On Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former lawyer and self-described "fixer," Judge Engoron wrote in his ruling that he found the star witness to be a credible witness despite having been convicted of perjury.

"His testimony was significantly compromised by his having pleaded guilty to perjury and by some seeming contradictions in what he said at trial," Engoron wrote. "However, carefully parsed, he testified that although Donald Trump did not expressly direct him to reverse engineer financial statements, he ordered him to do so indirectly, in his 'mob voice.'"

Engoron continued that although the "animosity between the witness and the defendant is palpable, providing Cohen with an incentive to lie, the Court found his testimony credible, based on the relaxed manner in which he testified, the general plausibility of his statements, and, most importantly, the way his testimony was corroborated by other trial evidence."

A "less-forgiving factfinder" might have come to a different conclusion and not believed "a single word of a convicted perjurer," Engoron wrote.

"This factfinder does not believe that pleading guilty to perjury means that you can never tell the truth," he continued. "Michael Cohen told the truth."

Cohen, who pleaded guilty in 2018 to lying to Congress about the Russia probe, addressed the passage on social media, writing on X, "Judge Engoron's determination regarding my veracity at the NYAG Trump civil fraud trial. Michael Cohen told the truth!"

Members of the Trump family and their attorneys roundly called the ruling unjust and indicated they plan to appeal.

Eric Trump told ABC News the judgment against him and his family is "a total joke" and "insane." He said the family will immediately appeal the ruling, which he said shows the court and the attorney general in his opinion are "living in an alternate universe."

Donald Trump Jr. accused the case of being politically motivated.

"We've reached the point where your political beliefs combined with what venue your case is heard are the primary determinants of the outcome; not the facts of the case!" he said in a statement to ABC News.

Donald Trump's lawyer, Chris Kise, also claimed the case was an "unjust political crusade" against the leading Republican presidential candidate and that there was no evidence of fraud.

"Hard to imagine a more unfair process and hard to believe this is happening in America," Kise said, adding that the former president "will of course appeal."

Donald Trump's legal spokesperson, Alina Habba, called the verdict a "manifest injustice" and the "culmination of a multi-year, politically fueled witch hunt."

"Countless hours of testimony proved that there was no wrongdoing, no crime, and no victim," Habba said in a statement. "Given the grave stakes, we trust that the Appellate Division will overturn this egregious verdict and end this relentless persecution against my clients."

The Trump Organization also said the ruling was a "gross miscarriage of justice."

"Every member of the New York business community, no matter the industry, should be gravely concerned with this gross overreach and brazen attempt by the Attorney General to exert limitless power where no private or public harm has been established," a spokesperson said in a statement. "If allowed to stand, this ruling will only further expedite the continuing exodus of companies from New York."

Judge Engoron took direct aim at several of the Trumps' core defenses, including Trump's claim that real estate appraisal is imprecise and subjective, and that property valuations reflect nuances in the market that only sophisticated practitioners can understand.

Engoron called that argument a "great red herring in this case."

"True enough, as appraising is an art as well as a science," Engoron wrote. "However, the science part cannot be fraudulent. When two appraisals rely on starkly different assumptions, that is not evidence of a difference of opinion, that is evidence of deceit."

Engoron also undercut a common refrain from defendants' that their accountants were responsible for maintaining above-board business practices.

In a section of his ruling titled, "Blame the Accountants," Engoron wrote that, "There is overwhelming evidence … that the buck for being truthful in the supporting data valuations stopped with the Trump Organization, not the accountants."

An attorney for Judge Arthur Engoron also filed in support of the gag order in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial, arguing that violent threats have increased since the gag order was lifted.

The limited gag order, which prohibited Donald Trump and his attorneys from publicly commenting about Engoron's staff, was issued by the judge last month after Trump posted about the judge's law clerk on social media. Judge David Friedman of the appellate division's First Department stayed the order on Thursday, citing constitutional concerns over Trump's free speech rights.

Engoron's filing includes a report from Charles Hollon of the Judicial Threats Assessment Unit of the New York State Court System's Department of Public Safety. According to the report, Engoron and his principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield, have been inundated with credible, violent and antisemitic threats since Trump began criticizing Greenfield.

"The threats against Justice Engoron and Ms. Greenfield are considered to be serious and credible and not hypothetical or speculative," Hollon wrote in the report.

Greenfield has been the victim of daily doxing of her personal email address and phone number, receiving dozens of calls, emails and social media messages daily, according to Hollon. Approximately half the harassing messages have been antisemitic, according to Greenfield.

In the report, Hollon wrote that Engoron was the subject of credible threats before the trial had started, but Trump's Oct. 3 Truth Social post directed at Greenfield exponentially increased the number of threats directed at her.

The report included multiple examples of voicemails that were left on the telephone in Engoron's chambers.

Hollon said the messages have created an "ongoing security risk" for Engoron, his staff and family, but that the gag order had been effective in lowering the number of threats.

"The implementation of the limited gag orders resulted in a decrease in the number of threats, harassment and disparaging messages that the judge and his staff received," Hollon said in the report. "However, when Mr. Trump violated the gag orders, the number of threatening, harassing and disparaging messages increased."

Engoron's lawyer, Lisa Evans, said the threats detailed in Hollon's affirmation justify the gag order, which functions as a reasonable limit on free speech.

"The First Amendment does not prohibit courts from limiting speech that threatens the safety of the court's staff," Evans wrote.

Trump's reply to the filing is due on Nov. 27, after which the First Department will decide whether to fully lift the gag order.