Trump Rages At Judge After Motion Denial in Fraud Case: Should Be ‘Thrown Off The Bench’


OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.

Former President Donald Trump had harsh words for Judge Arthur Engoron after he denied a motion in the $250 million civil fraud case filed against him by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Engoron upset Trump after he ruled that his Monday testimony must go forward, leading the former president to declare the judge should be “thrown off the bench.”

“We have totally proven our Case,” he wrote on his Truth Social platform Tuesday afternoon.

He also ripped into his former fixer lawyer, Michael Cohen, as the attorney general’s “sole witness” while calling for him to be “prosecuted for his lies.”


Trump wrote: We have totally proven our Case against the Corrupt, Racist, New York Attorney General, Letitia “Peekaboo” James. The Banks, Insurance Companies, virtually everybody said we were “GREAT,” PERFECT LOANS, NO VICTIMS! Their sole Witness has been completely discredited, and admitted he lied about everything. He was the only Witness they had, and should be prosecuted for his lies. The Judge and the A.G. falsified the value of Mar-a-Lago and other Assets to make me look as bad as possible, and got caught. For anyone else, what they did would be considered FRAUD, and they would be thrown off the “bench” and out of office….

Trump’s attorneys had filed a motion with Engoron seeking a delay in his Monday testimony while he appeals a gag order the judge put in place weeks ago.

The Washington Examiner reported that Trump has been under a gag order since the first weeks of his trial, which began in October, due to posts on social media referencing Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron and his staff. The Examiner noted that Trump’s filing appeared on the New York Appellate Division, First Judicial Department docket on Monday, which revealed the former president’s intent to appeal the lower court’s ruling to the state’s highest court.

“Engoron contends his principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield, has sustained harassing and antisemitic messages ever since Trump posted a picture of her with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and referred to her as his ‘girlfriend’ on Oct. 4, the second day of the civil fraud trial against the Trump Organization,” the outlet explained.

“Trump was ordered to delete the social media post and entered a gag order against him that day. Engoron has ruled Trump has violated the order twice and fined him a total of $15,000 so far, a fee Trump has already paid out,” the report continued. “The order has since been expanded to block Trump’s attorneys from commenting about his communications with the clerk, who sits next to Engoron during the trial.”

Meanwhile, in addition to the federal and state charges facing Trump, the former president is also dealing with a legal onslaught to keep him off the 2024 ballot in several states.


A lengthy list of parties, including over a dozen attorneys general from states controlled by Republicans, have filed briefs in a legal challenge to the constitutional eligibility of former president Donald Trump to appear on Colorado’s 2024 ballot.

Following last month’s ruling against six voters arguing that Trump’s role in inciting the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. was unfounded, the Colorado Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case this week. An insurrection clause from the Civil War bars him from the Capitol, Colorado News reported.

In her ruling from November 17, Judge Sarah B. Wallace stated that the 14th Amendment’s Section 3 does not apply to the presidency, even though she found that Trump “engaged in insurrection” according to that provision. The provision forbids someone from holding office again if they do so after taking an oath to support the Constitution.

Test your skills with this Quiz!

Since then, the Colorado Supreme Court has heard the case on appeal, and a decision is forthcoming.

Courts in other states—including Arizona, Minnesota, and Michigan—rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments.