Trump civil fraud case: Judge fines Trump $354M, says frauds 'shock the conscience'

Former President Donald Trump's plan to deliver part of his closing argument Thursday, as reported yesterday by ABC News, is now in doubt after he failed to meet a deadline to agree to limitations imposed by Judge Arthur Engoron.

According an email exchange between Engonon and defense counsel that was posted to the public docket Wednesday, Engoron said that Trump would have to follow the case's limited gag order, and that he would not be allowed to "impugn" the New York attorney general or her staff -- limitations that Trump attorney Chris Kise rejected, calling them "untenable."

"The limitations I am imposing, in my absolute discretion, are not subject to further debate. Take it or leave it," Engoron replied on Jan. 9, according to the email thread.

When Trump's lawyers missed the first deadline set by Engoron, the judge determined that Trump could not testify. Kise then responded that he did not see the deadline and requested that the closing arguments be postponed because of the death of Melania Trump's mother on Tuesday.

"I am sad to advise the Court that Mrs. Trump's mother passed away this evening. Because of the challenges presented by this deeply personal family matter, President Trump has asked that I request the Court postpone the date for closing argument," Kise wrote yesterday.

Engoron promptly denied the request and said the closings would continue as planned.

"On balance, going forward makes the most sense. Please tell Mr. Trump that I am sorry," Engoron wrote.

Kise informed Engoron that Trump still planned to attend the closings and speak.

"Despite the fact that his Mother-in Law, who he was very close to, passed away late last night, President Trump will be speaking tomorrow," Kise said in an email this morning.

When Engoron asked for assurance that Trump agreed to his rules, Kise pushed back, writing, "You are not allowing President Trump, who has been wrongfully demeaned and belittled by an out of control, politically motivated Attorney General, to speak about the things that must be spoken about."

"I won't debate this yet again. Take it or leave it. Now or never. You have until noon, seven minutes from now. I WILL NOT GRANT ANY FURTHER EXTENSIONS," Engoron replied at 11:54 a.m.

After Kise failed to respond, Engoron emailed him at 12:12 p.m. that he assumed Trump would not be speaking and that their email exchange would be posted to the court's public docket.

Responding to the development, Trump's legal spokesperson, Alina Habba, said in a statement to ABC News: "Is anyone surprised anymore?"

Former President Trump intends to personally deliver part of the defense's closing argument at the conclusion of his civil fraud trial in New York on Thursday, sources familiar with the former president's strategy tell ABC News.

The defendants in the case -- Trump, his two eldest sons and two former Trump Organization executives -- are represented by three primary attorneys, Christopher Kise, Clifford Robert and Alina Habba. But sources say Trump himself is determined to deliver a portion of the closing statement.

The sources cautioned that plans for the defense's closing argument remain fluid.

The Manhattan courtroom where the trial has been held during its first 11 weeks is currently in use for another high-profile trial involving the New York attorney general's case against the National Rifle Association, and the judge in that case told jurors that trial would temporarily move to a different courtroom this week to accommodate Trump's civil trial.

-Aaron Katersky and John Santucci

New York Attorney General Letitia James, in a written brief filed a week before the trial's closing arguments, asked the judge in the case to fine Trump over $370 million to disgorge profits from what James says is a decade of fraudulent business conduct, and to bar Trump for life from participating in the New York real estate industry.

The request for a $370 million fine, plus 9% annual interest, is a sharp increase from James' initial request for disgorgement totaling roughly $250 million.

The largest portion of the requested fine stems from the business loans the Trump Organization obtained using allegedly fraudulent financial statements. Based on expert testimony, James argued that Trump cost his lenders $168,040,168, which the banks would have made if Trump was given the appropriate interest rate corresponding to the actual value of his assets.

In their defense filing, Trump's lawyers called the attorney general's theory for disgorgement "fundamentally flawed, saying that "No lenders testified that they would have done anything differently had they known about Trump's misstatements, and James attempted to fill that evidentiary void with expert testimony, according to Trump's lawyers.

Trump's lawyers added that even if the attorney general proved that some of Trump's profits were ill-gotten, they lack the authority under New York Executive Law 63(12) to request the disgorgement.

Closing arguments in the trial are scheduled for Jan. 11.

Judge Arthur Engoron has denied Donald Trump's most recent motion for a directed verdict to end his civil fraud trial.

In a blistering ruling, the judge not only denied the motion but also opted to explain the flaws he sees in many of Trump's arguments at trial.

Addressing the testimony of defense accounting expert Eli Bartov, who Trump proudly and repeatedly declared found "no accounting fraud of any kind," Engoron flatly dismissed Bartov's findings by saying he lost credibility by "doggedly attempting to justify every misstatement."

"Bartov is a tenured professor, but all that his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say," Engoron wrote.

The judge also rejected assertions from Trump's lawyers that any financial misstatements are beyond the case's statute of limitations.

"Closing is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for future misstatements. All that §63(12) requires is a false statement used in business; the subject financial statements fit that definition 'to a T,'" Engoron wrote.

Engoron also suggested he didn't buy Trump's argument that fining the former president for ill-gotten gains was not merited in the case because his lenders were happy with the transactions.

"That the instant lenders made millions of dollars and were happy with the transactions does not mean that they were not damaged by lending at lower interest rates than they otherwise would have," he wrote.

Calling Trump's claims "misstatements at best and fraud at worst," Engoron wrote that "Valuations, as elucidated ad nauseum in this trial, can be based on different criteria analyzed in different ways. But a lie is still a lie."

The judge ended his ruling by reminding the parties about the date for closing arguments in the case, currently set for Jan. 11.