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

The former president was found to have defrauded lenders.

Former President Donald Trump has been fined $354.8 million plus approximately $100 million in interest in a civil fraud lawsuit that could alter the personal fortune and real estate empire that helped propel him to the White House. In the decision, Judge Arthur Engoron excoriated Trump, saying the president's credibility was "severely compromised," that the frauds "shock the conscience" and that Trump and his co-defendants showed a "complete lack of contrition and remorse" that he said "borders on pathological."

Engoron also hit Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump with $4 million fines and barred all three from helming New York companies for years. New York Attorney General Letitia James accused Trump and his adult sons of engaging in a decade-long scheme in which they used "numerous acts of fraud and misrepresentation" to inflate Trump's net worth in order get more favorable loan terms. The former president has denied all wrongdoing and has said he will appeal.


Summary of penalties

Donald Trump and his adult sons were hit with millions in fines in the civil fraud trial and barred for years from being officers in New York companies. The judge said the frauds "shock the conscience."

Donald Trump: $354 million fine + approx. $100 million in interest
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
Donald Trump Jr.: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Eric Trump: $4 million fine
+ barred for 2 years from serving as officer of NY company
Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg: $1 million fine
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company
Former Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney:
+ barred for 3 years from serving as officer of NY company
+ barred for life from financial management role in NY company


0

Judge allows testimony about Trump's charity

State attorney Louis Solomon focused on the activities of The Donald J. Trump Foundation, Trump's defunct charity organization, during his direct examination of tax lawyer Sheri Dillon.

Dillon, who worked with Trump between 2005 and 2020, testified that she received a letter from the New York attorney general in 2016 regarding a potential violation by Trump's charity, which she discussed with then-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg.

Solomon's line of questioning prompted an objection from Trump's attorney Chris Kise, who argued that Trump's charity was irrelevant to the state's case. But Judge Engoron overruled the objection.

"To me, this case is not just about financial statements being submitted to insurance companies. It is about whether or not defendants were committing fraud," Engoron said. "If the evidence shows a particular defendant was consistently acting fraudulently, the law says there can be particular forms of equitable relief."

Dillon testified that she could not recall if Trump Organization executives notified potential insurers about the violation.

Then-New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood sued the Trump Foundation in 2019 for using money set aside for charitable purposes to settle business disputes and cover political expenses. Trump was eventually ordered to pay $2 million to various charities as part of a settlement.


Judge upholds Trump's $10,000 fine

Judge Engoron is upholding Donald Trump's $10,000 fine for violating the case's limited gag order yesterday.

During a break, Engoron said he reviewed the video of Trump's hallway statement and reached the same conclusion as yesterday: that Trump was referring to Engoron's law clerk when he told reporters that the judge has a "person who is very partisan sitting alongside of him." The gag order prohibits public comments about the judge's staff.

Trump's lawyer Chris Kise had argued that a later portion of Trump's statement supported that he was referring to Michael Cohen, rather than the judge's law clerk.

But Engoron disagreed, saying, "That was a clear transition from one person to another, and I think the person he originally referred to is very clear."


Defense asks judge to reconsider gag order fine

Defense attorney Chris Kise requested that Judge Engoron again reconsider his decision to fine Donald Trump $10,000 for violating the case's limited gag order yesterday, offering a broader criticism of the gag order based on First Amendment grounds.

"This is open, public, and the defendant has a First Amendment right to comment on what he sees and perceives as a potential source of bias," Kise said.

Like yesterday, Kise maintained that Trump was referring to Michael Cohen, rather than the judge's law clerk, during his hallway statement in which he said the judge has a "person who is very partisan sitting alongside of him." Trump attested to this on the stand yesterday, though Engoron found that Trump was "not credible."

"The review of the statement does not support the sanction," Kise said.

Even if Trump was referring to the clerk, Kise made a broader argument that the gag order itself was "constitutionally infirm," considering Trump is the "leading candidate" for the presidency.

"I don't think that the order survives constitutional scrutiny," Kise said.

State attorney Andrew Amer argued in support of the gag order, which he said was narrowly limited to withstand constitutional scrutiny.

"A federal judge in D.C. has issued a similar order to protect herself," Amer added, referring to a ruling in Trump's election interference case.

Judge Engoron said he would reconsider the fine but stood by his gag order.


Insurance underwriter to testify

An underwriter who worked on a Trump Organization insurance policy to cover legal expenses incurred by the firm's executives is scheduled to testify this morning.

Michael Holl, an underwriter at Tokio Marine HCC, worked on the Trump Organization's Directors and Officers insurance policy in 2016 and 2017, according to the New York attorney general.

With Donald Trump about to be inaugurated president at the time, the Trump Organization attempted to increase their policy's limit to $50,000,000, which was ten times higher than their previous limit, according to the attorney general.

"In response to specific questioning from the underwriters, the Trump Organization personnel represented that there was no material litigation or inquiry from anyone that could potentially lead to a claim under the D&O coverage," the state alleged in their complaint.

However, four months before that representation was made, Trump Organization executives learned about an ongoing investigation by the attorney general into the Trump Foundation as well as Trump family members, according to the complaint.


Defendants were 'lying year after year,' prosecutors say

Prosecutors intend to prove in the coming months that "each defendant engaged in repeated, persistent, illegal acts in conduct of business," according to the opening statement from Kevin Wallace of the attorney general's office.

Referring to Judge Engoron's partial summary judgment last week, Wallace said that "the people have already proven" that former President Trump used "false, misleading" statements that were "repeatedly [and] persistently used in the conduct of business."

But prosecutors will further demonstrate that Trump and his co-defendants knew those statements were false and continued to peddle them anyway in furtherance of their alleged scheme, Wallace told the judge.

"The defendants were lying year after year," he said.

Wallace played clips of video depositions to punctuate his remarks, including testimony from Trump himself, as well as Eric Trump and former Trump attorney Michael Cohen -- whose congressional testimony years ago precipitated the state's investigation and some of the key allegations underpinning their case.

"The goal was to use each of [Trump's] assets and increase its value in order to get to the end result number," Cohen said during his taped deposition. "It was essentially backing in numbers to each of the asset classes in order to attain the number that President Trump wanted."

Trump and his co-defendants "knew that a high net worth was necessary to get and maintain certain financial benefits," Wallace said, pointing to basic principles of accounting and finance.

Throughout Wallace's remarks, the attorney general's office flashed graphics on television screens inside the courtroom showing some of the alleged inflated values of Trump's properties alongside the amounts the properties were appraised at.

Seated in his chair with his arms crossed, Trump visibly shook his head at times during the prosecutor's opening statement. At one point he seemed to mutter something under his breath.

The former president whispered with his attorneys throughout.