Trump’s fraud trial draws to a chaotic close
NEW YORK – Donald Trump’s civil fraud trial concluded Thursday much as it unfolded over the past three months: in chaos, with the former president insulting the judge to his face, lashing out at the New York attorney general who brought the case and declaring himself “an innocent man.”
Inside a packed Manhattan courtroom where each side presented its closing arguments, Trump delivered surprise remarks in his own defense with the judge staring stone-faced from the bench and Attorney General Letitia James sitting just feet away as the defendant accused her of pursuing a political vendetta.
Trump’s airing of grievances reflected visceral disdain for James, but it also amplified a broader strategy of painting himself as the victim of a grand conspiracy. As Trump mounts another run for the White House while facing the civil trial and four criminal indictments, he has sought to turn the cases on their head, accusing his accusers of the same conduct that landed him in legal jeopardy.
Trump claimed that the fraud case was, in fact, “a fraud on me.” He also brazenly asserted that James, who is seeking a $370 million penalty, “should pay me” for his ordeal.
The spectacle of Trump’s self-defense lasted only a few minutes, during which he claimed that James “hates Trump and uses Trump to get elected.”
And in a remarkable breakdown of courtroom decorum, Trump upbraided the judge, Justice Arthur F. Engoron, declaring, “You have your own agenda, I certainly understand that.” As Engoron stared at him, Trump added, “You can’t listen for more than one minute.”
Engoron instructed the former president’s lawyer to “control your client.” But Trump continued until the moment of the lunch break, when he stopped as suddenly as he had started and left the courthouse for a news conference at his 40 Wall St. building.
The episode ushered in a dramatic conclusion to a monthslong trial that has enraged the former president and threatened his family business. James wants not only to extract the financial penalty, but also to oust Trump from his own company and the wider world of New York real estate.
The trial put Trump’s net worth under a microscope as James accused the former president of violating state law by inflating the value of his properties to obtain favorable loans and other financial benefits. Her case struck at the heart of Trump’s image as a real estate mogul, portraying the former president as a fabulist rather than a visionary.
James’ team in closing statements highlighted internal documents and the testimony of onetime Trump employees, asserting that the former president’s financial statements were false every year from 2011 to 2021, inflated by as much as $2.2 billion.
Kevin Wallace, a state lawyer, said that New York does not permit such exaggeration. “That is the law,” he said.
Wallace argued that the fraud was necessary for the operations of the Trump Organization, and that it had profited from generous loans even when in a cash crunch, allowing the Trump family to avoid hard choices.
After court was adjourned, James defended her case, saying that it had “never been about politics, personal vendetta, or about name calling.”
“This case is about the facts and the law, and Mr. Trump violated the law,” she said.
Engoron, who will decide the verdict alone, has been persuaded by James’ arguments in the past. Even before the trial, he ruled in her favor, finding that Trump had committed fraud by inflating his assets and thus his net worth. The bulk of the trial concerned whether Trump’s conduct had violated other state laws, as well as the potential punishments.
Trump’s lawyers had informed Engoron last week that Trump planned to speak at closing arguments, but the judge sought to limit his remarks, preventing the former president from delivering “a campaign speech” or attacking him, his staff or James. Trump’s legal team objected to the restrictions, and it appeared he would not speak until one of his lawyers renewed the request at the end of the defense’s closing arguments Thursday and the judge permitted it.
Despite Engoron’s restrictions, the former president spoke his mind exactly as he had planned.
“I’ve been persecuted by someone running for office,” he said, apparently referring to James and again calling her case a “political witch hunt.”
Trump’s lawyers had kicked off the hearing with a similar attack on James, painting her as a rogue official who had no actual evidence, only partisan talking points.
“It has always been press releases and posturing, but no proof at all,” Christopher M. Kise, one of Trump’s lawyers, said.
Kise also argued that the documents at the heart of the case – Trump’s annual financial statements containing values of his properties – were essentially irrelevant to loans the former president received. Trump’s banks were hardly victims, he said: They profited, and extolled the former president as a reliable borrower.
“That’s unrebutted!” Kise repeatedly exclaimed about testimony favorable to the former president, adding that the bankers had “rolled out the red carpet” for Trump.
Wallace dismissed such arguments as repetitive and simplistic. “Donald Trump is rich,” he said in a mocking summary. “Banks like rich people.”
Alina Habba, a lawyer representing Trump as well as two of his former top employees, noted that there was little paper evidence connecting Trump to the case and that his financial statements had been assembled by a prominent accounting firm. In her theatrical presentation, Habba criticized the attorney general for drinking Starbucks in the courtroom and, she claimed, for having her shoes off during closing arguments.
“They’re not living in the real world,” Habba said. “They’re living in this crazy world,” she said, prompting Engoron to question the relevance of the attorney general’s footwear situation.
At times, the closing arguments, like the trial itself, devolved into a back and forth between Trump’s legal team and Engoron. Their conflicts often involved issues about which the judge had already offered his opinion – but unlike many lawyers, Kise made no apparent attempt to tailor his arguments to those opinions. Instead, Kise’s arguments seem targeted at an appeals court, the public and his client.
The trial unfolded amid Trump’s heated rhetoric about the swarm of cases against him – and a wave of threats against the prosecutors pursuing him and the judges overseeing the cases.
Early Thursday morning, Nassau County authorities responded to a false report of a bomb at Engoron’s home. The report came the morning after Trump had again attacked Engoron on Truth Social, his social media site, saying that the judge and James were trying to “screw me.”
Trump and his lawyers also frequently took aim during the trial at the judge’s chief law clerk, Allison Greenfield, prompting Engoron to bar them from commenting on court staff. The judge fined Trump $15,000 for twice violating that gag order.
Trump is not the only defendant in James’ case. His adult sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., are also on trial, as is the Trump Organization itself. The Trump sons were also called to testify by James and distanced themselves from the drafting of the financial statements, an argument to which Engoron appeared sympathetic Thursday.
The judge, however, offered no such glimmer of hope to their father.
When called to the witness stand by James’ office during the trial, Trump acknowledged having helped to assemble the statements.
“I would look at them, I would see them, and I would maybe on occasion have some suggestions,” he said.
While Trump contended that he had not taken part in fraud, James’ team questioned his credibility. Andrew Amer, one of James’ lawyers, on Thursday posited a question for the judge.
“Ask yourself: Would any of this persistent fraud have happened over the course of 11 years if it wasn’t directed from the top by Mr. Trump?” Amer said, adding, “We contend it’s obvious.”