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 rests its case, makes 5th motion to end trial

Donald Trump's lawyers rested their case in the former president's civil fraud trial, as New York Attorney General Letitia James watched from the gallery.

Defense attorneys undertook several "housekeeping items" before concluding their case, including adding expert reports to the trial record "for appellate purposes."

"You're going to appeal," Judge Engoron deadpanned before breaking into laughter.

Both parties were argumentative until the end, squabbling over minor issues that threatened to draw out the defense's case.

"We don't want additional time, we want the case to end," said state attorney Kevin Wallace.

With all housekeeping finished, Trump attorney Chris Kise announced, "We do rest." He then made the defense's fifth motion for a directed verdict to end the case, saying he planned to submit a written motion on Friday.

"There is no way I am going to grant that," Judge Engoron responded. "You'd be wasting your time."

Wallace criticized Kise's plan to submit a written motion as "silly" and a "colossal waste of resources."

"We have already won on summary judgment," Wallace said in reference to Engoron's pretrial ruling. "I don't know what we are pretending is happening here."


NY AG in attendance for conclusion of defense's case

New York Attorney General Letitia James is attending the afternoon session of Donald Trump's civil fraud trial.

Sitting in the gallery with her staff, James briefly walked into Judge Engoron's chambers before the trial resumed following the midday break.

Trump's legal spokesperson, Alina Habba, was also spotted entering the judge's chambers for a separate meeting.

Court then resumed with defense attorneys conducting their redirect examination of accounting expert Eli Bartov.

Bartov is expected to be the defense's last witness before they rest their case, which will likely be followed by a brief rebuttal case by the state.


State highlights 'unpersuasive' past testimony of defense expert

In an effort to discredit the defense's accounting expert, state attorney Louis Solomon highlighted that Eli Bartov's testimony was rejected by a judge when he testified as an expert for the New York attorney general in her trial against Exxon Mobil in 2019.

The judge in that case wrote in his ruling that Bartov's testimony during that trial was "unpersuasive" and was "flatly contradicted by the weight of the evidence," according to Solomon's reading of the ruling in court.

Bartov said he was unaware of the ruling, and defense attorney Chris Kise objected to the line of questioning as irrelevant.

Bartov largely stuck to his initial testimony during two hours of cross-examination this morning, defending his overall finding while acknowledging his analysis found that Trump's statements included some marginal overstatements that "did not impact significantly Deutsche Bank's decision to extend loans."

While Bartov agreed that, in the real estate business, "price gets set first, then valuation follows" he said he saw no evidence to support the attorney general's allegation that Trump's statements were reverse engineered to provide support for the values determined by Trump and his executives.

"Do you know if they were reverse engineered?" Solomon asked.

"I have no knowledge of that," Bartov responded.

Present in the courtroom for Bartov's testimony was Eric Trump, who made a surprise appearance in the gallery. Like his father, Eric Trump initially planned to take the stand during the defense's case, but canceled his testimony.


Trump cites limited gag order for decision to not testify

In a social media post this morning, Donald Trump claimed he "wanted to testify on Monday" but blamed his decision not to testify on the trial's limited gag order, which prohibits Trump from commenting on Judge Engoron's staff.

When Trump on Sunday pulled out of his testimony, he touted the strength of his evidence and previous testimony as the reasons he decided not to take the stand.

"Anyway, the Judge, Arthur Engoron, put a GAG ORDER on me, even when I testify, totally taking away my constitutional right to defend myself. We are appealing, but how would you like to be a witness and not be allowed free snd [sic] honest speech," Trump wrote today.

In a statement to ABC News on Monday, Trump attorney Chris Kise also partially blamed the limited gag order for his client's decision not to testify.

"There is really nothing more to say to a Judge who has imposed an unconstitutional gag order and thus far appears to have ignored President Trump's testimony and that of everyone else involved in the complex financial transactions at issue in the case," Kise said.

In a court filing last week, Engoron's attorney wrote that the limited gag order "does not prevent statements about Justice Engoron himself, not the Attorney General or her staff, not the substance of the claims and allegations against petitioners, not the facts or evidence or witness testimony, not the judicial process, nor any other topic concerning the underlying action."

-Peter Charalambous and Soo Rin Kim


Judge rejects defense's request for delay due to COVID

Before today's first witness entered court, Trump attorney Chris Kise asked Judge Engoron to postpone today's proceedings after five members of the New York attorney general's team tested positive for COVID-19.

Describing the attorney general's conduct as "beyond irresponsible," Kise said that his team did not get adequate notice about the COVID exposures despite having close contact with positive individuals.

"Nothing else matters except for pursuing President Trump," Kise said. "We have the leading candidate for president of the United States in the courtroom today."

"The attorney general's office knew on Wednesday and didn't tell any of us," defense attorney Clifford Robert said. "We are truly in an outbreak."

Engoron declined to grant their requested delay.

In a statement, a spokesperson for New York Attorney General Letitia James said the state has complied with all CDC guidelines.

"Our office properly notified the court and defendants' counsel, and the court decided to proceed with trial today. If there were any concerns, defendants could wear masks today or at any point, but they have opted not to," the spokesperson said.