This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The New York judge hearing state Attorney General Letitia James' claims about the value of the properties of Donald Trump – she's alleged fraud without documenting any loss or injury to anyone – apparently wants to control the entire dialogue in his courtroom.
Judge Arthur Engoron, who during a speech a few years ago described how he manipulated cases in front of him, on Friday expanded his gag order in the case to include Trump's defense lawyers.
He earlier gagged Trump, and fined him twice, for expressing his opinion on the case.
The Daily Caller News Foundation reported Engoron said now that Trump's lawyers cannot make "any public comments about court staff" referring to "confidential communications" between him and his staff.
The bias of the court, including the judge and the staff he directs, is, of course, a prime component in the case that has been openly criticized by analysts as nothing but "political."
Engoron ordered attorneys Christopher Kise, Clifford Robert, and Alina Habba to no longer make "inappropriate remarks" about his law clerk. Engoron claimed those remarks "falsely accus[e] her of bias against them and of improperly influencing the ongoing bench trial."
The judge already has decided the case, ruling for James on the claims that there was "fraud" in Trump's business empire, even though there were no unpaid loans, no injured parties, and no damages.
He wildly claimed that Trump's Mar-a-Lago home was worth $18 million, drawing guffaws from real estate experts who said its worth was many times that, well into the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Engoron initially gagged Trump in October after he made a post on Truth Social referencing Allison Greenfield, Engoron’s clerk, as Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s "girlfriend." It was accompanied by a photo of Greenfield and Schumer together.
Engoron Friday ordered that his law clerks "are performing their jobs in the manner in which I request," so they cannot be the subject of any comment.
Trump has already been fined $5,000 and $10,000 for violating his gag order. The first was for failing to remove a Truth Social post from his campaign website and then for comments he made to reporters outside the courtroom, calling the person sitting beside Engoron "very partisan."
The person "sitting" beside Engoron, he said, was a witness against him.
Engoron claimed he's bothered by "harassing and threatening phone calls, voicemails, emails, letters, and packages," so he's suspending the First Amendment rights of "defendants and their attorneys."
WND reported when a legal analyst warned that the fraud case brought against Trump by James, who campaigned politically for office on a "get" Trump ideology, is a "political persecution" that violates Trump's constitutional rights.
Legal expert Greg Jarrett, on "The Evening Edit," said James was "turning the law on its head" to "get" Trump.
"This executive law, Liz, was intended for consumer fraud cases impacting the general public. Here, the public wasn't impacted at all. Indeed, no party was harmed, which is normally an element of proof in fraud cases. The banks paid more than $100 million in profits from the loans to Trump," he explained.
"So, you know, this statute, as it's being used by Letitia James, is really turning the law on its head. It gives her unfettered authority to pursue Trump for fraud without actually having to prove the basic elements of fraud demanded by law. And that, as you say, deprives the defendant of a right to fairly defend himself. And it also deprives him of a right to a trial by jury, both of which are due process violations under the Fifth, the Seventh, and the 14th Amendments to the Constitution."
James, in fact, boasted during her campaign for office that she would "get" Trump and speculated even back then that he should be charged with "obstruction." She was creating a case against Trump at the time without evidence.
She has claimed that Trump inflated the values of his properties, but there were no complaints from his partners, the banks, or anyone else of any lost any money on any of his transactions.
James is demanding a quarter of a billion dollars in penalties from Trump and also wants his companies dissolved, which, Jarrett noted, would hurt innocent people who have had no opportunity to defend themselves from James' claims.
Jarrett explained the order from Engoron for that dissolution is unconstitutional.
"The judge's order of forced dissolution of any company that Trump has an interest in, well, what's that going to do? It's going to adversely impact every other business partner and entity associated with Trump that is not part of this case. They weren't even sued. They'll be harmed with no notice, and no right to defend their interests. How is that consumer protection? It's not. It's consumer punishment. This isn't equitable relief, which the statute calls for. It's a severe penalty..." Jarrett said.
