Trump Says New York Fraud Case Is Exposing His ‘Great Success’

Former U.S. President Donald Trump departs following the first day of his civil fraud trial at the New York State Supreme Court in New York City on Oct. 2, 2023. Trump appeared in a New York court on Monday to face civil fraud charges, denouncing the case as a 'sham' intended to torpedo his campaign to retake the White House. John Lamparski/AFP via Getty Images

Former President Donald Trump indicated on social media he would attend the second day of his New York civil trial, in a series of posts recapping day one and explaining the legal issues in the case against him.

“People are starting to see what a great company I built through the trial started by the Racist Attorney General of New York State, Letitia ‘Peekaboo’ James. It was all supposed to be private, but in many ways it is exposing great success. Incredible assets, lots of cash, and it only gets better,” he wrote.

However, he said, the case would only drive businesses away from New York, describing the ordeal thus far as “heartache.” A partial ruling last week already stripped the former president of his business certificates, and he may yet lose his flagship properties like Trump Tower in New York State.

“It is also stating, loud and clear, ‘don’t move your company to New York, and if you are already here, move out fast. Too much work and ’heartache' dealing with the Radical Left Democrats, Marxists, and Fascists!” he added.

“Good day at trial today as the judge will be honoring the Appellate Court’s unanimous decision on the Statute of Limitations! This reduces the case by approximately 80%. See you in Court on Tuesday morning!”

Last September, Ms. James sued President Trump, arguing he defrauded the state by inflating his net worth to obtain more favorable loans. She is seeking $250 million in penalties and barring him and his adult sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., from doing business in the state.

New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, presiding over the case, had already ruled in a pretrial summary judgment that President Trump was liable for fraud, inflating his net worth between $812 million and $2.2 billion from 2011 to 2021.

Reversal

President Trump’s legal team has clashed with Justice Engoron several times during the course of the case, being sanctioned with large monetary penalties for repeatedly making what he called “frivolous” arguments.

The former president clashed with Justice Engoron via remarks several times as day one unfolded yesterday but expressed appreciation at the end of the day.

First, the judge noted the oft-quoted figure of $18 million in describing the value of President Trump’s Palm Beach club, Mar-a-Lago.

“Please, press, stop saying that I valued it at $18 million,” Justice Engoron said. In his summary judgment, he quoted provided figures from the prosecutors’ motion, which compared county assessor data with the figures the Trump Organization used in valuing Mar-a-Lago. The judge said there were easements on Mar-a-Lago that weren’t taken into account in President Trump’s property valuation, which accounted for his ruling of fraud.

During the lunch break, President Trump had a newly published article from The Sun printed out to show to the press as he spoke for several minutes. The local outlet had spoken to several Florida real estate professionals, who unilaterally explained that county assessor data are known to be no indicator of value. President Trump has claimed that his “winter White House” is worth at least $1 billion and disparaged the judge for undervaluing it.

On Tuesday morning, he posted on social media that the prosecutors were trying to make him “look bad” by assigning low values to his properties.

“Now that it has been agreed in Court that Mar-a-Lago is WORTH 50 to 100 times the Value ...  James, ascribed to it (18 Million Dollars) ... we hope the Judge will TERMINATE his first ruling of fraud in that he was given false and ridiculous information by the Trump Deranged Lunatic, A.G. James. In actuality, I am WORTH FAR MORE than the numbers put down on the Financial Statements, not less,” he wrote, slamming the attorney general for allowing crime to rise in the city while she pursued what he described as a politically motivated case against him.

“This entire case should be thrown out and dismissed. The A.G. should be reprimanded and sanctioned for bringing this case with its FAKE LOW VALUES, in order to make me look bad. Election Interference!”

On Monday, he slammed the case as a “disgraceful situation“ and brought up a second point regarding an appeals court decision from June.

The appellate ruling had redefined the statute of limitations, and President Trump said that with the set time period, “we won 80 percent of the case.”

Earlier, his team tried to have the case dismissed based on the appellate ruling and sued the judge when he would not do so.

However, during the first witness testimony after lunch, the judge acknowledged the statute of limitations.

Donald Bender, a former Mazars accountant who prepared tax documents and did accounting for the Trump Organization, testified about a 2011 Mazars letter, which President Trump’s team objected to.

While Justice Engoron allowed the testimony, he acknowledged the statute of limitations objection, telling the prosecutors that they would have to tie the 2011 letter to something within the statute of limitations, or else the entire testimony would have just been a “waste of time.”

President Trump spoke to the press again at the end of the day, adding that he appreciated that the judge did so.

New York Executive Law 63(12)

The prosecutor’s seven claims are made under New York Executive Law 63(12), which allows the attorney general to investigate and prosecute fraud cases with broad powers and few legal hurdles.

“The rarely used Executive Law that the N.Y.A.G. is proceeding under is VERY UNFAIR, and being used against me for that reason,” President Trump wrote on social media.

“NY Executive Law 63 (12) does not require a victim, traditional elements of fraud are eliminated (the only such law!), the law allows a politically elected partisan prosecutor to convince a politically elected judge, who may be friends, to destroy even a Political Opponent. This law may not be Constitutional and is not FAIR, and that is why terrible A.G. James chose it to use against me!!!” he wrote just hours before heading to the 60 Centre Street courthouse on Oct. 3 for the second day of his trial.