He was belligerent and brash, unrepentant and verbose – regardless of the courtroom context, he was the epitome of Donald J. Trump.
Minutes after Mr. Trump took the witness stand on Monday, his civil fraud trial in Manhattan devolved into a chaotic spectacle in front of a packed house. The former president lashed out at his accusers and denied their allegations, while acknowledging his involvement in some of the conduct at the heart of the affair.
Ranting and rambling as the courtroom vibrated with tension, Mr. Trump attacked New York Attorney General Letitia James as a “political hack.” He called the proceedings a “very unfair trial.” And he chastised the judge in the case, Arthur F. Engoron, for deciding before trial that he had committed fraud.
“He called me a fraud and he knows nothing about me!” Mr. Trump exclaimed from the stand, pointing to the judge, who flashed a smile.
These outbursts demonstrate the former president’s disregard for a matter that has already jeopardized his family business and called it fraud and cheating. Ms. James, who has become one of Mr. Trump’s main adversaries, has not only taken his company to court but also called into question the richer-than-rich persona he has built over his years as a businessman and reality TV star. the identity that propelled his bid for the White House.
Mr. Trump, accused by Ms. James of inflating his net worth to defraud banks and insurers, admitted to having helped assemble the annual financial statements submitted to the banks.
“I would look at them and see them and maybe occasionally have some suggestions,” said Mr. Trump, who started the day looking tired but quickly brightened up.
Although the admission appeared to bolster the attorney general’s case, Mr. Trump, sitting 9 feet from Ms. James, also sought to downplay the importance of the financial statements, which he said he left largely to aides. He noted that they contained numerous warnings, essentially making them “worthless.” The banks paid little attention to it, he said, before promising, spontaneously, that some of his bankers would soon testify in his defense.
Mr. Trump, the leading Republican presidential candidate, brought combative campaign energy to the courtroom, punctuating his testimony with grandiose assertions and lengthy asides that infuriated the judge and obscured some of his most effective testimonies.
He delivered a passionate ode to his golf course near Aberdeen, Scotland, calling it an “artistic expression” and the greatest ever built. He attacked Judge Engoron: “The fraud is on the court, not on me. »
The judge, who will determine the outcome of the case instead of a jury, repeatedly chastised Mr. Trump for not directly answering questions from Ms. James’ team.
“You can attack me. You can do whatever you want, Judge Engoron told him, but answer the question.
When the judge turned to Mr. Trump with a simple request — “please, no speeches” — his words elicited a smirk from the former president, who continued to meander. At one point, Mr. Trump interrupted Kevin Wallace, a state lawyer who was questioning him, with an “Excuse me, sir,” so he could give his opinion on what he would have done s he had actually wanted to inflate the value of his assets.
“My net worth was way higher than the financial statements,” Mr. Trump chastised Mr. Wallace, later telling him he should be “ashamed.”
“People like you are trying to demean me and hurt me,” Mr. Trump told Mr. Wallace.
The testimony pushed Mr. Trump away from his campaign comfort zone and into the controlled environs of a courtroom, where lying is a crime and outbursts can land you in contempt of court. The deeply personal nature of the trial for Mr. Trump, 77, whose obsession with his wealth is a defining trait of his celebrity, injected an extra dose of emotion into his testimony.
Mr Trump is fighting Ms James’ civil suit while facing four criminal indictments implicating him in everything from a secret deal with a porn star to an attempt to undermine American democracy. Although the affairs are a distraction during his third White House campaign, Mr. Trump’s lead has only grown. He presented himself as a political martyr attacked by Democrats like Ms. James and Judge Engoron.
Speaking to reporters after the testimony, Ms. James said that Mr. Trump had “rambled” and “thrown insults” but that “the evidence showed that, in fact, he had falsely inflated his assets to enrich himself.” himself and his family.
Christopher M. Kise, Mr. Trump’s lawyer, thought otherwise: “In 33 years, I haven’t seen a witness testify better,” he said.
Even before Ms. James’s case went to trial, Judge Engoron ruled that Mr. Trump’s financial statements were riddled with fraud.
