Advertisement
Advertisement
Donald Trump
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
US President Donald Trump listens during an event at the White House in January 2020. Photo: AP

Bomb threat at New York court where Donald Trump hearing held

  • An emergency call was made just as the judge was about to start a hearing over a US$250 million lawsuit by the state’s attorney general against the ex-president
  • The threat, which was later deemed unfounded, comes with the city on alert over Trump’s possible indictment in the separate Stormy Daniels hush money case
Donald Trump

A bomb threat was called in just as a judge in lower Manhattan was about to start a hearing over a US$250 million lawsuit by New York Attorney General Letitia James against Donald Trump.

Tuesday’s emergency call was investigated, the courthouse at 60 Centre Street temporarily closed and searched, and the threat deemed unfounded, state court spokesman Lucian Chalfen said.

The building, featured in the opening footage of the popular drama show Law and Order, is where state civil cases are heard.

James sued Trump, his company and three of his children in September for allegedly inflating the value of his real estate company’s assets.

The New York Police Department said in a statement it had an increased uniformed presence throughout the city and stressed that “there are currently no credible threats” to New York, but that it remained ready to respond to protests and counterprotests.

Law enforcement is on alert as a state grand jury, in a separate, criminal investigation, examines hush money payments Trump allegedly directed be made to porn star Stormy Daniels during his 2016 presidential run.

Why a Trump indictment would be unprecedented in US history

Trump, who has denied wrongdoing in either matter, predicted on Saturday without evidence that he would be arrested on Tuesday. He exhorted his supporters to “protest” and “take our nation back!”

New York State Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, who is presiding over the James litigation, drily noted: “As if this case wasn’t interesting enough.”

Post