Trump Appeals $454 Million Fraud Case as NY AG Letitia James Responds

New York Attorney General Letitia James is advocating for an appeals court to affirm a hefty $454 million judgment against former President Donald Trump for deceiving lenders. In her recent filing, James maintains that the judgment is bolstered by significant evidence of Trump’s deceptive practices.

James submitted her brief on Wednesday in response to Trump’s appeal regarding the ruling he faces after Judge Arthur Engoron determined he artificially inflated his asset values over several years. This inflation was aimed at securing more favorable loan and insurance terms. The judgment amount continues to accrue interest, which adds to the approximately $10 million liability imposed on former Trump Organization executive Allen Weisselberg and Trump’s sons, Donald Jr. and Eric.

In her defense of the court’s findings, James highlighted several specific methods used by Engoron to conclude that Trump inflated his net worth. These methods included exaggerating the size of his penthouse, bypassing rent regulations for his apartments, and ignoring deed restrictions at his Mar-a-Lago club.

James particularly focused on two main arguments presented by Trump in his appeal: the claim that no real victims were harmed in the loan transactions, and the assertion that this lack of victims makes a difference.

In his July appeal, Trump argued he did not violate any New York fraud statutes, asserting that any misrepresentation of his assets did not result in harm. He noted that the Trump Organization has repaid Deutsche Bank hundreds of millions of dollars in loans, which were secured based on those disputed financial statements. His legal team maintained that these transactions involved no victims, no complaints, and no demonstrable losses.

James countered this argument by emphasizing that the absence of past harm does not negate the seriousness of fraud. One essential aim of the statute in question is to prevent fraud before it inflicts damage. “A core focus of [the statute] has thus always been protecting both the integrity of the marketplace and honest market participants from the risks of misconduct—even if those risks have not yet come to pass,” her legal team remarked.

James also clarified that Trump’s actions did indeed harm lenders, as they provided his businesses with more favorable loan terms due to the fraudulent representations. She referenced testimony from a Deutsche Bank executive, which stated that receiving repayment did not equate to the bank being properly compensated for the risks involved.

These legal proceedings take place against a backdrop of looming deadlines, as the Manhattan-based appeals court has focused on scheduling arguments for Trump’s appeal on September 26.

The potential repercussions of Trump’s appeal are considerable. If upheld, he will be required to settle the substantial judgment in cash or risk having his assets seized by James. This has already been a topic of concern for Trump, who in March expressed that meeting a bond of over $450 million in order to prevent asset seizure during the appeal was a “practical impossibility.” He noted that the only way to raise such an amount would entail a real estate fire sale that would lead to “massive, irrecoverable losses.” However, the appeals court later adjusted that bond requirement to $175 million for him and the co-defendants.

As the legal battle intensifies, the implications for Trump’s financial and political future remain significant. The case reflects not only on his business conduct but also on his ongoing candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination.

Source: USA Today