Engoron ruling activates Trump rant

And that was to be expected.

For at least the fifth time, former President Donald Trump on Monday lost an attempt to dismiss his civil fraud case through a maneuver seeking a directed verdict in his favor.

[...]

Trump brought his most recent challenge toward the end of the defense case, when his experts argued that his business had latitude on what he could disclose about his assets without engaging in fraud.

[...]

"Valuations, as elucidated ad nauseum in this trial, can be based on different criteria analyzed in different ways," the ruling states. "But a lie is still a lie. Valuing occupied residences as if vacant, valuing restricted land as if unrestricted, valuing an apartment as if it were triple its actual size, valuing property many times the amount of concealed appraisals, valuing planned buildings as if completed and ready to rent, valuing golf courses with brand premium while claiming not to, and valuing restricted funds as cash, are not subjective differences of opinion, they are misstatements at best and fraud at worst."

  Messenger

Speaking on his Truth Social media platform, Trump said Judge Arthur Engoron "mocked and excoriated" a "highly respected Expert Witness."

[...]

The ignorant Judge did not even try to listen to the Expert Witness. This is a great insult to a man of impeccable character and qualifications."

[...]

In a rant spanning several Truth Social posts, Trump continued to suggest the court was against him for political reasons.

[...]

Engoron wrote: "[Eli] Bartov is a tenured professor, but the only thing his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say."

Bartov was paid around $1,350 an hour in relation to the case. For 650 hours work, the New York University Stern School of Business research professor came away with $877,500. In all, the Trump team paid a total of 19 witnesses $2.5 million.

[...]

Engoron already ruled that Trump did commit fraud while filing his financial statements and deceived lenders in the processed. As a result, he said Bartov "lost credibility" by "doggedly attempting to justify every misstatement."

[...]

"I never said that or even remotely implied that," Bartov said, adding that some errors were "inadvertent, not fraudulent."

Saying that he charged Trump his normal billing rate, he said: "No other expert found fraud... no expert rebutted my testimony."

  MSN

They didn't have to. Documents and other witnesses did that. But it would seem that, while that was technically true, a state's expert gave contradictory testimony.

Michiel McCarty, chairman and CEO at the investment bank M.M. Dillon & Co, was paid around $350,000 for his testimony, according to ABC News. He was the state's only paid witness.

And everyone knows - or should know - that, indeed, experts say what you pay them to say.  It's no surprise that a rich defendant's expert gets paid more than a state's.  They all get way too much.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.