Birdwatch Note Rating
2024-02-18 07:20:24 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: 80D6E5FA019B8E5525249A0659485ABEF36094C2007752792D4CD977DC311BA4
Participant Details
Original Note:
The judge, chose to ignore the bank testimony, ignore expert testimony, and ignore defendant testimony. Instead, he says a known perjurer testimony was the credible one. The post is consistent with the judge's opinion. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24432591/ruling-in-donald-trumps-civil-fraud-trial.pdf
All Note Details