i.e., that Trump would have to limit his remarks to the boundaries that cover attorneys’ closing arguments: “commentary on the relevant, material facts that are in evidence, and application of the relevant law to those facts.”

He would not be allowed to introduce new evidence, “comment on irrelevant matters” or “deliver a campaign speech” — or impugn the judge, his staff, the attorney general, her lawyers or the court system, the judge wrote.

Trump attorney Christopher Kise responded that those limitations were “fraught with ambiguities, creating the substantial likelihood for misinterpretation or an unintended violation. Engoron said that they were ”reasonable, normal limits,” but Kise termed them “very unfair.”

After not hearing from Trump’s lawyers by a noon Wednesday deadline, Engoron wrote that he assumed Trump was not agreeing to the ground rules and therefore would not be speaking.

Trump (and his attorney's) objected to that and refused to agree with it, so Judge Engoron rescinded his permission.