Donald Trump was forced to take the witness stand as the defendant in the $250 million civil fraud case on Monday. He found himself on an uncontrollable public stage, and he hated it. Trump struggled and was often unable to answer questions directly from New York prosecutors regarding his role in fraudulently inflating the value of his net worth.
As the defendant in a$ 250 million civil fraud case, Donald Trump took the witness stand on Monday. He found himself on an unmanageable public stage, and he detested it. Trump struggled, and frequently failed, to keep his composure in the face of strong questions from New York prosecutors about what part he played in improperly inflating his net worth. Trump appeared to be ready to argue with the attorneys from the state attorney general’s office when he appeared in court, but judge Arthur Engoron didn’t think twice to restrain his attempts to scuttle the case.
How do you rule someone who did a wonderful job as the president of the United States and call them fraud?
When Kevin Wallace, the state’s attorney, asked Engoron about the banks he did business with, Trump blustering about what they might be interested in. At one point, Kise turned to Trump and reprimanded the team with his typically cordial face grimly furrowed.
Can you manage your client, Mr. Kise? Engoron snarled,” This is a courtroom, no some political rally. ” We’ll be around forever and achieve nothing if he editorializes, so I don’t want that.”
A short while later, Engoron attacked Kise once more when Trump strayed from the question he had been asked.
” We got another speech ,” he muttered. ” I implore you to restrain him, if you can. I will if you can’t. I’ll pardon him and make every unfavorable assumption I can.
A court’s conclusion that a defendant must be concealing something negative if they don’t follow the rules is referred to as” negative inference” in legal jargon. In a legal case, defendants are protected by the constitution by their right never to testify; if they decline to do so, their decision cannot be used against them. However, defendants do not have this right in legal court, where this special Trump’s trial is being held. Engoron made it clear he was done giving Trump the benefit of the doubt when Kise objected that Trump, who was a key player in the case, should be permitted to respond as loosely as possible.
Engoron told Kise,” No, I don’t want to hear everything this witness has to say; a lot of it has nothing to do with the case or the questions.” Engoron repeated that sentiment a short while later.
We’re not around to hear what he has to say, but rather to listen to him respond to inquiries, and the majority of the time, Engoron said. Trump, who posted the second half of the quote to his Truth Social account during a lunch break and left off the rest, seemed to be specially altered by that phrase.
Engoron’s aggressive demeanor was different from how he usually acted. He was considerably persistent with Trump and his attorneys in the early stages of the lengthy legal case, despite the fact that they frequently disobeyed his orders. Engoron was much more likely to crack a silly joke than speak up during the initial five weeks of the trial.
Trump was also in a bad mood when he stumbled into court on Monday morning, followed by an exceedingly large group of lawyers and security personnel. Although he was initially quiet on the witness stand, his face was in an angry pout, and it didn’t take him long to explode — especially after Engoron repeatedly checked his rambling testimony. At one point, the former president curled forth in a hunch and leaned into the microphone, enraged by Engoron’s refusal to acknowledge that Trump was exonerated of any wrongdoing by an ambiguously worded disclaimer at the beginning of financial statements. Trump berated Engoron for having ruled that Trump had in fact committed fraud before the trial also started, raising his voice to a pitch of real rage.
Trump said, pointing his finger in Engoron’s direction and sounding pretty much like a man who had been severely injured,” He ruled against me without knowing anything about me, nothing about my character.” ” He didn’t know anything about me and called me a fraud.”
It was also obvious that Trump was being negatively impacted by the fact that he had previously held the most influential position in the country but was then required to respond to inquiries from New York AG Letitia James’ attorneys.
How do you rule someone who did a wonderful job as the president of the United States and call them fraud? Trump screamed. It’s a sad thing you’ve done, you know it! It’s unfortunate that you’ve believed this political hack up it! James, who was seated in the back row, received a finger from Trump.
