In a highly contentious $250 million civil fraud case against former President Donald Trump, Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron finds himself embroiled in controversy. Recent screenshots have emerged, allegedly showing derogatory comments about Trump on Twitter from Dawn Marie Engoron, the judge’s wife. These allegations have raised concerns about bias in the ongoing trial, further complicating an already politically charged legal battle.

Screenshots circulating on social media indicate that Dawn Marie Engoron, under the handle @dm_sminxs, posted explicit tweets directed at Trump. These tweets allegedly contained derogatory language and manipulated images of the former president wearing an orange jumpsuit. Additionally, Engoron is said to have targeted Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, and even journalist Laura Loomer, who exposed the situation. These findings have raised concerns about potential bias in the proceedings.

EXCLUSIVE: I have Uncovered screenshots from the X account of Dawn Marie Engoron, the wife of Leftist NYC Judge Arthur Engoron, who is overseeing the civil fraud against President Trump shows that she has been posting attacks on Trump from her account @dm_sminxs as the trial is… https://t.co/LynqZsciiz pic.twitter.com/07xcIo7Kma

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) November 8, 2023

Laura Loomer further alleges that Judge Engoron provided reserved seating to his son, who reportedly has a financial interest in the outcome due to his employment at a law firm involved in the case. This potential conflict of interest adds another layer of controversy and raises questions about the fairness of the proceedings.

In response to the judge’s conduct and the alleged bias, Trump’s legal team has hinted at the possibility of seeking a mistrial. Concerns over the fairness of the proceedings have been repeatedly raised, and the emergence of new evidence regarding the judge’s wife’s Twitter activity only intensifies these concerns. A mistrial could have significant implications for the case and the future of Trump’s legal battles.

Trump has accused both Judge Engoron and New York Attorney General Letitia James of conducting a politically motivated attack against him. He claims that this trial is part of a broader effort to undermine his presidency and presidential aspirations. Accusations of bias and politically motivated actions have become central to Trump’s defense strategy, further fueling the contentious nature of this legal battle.

In early October, Judge Engoron issued a gag order against Trump after the former president made public comments and posts on social media criticizing Engoron’s law clerk. Trump was ordered to refrain from publicly speaking about any member of the judge’s staff. This move was seen by many as an attempt to control the narrative surrounding the trial and limit potential interference.

The trial took a tumultuous turn when Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, challenged Judge Engoron’s courtroom decorum. Habba expressed her dissatisfaction with the judge’s behavior, claiming that she was yelled at and that the judge displayed unhinged behavior, slamming a table. This clash highlights the tense atmosphere surrounding the trial and raises questions about the judge’s demeanor and impartiality.

The $250 million civil fraud case against Trump centers around allegations of misleading financial statements. The prosecution claims that Trump provided inaccurate information regarding the value of his properties, including Mar-a-Lago. The numbers presented by the prosecution differ significantly from Trump’s financial statement, and they aim to prove that Trump intentionally misrepresented the value of his assets.

Trump has characterized the trial as a form of еlеction interference, asserting that the case is politically motivated and aimed at undermining his reputation and future political ambitions. He has criticized New York Attorney General Letitia James, labeling her a “racist attorney general” and highlighting what he perceives as a politically biased prosecution. These claims add another layer of complexity to the trial and its broader implications.