Trump fined $350m in civil fraud trial as judge blasts ‘pathological’ lack of remorse
Donald Trump ordered to pay more than $350m in massive fraud trial ruling
Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox
Get our free Inside Washington email
Justice Arthur Engoron has delivered his verdict in Donald Trump’s New York civil fraud trial that sees the former president, his company, and his associates with $355m in fines — with interest $463.9m — and a three-year ban on doing business in the state.
The judge had already ruled that Mr Trump inflated his wealth on financial statements that were given to banks and insurers to make deals and secure favourable loans.
New York Attorney General Letitia James who brought the case had sought $370m in disgorgement from the entities.
On Thursday, another Big Apple justice, Judge Juan Merchan, denied Mr Trump’s motion to dismiss the case brought against him by Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg for allegedly falsifying business records to conceal a “hush money” payment made to porn star Stormy Daniels, setting a trial date of 25 March.
And, in Georgia, Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis took to the witness stand to defend herself and former boyfriend Nathan Wade against a motion arguing they should be disqualified from prosecuting the sprawling racketeering case brought against Mr Trump and others over their alleged effort to interfere in the 2020 election in the Peach State.
Willis and Wade’s relationship was first revealed by Merchant, an attorney for Trump co-defendant Michael Roman, a former campaign staffer and onetime White House aide. Merchant has alleged that Willis personally profited from the case, paying Wade more than $650,000 for his work and then benefiting when Wade used his earnings to pay for vacations the pair took together.
Wade testified that he and Willis took trips together, but said Willis paid him back in cash for some expenses that he had charged to his credit card. Defense attorneys have sought to cast doubt on the claim that Willis paid Wade in cash, pressing both of them on why Willis would use cash and if they had any evidence that she paid him with it.
Prosecutors opted not to put Willis back on the witness stand on Friday, avoiding the spectacle of more deeply personal testimony from the the district attorney. On the witness stand Thursday, Willis forcefully pushed back against any suggestion that her relationship with Wade created a conflict of interest and accused a defense attorney of trying to smear her with salacious lies in an effort to discredit the case against Trump. Willis and Wade have both acknowledged they were in a relationship, but say their personal lives have no bearing on their ability to prosecute the case.
Even if the allegations don’t derail the case, they threaten to taint the public’s perception of one of four criminal proceedings facing the former president, and have provided an opening for Trump and his Republican allies to try to cast doubt on the case’s legitimacy as he vies to reclaim the White House in November.
Trump immediately jumped on the allegations in hopes of discrediting the entire case, part of a yearslong pattern of deflecting attention away from his own conduct by highlighting the personal lives and lapses in judgment — both perceived and real — of the officials investigating him. His use of the word “lover” to refer to Wade echoed his attacks years earlier on two FBI officials who had an extramarital relationship and exchanged derogatory text messages about him during the FBI’s investigation into Russian election interference.
The hearing, with testimony about cash stashes in homes, romantic dalliances and vacations to exotic locales, lent a soap opera feel to one of the most politically consequential prosecutions ever initiated by a county district attorney. Thousands watched a livestream of the proceedings, even during tedious lawyerly exchanges about legal theory, while some prominent local figures — including Atlanta’s current mayor — dropped in to witness the hearing in person.
Yet despite the public intrigue and the potential to undermine the integrity of the case, it was far from clear by midday Friday that defense lawyers had succeeded in presenting indisputably persuasive evidence to push Willis or Wade out of the prosecution.
Wade’s former law partner and divorce attorney, Terrence Bradley, was described by the defense as a key witness who would testify that Willis and Wade began dating before Wade was hired. There have been differing accounts about when the relationship began. Wade and Willis have said they didn’t start dating until 2022, but a former Willis friend and co-worker testified Thursday that she saw them hugging and kissing before Wade was hired in November 2021.
Bradley repeatedly refused to answer questions about Wade and Willis, citing attorney-client privilege. But he did acknowledge texting with the defense attorney who first revealed the existence of Willis and Wade’s relationship
Fani Willis case ensnared in legal arguments during testimony about romantic relationship timeline
Attorneys for the state of Georgia seeking to knock down misconduct allegations against Fani Willis called her father to the witness stand Friday to testify about his knowledge of her romantic relationship with the special prosecutor she hired to lead the state’s election interference case against Donald Trump.
