Judge Arthur Engoron has denied former Pres. Donald Trump's lawyers' fourth request for a directed verdict to end his New York civil fraud trial, following a tense exchange over whether New York Attorney General Letitia James' case lacked merit.
Previously, Eli Bartov, a New York University accounting professor testifying as an expert witness for the defense, had told the Manhattan Supreme Court that the $250M case couldn't be proved as "there is no evidence whatsoever for any accounting fraud."
This case is an ultimate embarrassment to America's justice system, as the Democratic prosecutors have gone out of their way to try to impoverish Trump and prevent him from returning to the White House. As usual, they have nothing against him — no victim, fraud, statute violation, intent, materiality, or unlawful gains.
Section 63(12) of New York's Executive Law, which was passed at the behest of Republican Attorney General Jacob Javits in the mid-1950s, doesn't require the government to prove financial losses or intention to defraud. The statute defines fraud simply as the continuous submission of exaggerated financial statements — precisely what Trump has made for decades.