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

'Tell me what the point is,' judge tells Trump attorney

Trump attorney Jesus Suarez is continuing his attempts to discredit former Trump accountant Donald Bender's testimony, but his arguments seem to be wearing thin for the judge.

After Suarez played a short clip from Bender's deposition, Judge Engoron -- who is deciding the case himself -- told the attorney, "There's no jury. Tell me what the point is."

During another portion of the cross-examination, Engoron told Suarez, "It's starting to sound like 'How many angels can dance on the head of a pin.'"


Cross-examination of ex-accountant continues

Continuing his cross-examination of Mazars USA accountant Donald Bender, who formerly worked on Trump's account, Trump attorney Jesus Suarez is adopting a less aggressive approach to his questioning than the theatrical approach he took yesterday.

When Justice Engoron appeared unreceptive to one part of Suarez's questioning, Trump, sitting with his attorneys, visibility groaned.

"It's easiest just to move on. Take a hint," Engoron said to Suarez about one of his attempts to discredit Bender.

Trump has been conferring with his attorney Alina Habba, taking notes, reviewing documents, and even ripping up papers while seated at the counsel table during the cross-examination of Bender.


Trump says his net worth is 'much higher' than statements say

Former President Trump, on his way into court for Day Three of his trial, said that his financial statements under-report his wealth, despite the judge in his case already ruling that his financial records were fraudulently inflated.

"My real net worth is much higher than that, much higher than the statement," Trump told reporters.

Decrying his trial as the "beginning of communism in our country," Trump continued his attacks on New York Attorney General Letitia James, but did not comment on Judge Arthur Engoron.

"This is just a continuation of the witch hunt that started the day I came down the escalator in Trump Tower," Trump said.


Trump back in court for Day Three

Former President Trump is back in court for Day Three of the trial, where defense counsel is expected to continue its cross examination of longtime Mazars accountant Donald Bender.

Once questioning of Bender concludes, the state says they plan to call Whitley Penn audit partner Camron Harris, who took over Trump's accounting after Mazars.

Justice Arthur Engoron may also address the narrow gag order he placed on Trump and the other defendants yesterday regarding making statements about the judge's staff, after the former president made what Engoron described as a "disparaging, untrue, and personally identifying post" involving Engoron's clerk.


Defense lawyers decline to provide details on potential perjury

Citing their ethical obligations, lawyers for the defendants in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial declined to provide details about "rumors of any kind" involving former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and urged Judge Arthur Engoron to make a decision solely based on the evidence presented at trial, after Engoron asked them to weigh in on public reports that Weisselberg was engaged in plea talks with the Manhattan DA's office to resolve a potential perjury charge.

In a letter submitted to Judge Engoron Wednesday, defense attorney Clifford Robert urged the judge to strictly consider the record from the trial in his final decision, describing his request to provide information about Weisselberg based on a New York Times article "unprecedented, inappropriate and troubling."

"The Article simply does not provide any principled basis for the Court to reopen the record or question the veracity of Mr. Weisselberg's testimony in this case. Indeed, we respectfully submit that the Court's request for comment on this speculative media account is unprecedented, inappropriate, and troubling," Robert wrote.

In a separate letter, Alina Habba -- who represents Weisselberg in the civil case but is not his criminal defense lawyer -- declined to provide any information about the potential perjury and argued that no further action was needed on the matter.

"The New York Times article is neither admissible nor reliable, and it should not be considered in Your Honor's determination as to the merits of this case," Habba wrote. "We urge you to render your decision based solely on the evidence now before you."

"Court decisions are supposed to be made based on the evidence at trial, not on media speculation," defense attorney Chris Kise said in a statement.