On the second day of an extraordinary hearing that could result in Willis and her office being removed from the case against the former president, Willis’ father, John Clifford Floyd III, testified that he had not met special prosecutor Nathan Wade until last year and didn’t find out until weeks ago that they had been in a relationship. Defense attorneys have been trying to show that the romantic relationship existed before Willis hired Wade.
Prosecutors also sought to bolster Willis’ testimony that Wade was not the district attorney’s first choice to lead the case against Trump. Former Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes testified that Willis approached him in 2021 about serving as special prosecutor, but that he turned it down in part because he had “mouths to feed” at his law practice and because he was concerned about potential threats of violence that could come with the job.
No Trump endorsement = No Senate bid
Congressman Matt Rosendale, a Republican who launched his bid for the Senate less than a week ago, announced he is no longer running for the seat.
He issued a statement saying he dropped out because Donald Trump did not endorse him, according to Politico.
“As everyone knows, I have planned to run for the U.S. Senate and to win both the primary and the general election,” Mr Rosendale said in a statement. “However, the day I announced, President Trump then announced that he was endorsing a different candidate.”
Mr Trump tossed his support to Tim Sheehy, a former Navy SEAL and aerospace businessman. Mr Sheehy has also been endorsed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Oliver O’Connell17 February 2024 03:20
Report: Trump privately supporting 16-week abortion ban because he likes even numbers
Former President Donald Trump has quietly expressed support for a 16-week abortion ban but told his advisers he wants to keep his opinions close to his chest until the end of the Republican presidential primary, according to reports.
The New York Times was the first to report the news. According to the outlet, Mr Trump is advocating for a ban with three exceptions: in cases of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother. The paper said the information came from “two people with direct knowledge of Mr Trump’s deliberations.”
Michelle Del Rey has the story:
Oliver O’Connell17 February 2024 02:20
Watch: Fani Willis’s father learned of her relationship with Nathan Wade when we did
Oliver O’Connell17 February 2024 01:45
Recap: Don Jr and Eric Trump fined millions
Donald Trump Jr and his younger brother Eric Trump have been ordered to pay a total of more than $8m for the fraudulent business dealings of their father’s sprawling real estate empire.
A New York court on Friday found former president Donald Trump and his Trump Organization liable for just under $464m, representing $364m in surrendered profits and $100m in interest so far.
Prosecutors had accused the company of grossly inflating Mr Trump’s net worth and assets in documents handed to banks and lenders in order to secure more favourable financing terms for some of his star properties.
Oliver O’Connell17 February 2024 01:00
Recap: Judge orders Donald Trump to pay more than $350m in massive fraud trial ruling
The former president and his co-defendants defrauded banks and investors as part of a decade-long scheme to secure favourable financing terms for some of his brand-building properties, according to a blockbuster lawsuit filed by New York’s attorney general nearly two years ago.
A final judgment from New York Justice Arthur Engoron on Friday finds the former president, Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump, as well as their Trump Organization associates and Trump properties liable for tens of millions of dollars.
Alex Woodward has been following the case for The Independent since day one:
Oliver O’Connell17 February 2024 00:45
Key revelations from Donald Trump’s fraud trial ruling
The former president, his companies and his trust face more than $350m in financial penalties, plus interest, in a total amount that could exceed by another $100m, among other sanctions that could imperil his ability to do business in the state for at least three years. Should he appeal, he will have to pay a significant amount of that total to post a bond.
The total “disgorgement” owed back to the state among all the defendants – money that is effectively forfeited as “ill-gotten gains” – amounts to roughly $364m, or nearly $464m with likely interest.
According to the New York attorney general’s office, those figures will continue to increase every day until they are paid.
Alex Woodward rounds up the key revelations from Judge Engoron’s ruling:
Oliver O’Connell17 February 2024 00:26
Read Nore:Trump fined $350m in civil fraud trial as judge blasts ‘pathological’ lack of remorse