The trial will determine the sentence. Ms. James wants Mr. Trump to pay a $250 million fine, be ousted from his company and permanently barred from the New York real estate world.
On Monday, as Mr. Wallace questioned Mr. Trump, the former president turned to the judge and lamented how he had accepted Ms. James’s central assertion before any evidence was heard in court: “You believed in that political hack there, and it’s absolutely true. unfortunate.”
“Do?” asked Mr. Wallace, like a parent asking his child if he is done with his tantrum.
“It’s done,” Mr. Trump replied, and the questions continued.
Throughout the roughly four hours of testimony, Mr. Trump alternately accepted and avoided responsibility. When Mr. Wallace asked him how he ensured the financial statements were handled correctly, he passed the buck to the financial lieutenants and external auditors, saying: “I gave two people total authority to work with a very expensive accounting firm. »
Mr. Trump added, however, that he was not completely indifferent: “I said, ‘Prepare the statements so the accounting firm is happy.’ »
Often, Mr. Wallace would challenge Mr. Trump with simple questions about whether he relied on banks to trust his financial statements. Mr. Trump claimed that he had, without appearing to realize that the question touched on intent, a necessary element for Ms. James’s lawyers to demonstrate.
He also couldn’t help but exaggerate in exactly the way that made him vulnerable to the attorney general’s claims. When asked how big his triplex in Trump Tower is, he first provided the specific answer: 11,000 square feet. Seemingly unable to help himself, he then said 12,000. Then he said 13,000.
Mr. Trump also said he ordered his employees to lower the value of his Westchester County, N.Y., property in Seven Springs because he “thought it was too high ”, another recognition of its involvement in the financial statements.
While it appeared to detract from Mr. Trump’s task on the stand — distancing himself from the assessment of his net worth — parts of his testimony may have helped him.
Mr. Trump gave a tutorial of sorts on real estate valuations, noting that lower cash flow in a given year might not lower the overall value of his flagship office building in the Financial District. And he pointed out that the banks he is accused of defrauding actually made money, arguing that they were hardly victims.
He also talked about moments of restraint.
When asked if he approved the office building assessment, Mr. Trump said he accepted it, not that he approved it, and that he did not had asked anyone to modify it. When asked if this was based on true and accurate information, the former president replied: “I hope so.”
Mr. Trump testified that he had an opinion about the value of his properties, particularly those in Florida. “I thought Mar-a-Lago was very underrated, but I didn’t do anything about it,” he said. “I just left it as is.”
But his expansive responses irritated the judge. As Mr. Trump spoke lovingly about Mar-a-Lago, calling it “beautiful” and “successful,” Judge Engoron looked up at the ceiling. The more Mr. Trump spoke, the more Judge Engoron rolled his eyes.
After Mr. Trump blurted out that Aberdeen was the oil capital of Europe, Judge Engoron barked: “Not relevant, not relevant. Respond to the question.”
In a criminal case, a jury or judge cannot hold against a defendant a defendant’s refusal to answer questions. But this case is civil and the rules are different: A judge can make what’s called a “negative inference” — a damning assumption about why a defendant won’t respond.
At one point on Monday, the judge, fed up with Mr. Trump’s insensitive responses, threatened to excuse the former president from the stand and assume the worst about why he would not respond.
Judge Engoron also repeatedly called on Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Mr. Kise, to rein in the former president. As Mr. Trump pursed his lips and shrugged his shoulders, Mr. Kise responded that Mr. Trump’s stature — as “former and soon-to-be future chief executive of the United States” — gave him some leeway. .
“Mr. Kise, can you control your client? This is not a political rally,” Judge Engoron said in the opening moments of his testimony, adding: “We will be here forever and we will not We won’t accomplish anything.”
By the time Mr. Trump stood to leave the stand at the end of the day, the judge seemed relieved. He turned to the former president and raised his left hand to say goodbye.
Kate Christobek, Maggie Haberman, Nathan Schweber, Liset Cruz And Susanne Craig reports contributed.
