“It’s called politics”: In court testimony, Donald Trump puts on a combative show
The ex-US president defies conventional legal norms, transforming his Manhattan trial into yet another campaign event.
Donald Trump Faces Manhattan Civil Fraud Trial with Rambling Testimony
In a remarkable turn of events at the Manhattan federal courthouse, former US President Donald Trump found himself in the hot seat during his civil fraud trial, facing allegations of inflating his net worth to secure favorable loans and economic benefits. The trial not only addresses the allegations against him but also becomes a unique campaign stop in Trump’s quest to return to the White House. As he took the witness stand, the larger-than-life real estate tycoon displayed an unusual mix of sensitivity, bravado, and defiance, all while defending the reputation of his business success that is central to his identity and political career.
Trump’s decision to testify raised eyebrows, as legal experts warned it could have consequences in his upcoming criminal trials. While his testimony may not be helping him legally, it appears he is leveraging the trial for political gains, especially with his base. However, Trump’s courtroom appearance was not without its share of tension and drama.
The trial, brought by the New York attorney general, accuses Trump of fraudulent activities related to his real estate empire. Judge Arthur Engoron had already ruled in favor of the prosecution before the trial began, concluding that Trump had inflated his net worth. The ongoing proceedings aim to determine the penalties for Trump and his adult sons.
From the moment he took the stand, Trump’s testimony was marked by a barrage of words, circular speeches, and digressive statements. It soon irked the judge, who sternly warned Trump’s lawyer to control his client and reminded him that it was not a political rally. Trump, however, seemed unbothered and maintained a mischievous grin throughout.
For Kevin Wallace, the attorney general’s lawyer, questioning Trump was akin to trying to control a thunderstorm. Many of Wallace’s questions sought straightforward “yes or no” answers regarding the accuracy of property values in Trump’s financial statements. Trump, in characteristic fashion, dismissed accountancy rules and responded with the confidence of a New York property developer. He defended his valuations and even claimed that he could gauge a property’s value just by looking at it.
However, Trump’s audacious approach raised eyebrows, especially regarding the Trump Organization’s actions in Scotland. The organization had purportedly inflated the value of its Aberdeen golf course by $245 million in a year, based on unrealized development plans. Trump defended this by likening property valuation to painting, suggesting that you can do almost anything you want with land.
When questioned about whether he had inflated his net worth to avoid loan covenant breaches, Trump asserted that banks were primarily concerned with cash. He claimed to have a significant amount of cash over the years, which was their primary focus. There was also an unexpected moment of tenderness when Trump expressed sympathy for Allen Weisselberg, his former CFO, who had faced legal troubles.
However, Trump’s testimony was not without its moments of concession. He admitted that someone had overvalued his penthouse apartment by over $200 million, possibly due to an erroneous tripling of its square footage. Despite this, Trump insisted that the inaccuracies in his financial statements were not material because they did not account for the value of the Trump brand.
As the lunch break came and went, Trump’s demeanor shifted. He appeared bored, folding his arms and repeatedly emphasizing that any inaccuracies in his financial statements were immaterial. He argued that his actual net worth was far greater, considering the value of the Trump brand. The exchanges grew less confrontational, and the tension eased momentarily.
Yet, Trump’s fury soon returned. He directed sharp criticism at Wallace, labeling the case “a disgrace” and questioning the motivations behind it. He highlighted that his lenders had been repaid in full and on time, even possibly ahead of time, and insisted that the case was driven by politics.
The trial remains a pivotal moment in Trump’s legal and political journey. As he navigates the courtroom drama, he continues to vie for the attention of the American public, all while facing the possibility of more legal troubles in the future. Whether his strategy of mixing legal battles with political ventures will be successful remains to be seen. However, one thing is clear: the Trump legacy, both in business deals and in the realm of politics, remains as polarizing as ever.
By: M Z Hossain, Editor Sky Buzz Feed