By the time of Trump’s rant, which he repeated later in the afternoon, Engoron had already informed Wallace, the AG office attorney, that Wallace would be in charge of determining whether Trump responded properly. Wallace smirked from his lectern as Engoron scowled at Trump’s criticisms of him but made no comment.
” Finished”? Wallace enquired.
Trump muttered,” Done ,” and Wallace continued his inquiries.
Wallace, on the other hand, appeared more than ready to let Trump loose. Wallace remarked with a grin that he would be happy to let Trump’s off-topic testimony stay in the trial record because it contains” a lot in it.”
Apart from Trump’s outbursts, different portions of his testimony may have provided the most important lessons from his courtroom experience. He has been charged by James’ office with purposefully providing false asset valuations to banks and insurance companies in order to get better interest rates and coverage. Executives from banks and insurance companies have testified that they did, in fact, give him better rates based on his false numbers. Therefore, it was crucial that Trump acknowledged on Monday that he did contribute to the figures his company submitted to banks.
Trump testified,” I would look at them, I would see them and I might occasionally have some suggestions.”
Trump appeared to be trying to spin a complicated and not completely clear story in his testimony, simultaneously describing himself as an indifferent, high-level executive who thought the financial statements were unimportant and as someone who was quite sure that the statements weren’t accurate because they didn’show him that he was wealthy enough. Both strategies didn’t seem to be very effective.
By later afternoon, James’ office had finished questioning Trump, and Trump’s legal team declined to cross-examine him, though they did raise the possibility that they might call him back as a witness in the future. After hearing testimony from the state’s last witness, Ivanka Trump, Trump is expected to request a mistrial as soon as James’ team rests its case, which should happen on Wednesday or beginning Thursday. Donald Trump found himself on a public stage that he had no control over and detested on Monday as the defendant in the$ 250 million civil fraud case. Trump struggled, and frequently, when confronted by New York prosecutors about the part he played in unlawfully inflating his net worth.
Donald Trump was forced to take the witness stand as the defendant in the $250 million civil fraud case on Monday. He found himself on an uncontrollable public stage, and he hated it. Trump struggled and was often unable to answer questions directly from New York prosecutors regarding his role in fraudulently inflating the value of his net worth.
In this courtroom sketch, Donald Trump testifies in New York Supreme Court, Monday, Nov. 6, 2023.Elizabeth Williams/via AP. Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.. When Donald Trump took the witness stand Monday as the defendant in a $250 million civil fraud case, he found himself on a public stage he had no control over—and he hated it. Facing direct questions from New York prosecutors about what role he played in fraudulently inflating his net worth, Trump struggled, and often failed, to maintain his cool. Trump seemed to have come to court prepared to fight with the lawyers from the state attorney general’s office, but judge Arthur Engoron didn’t hesitate to check his efforts to derail the proceedings.. “How do you rule [on] someone, and call them a fraud, someone who as the president of the United States, who did a great job?”. At one point, with Trump blustering about what he believed the banks he did business with were interested in—which was not the question posed to him by Kevin Wallace, the state’s attorney—Engoron turned to Trump lawyer Chris Kise and, with his normally amicable face darkly furrowed, scolded the former president’s team.. “Mr. Kise, can you control your client? This is not a political rally, this is a courtroom,” Engoron barked. “I don’t want him editorializing, or we’ll be here forever, and we’ll accomplish nothing.”. A few minutes later, when Trump again wandered away from the question he’d been asked, Engoron went at Kise again.. “We got another speech,” he groused. “I beseech you to control him—if you can. If you can’t, I will. I will excuse him and draw every negative inference that I can.”