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

Defense presses ex-accountant on evaluation of assets

Attorneys for the defense team declined to cross-examine Cameron Harris after the former Trump accountant completed his testimony. However they reserved the right to call him back to the stand later.

Instead, they spent the last hour of court Wednesday continuing their cross-examination of former Mazars USA accountant Donald Bender, who handled Trump's account prior to Harris.

After the defense highlighted Bender's inconsistent statements about Mazars' use of specialists to evaluate assets, Bender seemed to struggle to articulate how Mazars provided accounting expertise.

Defense attorney Jesus Suarez told Judge Engoron that he plans to continue his cross-examination of Bender through Thursday afternoon, though the defense promised to "streamline" their questions after the judge complained about the timing.

Court was then adjourned for the day.


2nd accountant says Trumps were responsible for statements

Cameron Harris, an accountant from the firm Whitley Penn, has taken the stand as the trial's second witness following hours of testimony from former Trump accountant Donald Bender of Mazars USA, whose cross-examination will continue later.

Whitley Penn succeeded Mazars as Trump's accounting firm.

Harris testified that Trump's son Eric Trump "set the tone at the top" of the Trump Organization.

Like Bender, Harris testified that the Trumps had the ultimate responsibility for their financial statements.

"Who's responsible for the statement of financial condition?" asked state attorney Kevin Wallace as Eric Trump sat in the courtroom.

"The client's responsible for that," Harris replied.

The proceedings appear to have taken a more workmanlike tone since Trump left the courtroom to return to Florida. The defense has not logged a single objection after earlier objecting so often that it drew the judge's ire.


'Trump show is over' says AG James after he departs

With former President Trump heading back to Florida after attending three days of the trial, New York Attorney General Letitia James told reporters that "the Donald Trump show is over."

Speaking to the media on her way back into court following a break, James denounced Trump's rhetoric about the case, as well as his social media post about the judge's clerk.

"Mr. Trump's comments were offensive, they were baseless, they were void of any facts," James said.

Trump, who called James "corrupt" during his various appearances outside the courtroom, also denounced the case she brought as "rigged" and said it was timed to upend his campaign for the presidency.

"This case was brought simply because it was a case where individuals were engaged in a pattern and practice of fraud," James said. "I will not be bullied."

"Mr. Trump is no longer here -- the Donald Trump show is over," said James. "This was nothing more than a political stunt, a fundraising stop."


Trump appeals judge's pretrail ruling that he committed fraud

Three days into their fraud trial, Trump and his co-defendants have appealed the pretrial ruling last week by Judge Engoron that Trump and his adult sons committed fraud in their business dealings.

Engoron made the determination last Tuesday but said the trial was still required to decide the scope of the penalty plus six remaining causes of action alleged by the New York attorney general.

Trump's appeal asks the court to consider whether Engoron "committed errors of law and/or fact, abused its discretion, and/or acted in excess of its jurisdiction" when he ruled that Trump committed fraud and canceled his business certificates in New York state.

Trump's last attempt in this case to appeal to a higher court was denied by the appellate division of the New York State Supreme Court on the eve of the trial.


Judge, clerk subjected to daily threats, official says in gag order filing

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.