Birdwatch Note Rating
2024-02-18 02:26:01 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: EF466972862EFFEFF4EBB376394D5B2C21A125DF0258A4CD5F946FE0C3A65395
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