“Absolutely untrue”: Judge shames Trump lawyer for using Breitbart article to attack clerk in court

Donald Trump's civil fraud trial in New York took a nosedive before the proceedings got underway Friday with Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron opening by raising his concerns about the former president and his legal team's jabs at Engoron's principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield, over their perceptions of "bias."

“I’m worried about this,” Engoron told the defense, according to The Daily Beast.

“To the extent that there is the perception of bias,” Trump lawyer Chris Kise replied, he needed to “as a lawyer… at least mark it.”

Engoron said he didn't consider the case to be political and “promised not to pound the table again, the bench.” But he reiterated a Thursday assertion that he had an “unfettered right to get assistance” from his clerk, who sits at his side on the bench, and explained he had "no idea" how that act demonstrates bias.

“You can say whatever you want about me,” he said. “And that has been taken advantage of. I think that’s where there would be any appearance of bias, but I cut this case right down the middle.”

In response, Kise dove into a rant about how the matter was "treading in a dangerous area."

“The entire country, if not the world, is watching this proceeding,” Kise argued. “And the U.S. heretofore has been a model for integrity and impartiality in the judicial system, since its founding. Nothing in here should create any appearance that the adherence to those principles has wavered… Yes, as a judge you’re entitled to receive [assistance], but from someone who has potentially demonstrable bias… and the manner in which that has taken place, we at least have to make a record.”

Kise rehashed the same argument he made at the end of the day Thursday, griping about how “things are frequently, if not inordinately, against us on every major issue.” He said he felt as if he were taking on “two adversaries, not one,” and referenced a Thursday night article calling for Greenfield to be disbarred because of her political donations to Democrats.

The allegations in the article, he said were, "delivered to the court" on Friday morning, asserting that he may move for a mistrial and adding that the same "information" about "extrajudicial conduct” was brought up last month. 

"It's not information, it's an allegation," Engoron fired back, saying that he had no idea what article Kise was referring to and hadn't seen it. 

Though he admitted to not remembering the specific publication, Kise said he thought it "may be Breitbart," which is a website once run by Trump's ex-strategist Steve Bannon. The Daily Beast confirmed that the story in question was a "thinly sourced Breitbart article about a complaint filed by a Wisconsin man not involved in the trial."

Specifically, the article is sourced entirely to an X/Twitter user from Wisconsin whose account bio reads, "Applying the 69th Amendment to the Internet!" according to The Messenger. That user filed a bar complaint, circulated on a website with a URL in Greenfield's name that was created on Oct. 4, 2023, the day after Engoron first issued the gag order against Trump. The user's feed is also rife with attacks of the judge.

When Kise disclosed the origin of the claims on the pro-Trump website, audible groans resounded in the courtroom.

At that point, Engoron seemed to have reached his wits end, calling Kise's claim that he had been made aware of the story on Friday morning, "absolutely untrue, okay?!”

“I would have remembered receiving such an allegation,” he roared, adding. “Let everybody in the room decide what they think of Breitbart… It's a shame things have descended to this level.”

After telling the defense that he just wanted to “move ahead with the trial,” Eric Trump rose to the witness stand — around 30 minutes behind schedule — to resume his testimony from Thursday. In his Friday testimony, The New York Times reported, he consistently evaded questions about what he knew of the Trump Organization's financial statements, claiming that he did not know about the minute details. 

“That is not what an executive at my level of the company does,” Eric Trump said at one point when asked about the process of assessing properties in Florida.

Relations between the judge and Trump's legal team have become increasingly fraught as the trial progresses. At the end of Thursday's proceedings, Engoron blew up at Kise, pounding on the bench and threatening to expand a gag order to bar Trump's attorneys from attacking court staff.

Kise had complained that Greenfield was passing notes to Engoron, suggesting that she was co-judging the trial. But an angry Engoron replied that he had an “absolute unfettered right to get advice” from his clerk, adding that there “may be a bit of misogyny” in the repeated slights at Greenfield. Kise countered that he couldn't be a misogynist because he's married and had a daughter.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Later Friday morning, Engoron ruled that Trump's attorneys were prohibited from making statements about his staff, adding that he would issue a written order on the matter later. 

Counsel for the attorney general, Kevin Wallace, ripped Trump's teams' "sideshow" of the clerk passing notes to the judge as being "designed to interrupt our ability to put an end to this."

"If there's something improper between a judge and a clerk passing notes, you should make your motion now," Wallace said, prompting agreement from the judge.

"If you want to appeal, or move to recuse, you have plenty of ammunition," Engoron said.

Engoron has previously fined the former president a total of $15,000 for repeatedly going after Greenfield in violation of a partial gag order, including a social media post where Trump called the clerk “[Chuck] Schumer’s girlfriend.”

The judge ruled in a partial summary judgment ahead of the trial that Trump and sons Eric and Don Jr., the Trump Organization and other company execs were liable of fraud in overvaluing their assets on financial statements to secure better loan terms and make more favorable deals. Through the bench trial, Engoron will determine the exact penalty the co-defendants will receive. 

The New York attorney general brought the lawsuit against the former president and is seeking $250 million in damages as well as a ban on the co-defendants' ability to do business in the state. Engoron granted part of that request but it has been placed on hold pending appeal.