After more than three months of bitter arguments, courtroom grandstanding, hallway gaggles and hundreds of objections, former President Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial is coming to a close in a New York courtroom on Thursday.
Trump is attending the proceedings, which got underway shortly after 10 a.m. His effort to get permission to deliver some of his own closing arguments was rejected by Judge Arthur Engoron on Wednesday, when Trump failed to agree to limit what he said to “relevant, material facts that are in evidence, and application of the relevant law to those facts,” as the judge had required.
Outside the courtroom, Trump said he was “hoping to speak and help my lawyers reveal all the defects in this case.”
“As you know, I want to speak, I want to make the summation. At this moment the judge is not letting me make the summation because I’ll bring up things that he doesn’t want to hear,” he told reporters.
The closing arguments are the last opportunity for lawyers for Trump and his co-defendants to limit the fallout from the case. New York Attorney General Letitia James is seeking $370 million for the state and a lifetime ban for Trump from working in New York real estate, among other sanctions.
Trump’s attorneys will present their closing first, with lawyers for the state following suit in the afternoon. Each side is allowed up to 2 hours and 15 minutes to make their case.
The judge has said he won’t issue a ruling immediately. He plans to take several weeks before making a decision on the outstanding issues in the case.
The Trump team’s closing argument
SHANNON STAPLETON/POOL/AFP via Getty Images
Christopher Kise, an attorney for Trump, argued that the state failed to rebut the testimony of experts called by the defense and cast doubt on one of the state’s key witnesses.
Kise insisted Engoron had to take unrebutted testimony into consideration when crafting his decision. Engoron interrupted Kise to disagree.
“I should make clear that I’m not passing judgment on whether what you say was unrebutted, but I don’t believe I have to accept unrebutted testimony if I don’t find it credible,” Engoron said. In a Dec. 18 ruling, the judge indicated that he in fact did not find one particular Trump witness credible: accounting professor Eli Bartov, who heaped praise on Trump’s financial statements.
“All that his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say,” Engoron wrote at the time, referring to the amount Bartov charged for the work that went into his testimony, which totaled at least $877,500.
Trump leaned in, apparently paying particularly close attention when Kise spoke about estimates of his net worth, and the testimony of his nemesis and former attorney Michael Cohen.
Kise honed in on Cohen’s October testimony, when Cohen said the former president personally authorized the fraudulent inflation of his net worth and property valuations.
Kise displayed a slide titled, “Michael Cohen — AG Only [sic] Witness is a Serial Liar.” Cohen admitted while testifying to previously having lied under oath multiple times. Kise said Cohen was the state’s only witness who testified about the defendants’ “intent” in compiling fraudulent financial statements.
“He’s their only witness. They don’t have anybody else. They’re forcing you, judge, into the extremely uncomfortable position of having to find Michael Cohen a credible witness,” Kise said.
Another attorney for Trump and other defendants, Alina Habba, also focused her brief remarks on Cohen, whose 2019 congressional testimony about Trump was the impetus for the state’s investigation.
“Your honor, you’re not a pushover, but he thought you were. He sat here, he lied, and he instigated all of this,” Habba said.
She and Kise both blamed accountants working for Trump and the company, arguing that they relied on an outside firm to safeguard them.
“What did they do, these fraudsters, these alleged fraudsters? They hired one of the largest accounting firms in the state of New York. It makes no sense,” Habba said.
Kise finished his presentation by going through a list of Trump properties, seeking to show that James’ team failed to prove that Trump and his company received any “ill-gotten gains” from fraud, let alone the $370 million the state is seeking.
Trump’s attorney argued that a witness for James who testified about the impact of fraud on the loans didn’t account for the possibility that, as the defense said, Trump would have still qualified for unusually good terms, even if his net worth was a fraction of what it was.
Kise said the case would set a bad precedent if Trump loses, driving businesses from New York.
“You just cannot allow the attorney general to pursue a victimless fraud and impose the corporate death penalty,” Kise said.
He also admonished Engoron: “Think of your legacy. This is precedent.”
The Trump fraud trial
The trial, which began Oct. 2, revolved around accounting minutiae and days of dry testimony that were punctuated by heated courtroom outbursts and confrontations. Trump was fined twice for violating a gag order put in place after he published a derogatory social media post about Engoron’s law clerk.
Cohen, Trump’s former fixer, testified in October and tried to object to questions he was asked, causing Trump’s current attorney to lament, “This witness is out of control.” A witness who testified on Trump’s behalf told a lawyer for James, “You ought to be ashamed of yourself.” And Trump himself was called to the stand on Dec. 6, often responding to questions with lengthy diatribes focused on Engoron and James.
James’ office accused Trump, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., their company and two executives of a yearslong scheme to use inflated valuations to obtain undeservedly good terms on bank and insurance deals.
Engoron found the defendants liable for fraud in a September pretrial ruling. Much of that ruling was paused during the trial, which continued on accusations related to insurance fraud, falsification of business records, and conspiracy.
Trump and his co-defendants have denied all allegations. The Republican, who is running for president again, has raged against the case, calling it political retribution by Democrats.
