil fraud case against President-elect Trump brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, seemingly replacing Judge Arthur Engoron, but hours later, the court put him back on the case, sources close to Trump’s legal team told Fox News Digital. The case and the trial were handled by Judge Arthur Engoron, who was accused by Trump allies of acting with bias against the president-elect, his family and his company. TRUMP’S $454M JUDGMENT BOND SLASHED BY MORE THAN HALF IN APPEALS COURT RULING Sources familiar told Fox News Digital the court sent out an automated email at around 12:45pm on Thursday, notifying the parties that it had assigned New York County Supreme Court Justice Judith McMahon of Staten Island to the case. But several hours later, at 4:12pm, attorneys on the case received another automated message from the court system notifying them that Judge Arthur Engoron was assigned back to the case. A source close to Trump’s legal team told Fox News Digital that they are concerned with the back-and-forth. The case is pending on appeal. After the appeals court issues its decision, the case will be remanded to a lower court, which Engoron presided over during the trial. NEW YORK APPEALS COURT APPEARS RECEPTIVE TO REVERSING OR REDUCING $454M TRUMP CIVIL FRAUD JUDGMENT Engoron, after a weeks-long non-jury civil fraud trial that began in October 2023, ruled last year that Trump and defendants were liable for “persistent and repeated fraud,” “falsifying business records,” “issuing false financial statements,” “conspiracy to falsify false financial statements,” “insurance fraud,” and “conspiracy to commit insurance fraud.” But before the trial began, Engoron issued a summary judgment against Trump, making the subsequent trial a case over the penalty to be paid. Notably, during the case, Engoron allowed the value of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago to be listed at $18 million. President Trump disputes that valuation, saying the property is worth 50 to 100 times more than Engoron’s estimation. And real estate insiders and developers argued the property could list at more than $300 million. In his ruling in the case last year, Engoron took a shot at Trump, criticizing him for his participation in the trial, stating that he “rarely responded to the questions asked, and he frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial.” ERIC TRUMP CONDEMNS NY ‘SET-UP’: MY FATHER BUILT NYC SKYLINE AND THIS IS HIS THANKS “His refusal to answer the questions directly, or in some cases, at all, severely compromised his credibility,” Engoron wrote. Over the course of the trial late last year, Trump, Trump allies, Republicans and legal experts repeatedly criticized Engoron, who throughout his career has exclusively donated to Democrats, over his handling of the case. Engoron is also reportedly subject to a probe over unsolicited advice he received on the case. Trump and his family denied any wrongdoing, with the former president saying his assets had been undervalued. Trump’s legal team insisted that his financial statements had disclaimers and made it clear to banks that they should conduct their own assessments. TRUMP VOWS TO FIGHT NEW YORK AG CASE ‘ALL THE WAY UP TO THE US SUPREME COURT,’ AS DEADLINE TO POST $454M LOOMS Trump appealed the $454 million judgment. The appeal is pending before the New York Appeals Court. Judges on the New York appeals court appeared receptive last year to the possibility of reversing or reducing the $454 million civil fraud judgment. The president’s attorneys called Engoron’s ruling “draconian, unlawful, and unconstitutional.” Trump attorney D. John Sauer, the incoming solicitor general, argued that James’ lawsuit stretched New York consumer protection laws and said there were “no victims” and “no complaints” about Trump’s business from lenders and insurers. Sauer said the case “involves a clear-cut violation of the statute of limitations,” pointing to transactions used in the non-jury civil fraud trial that dated back more than a decade. Sauer said if the verdict is not overturned, “people can’t do business in real estate” without fear. Editor’s Note: This story has been updated to reflect additional information.