. A “negative inference,” in legal parlance, is a conclusion by a court that a defendant who fails to follow the rules must be hiding something negative. In a criminal case, defendants have a constitutional right not to testify; if they choose not to take the stand, that decision can’t be used against them. But in civil court, where this particular Trump’s trial is taking place, defendants have no such right. When Kise protested that Trump—as a central figure to the case—should be allowed to answers as broadly as he wanted, Engoron made it clear he was done giving Trump the benefit of the doubt.. “No, I do not want to hear everything this witness has to say—a lot of it has nothing to do with the case or the questions,” Engoron told Kise. Moments later, Engoron repeated that sentiment.. “We’re not here to hear what he has to say, we’re hear to hear him answer questions, and most of the time he’s not,” Engoron said. That phrase seemed to particularly tweak Trump, who, during a lunchtime break, posted the first half of the quote to his Truth Social account, leaving off the rest of it.. Engoron’s combative attitude was a departure from his normal demeanor. In earlier portions of the years-long legal case, he was noticeably patient with Trump and his attorneys, who often were not cooperative with his orders. Through the first five weeks of the trial, Engoron had been far more likely to crack a goofy joke than raise his voice.. Trump, too, was in a foul mood from the moment he lumbered slowly into court Monday morning, trailed by an unusually large entourage of attorneys and security. His face was in an angry pout, and although he was initially subdued on the stand, it didn’t take him long to blow up—especially after Engoron repeatedly checked his rambling testimony. At one point, infuriated by Engoron’s refusal to accept that a vaguely worded disclaimer at the start of financial statements absolved Trump of any wrongdoing, the former president curled forward in a hunch, leaning into the microphone. With his voice rising to a pitch of genuine fury, Trump berated Engoron for having ruled before the trial even began that Trump had indeed committed fraud.. “He ruled against me without knowing anything about me, nothing about me, he ruled against me,” Trump said, jabbing his finger in Engoron’s direction, sounding very much like a man who was deeply hurt. “He called me a fraud, and he didn’t know anything about me.”. The fact that Trump once held the most powerful office in the land but now had to answer questions from New York AG Letitia James’ lawyers also clearly was eating at him.. “How do you rule [on] someone, and call them a fraud, someone who as the president of the United States, who did a great job?” Trump ranted. “There’s a terrible thing you’ve done, it’s a terrible thing you’ve done! You’ve believed this political hack back there, and it’s unfortunate!” Trump stuck his finger out at James, sitting in the front row.. By the time of Trump’s rant—he delivered a second one later in the afternoon—Engoron had told Wallace, the AG’s office attorney, that he would let Wallace take the lead on deciding whether Trump’s answers were appropriately responsive. Engoron scowled at Trump’s attacks on him but didn’t respond, and Wallace, from his lectern, smirked.. “Done?” Wallace asked.. “Done,” Trump muttered, and Wallace continued his questions.. For his part, Wallace seemed more than willing to let Trump vent. On several occasions, Wallace said he’d be happy to allow Trump’s off-topic testimony to remain in the trial record because, as he noted with a grin, “There’s a lot in there.”. Trump’s eruptions aside, it was other parts of his testimony that might offer the most consequential takeaways from his day in court. James’ office has accused of him of intentionally submitting fraudulent valuations of his assets to banks and insurance companies in order to obtain better interest rates and coverage. Bank and insurance company executives have testified that they indeed gave him better rates based on his fraudulent numbers. So it was particularly important that, on Monday, Trump acknowledged that he did play a role in coming up with the numbers his company submitted to banks.. “I would look at them, I would see them, and I would maybe on occasion have some suggestions,” Trump testified.. In his testimony—when he wasn’t complaining about how unfair he believes the case to be—Trump appeared to be trying to spin a complex and not entirely coherent story, alternately describing himself as an uninterested, high-level executive who thought the financial statements were unimportant, and as someone who was very sure that the statements were inaccurate because they didn’t show him to be wealthy enough. Neither tactic seemed very successful.. James’ office had finished questioning Trump by late afternoon and Trump’s legal team declined to cross-examine him—although they did bring up the possibility they might recall him as a witness later in the trial. Trump’s attorneys told Engoron that they plan to ask for a mistrial as soon as James’ team rests its case, which should happen on Wednesday or early Thursday, after testimony from the state’s final witness, Ivanka Trump.
