Judge Engoron's 'last-minute question' at fraud trial hints at bad news for Trump: expert

In a series of posts on X, formerly known as Twitter, MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin confessed that an out-of-the-blue question that Judge Arthur Engoron posed to one of the prosecutors working for New York Attorney General Letitia James seemed to imply that he may come down hard on Donald Trump's ability to conduct business in New York.

While a central focus of the case involving financial fraud perpetrated by executives of the Trump Organization is the $370 million fine requested by AG James, there is also the strong possibility the Trump Org could cease to exist.

What caught Rubin's attention was, as she wrote in her initial post, "Judge Engoron's last-minute question to the New York Attorney General's lawyer yesterday: 'How would you compare the fraud you are alleging to the Madoff Ponzi Scheme?'"

She then added, "Allotted just a minute to respond, he said what many of us might say: 'It's smaller in that there is a smaller amount of people affected, smaller dollar number. But I still think it's significant given the dollar numbers involved & the fact that it involves critical regulated industry," with Rubin continuing, "And he added that Trump & the other defendants used the money they procured to build properties of which they are 'very proud,' but the lies they told to a bank to 'get that much revenue' remain 'a very significant issue.'"

ALSO READ: ‘Official’ Trump calendar omits a critical detail

Elaborating on her point, she explained that, in the case of Madoff, he showed remorse for what he had done while Trump has been defiant and professing he did nothing wrong.

That, she explained, opened the door to Engoron to suggest in his final ruling that the former president would once again engage in illegal activities unless extreme measures are taken.

"According to the AG's office, permanent injunctive relief is appropriate where there is a reasonable likelihood that the violation will continue," she wrote. "And under a case the AG cited, one factor in determining that likelihood is 'whether the defendant continues to maintain that his past conduct is blameless.'"

To bolster her position using the Madoff case cited by Engoron as a guide, she wrote, "But I am struck by the differences between these families. In one case, the father confessed, and his sons turned him in. And in the other, there is no daylight between the generations of men; the patriarch and his progeny alike have zero regrets. Worse, given an opportunity to address the court, Trump railroaded the same judge he's been publicly attacking (and endangering) for months. "

You can begin to read the thread here.