Fate of Trump’s business empire to be decided in new year: What we know

The fate of former President Trump’s business empire, which rocketed him to fame, will be decided in the new year, following more than two months of testimony from 40 witnesses in his sprawling New York civil fraud trial.

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) accused Trump, his business and several executives — including his adult sons — of misleading lenders and insurers by falsely altering the value of the business’s assets on key financial statements to receive tax and insurance benefits.

Judge Arthur Engoron has already found the former president and his co-defendants liable for fraud, recasting the trial’s focus on other claims including conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsified business records. 

Engoron — who repeatedly butted heads with Trump and his counsel, including in a separate legal battle over a gag order the judge imposed early in the case — will alone decide the verdict. 

That decision could come as soon as next month, after closing arguments are made on Jan. 11. 

The trial gave new insight into Trump’s finances and business dealings. It also showed how the former president and current 2024 Republican primary front-runner could leverage his court appearances in the new year as campaign stops, through fiery speeches outside courtrooms and politically charged testimony on the witness stand. 

With the Trump family business in flux, here’s what we learned from the trial:

Politics seeped into trial

The politics of the 2024 presidential race have been entangled with the trial since its first day.

In a rant outside the courtroom Oct. 2, Trump accused Engoron of “interfering with an election” and suggested he should be “charged criminally” for overseeing the case. 

Roughly 20 minutes after court was dismissed, Trump’s campaign blasted out a fundraising email with the subject line “I just left the courthouse” that lambasted the trial as political in nature and a “witch hunt” against him. 

“Politicians, drunk with power, are weaponizing the legal system to try and completely destroy me — and, ultimately, imprison me for the rest of my life as an innocent man,” the email read. “And why do they want to stop me so bad? Because they know that I’m on the verge of winning the 2024 election in a landslide and upon taking office, will take away their power and return it to YOU, the American people.”

Trump’s politically charged remarks reached a boiling point when he took to the witness stand on Nov. 6. 

The former president lobbed attacks against those involved in the case as “Trump haters,” calling the judge and state attorney general “frauds” and “political hacks.” He aired his frustration over “Democrat” prosecutors and attorneys general “coming after” him. And he repeated the familiar refrain that his legal issues are all “political witch hunts” aimed at keeping him from a second term in the White House. 

“Can you control your client?” Engoron asked a Trump lawyer at one point. “This is not a political rally.”

The politics of the fraud trial could offer a glimpse of what’s to come in 2024 as the election heats up and Trump’s four criminal cases head to trial.

Trump financial statements skewed, witnesses testify

Trump’s statements of financial condition were at the heart of the New York attorney general’s case. The documents detail the value of the Trump Organization’s various assets and were sent to banks and insurers to secure loans and deals.

Michael Cohen, Trump’s onetime fixer and personal lawyer, testified that he inflated Trump’s assets at the former president’s request.

“My responsibility, along with Allen Weisselberg, predominantly, was to reverse engineer the various different asset classes — increase those assets — in order to achieve the number that Trump had tasked us with,” Cohen said.

“When you say number, what number are you talking about?” prosecutor Colleen Faherty asked Cohen.

“Whichever Mr. Trump told us,” Cohen replied.

The former president’s Trump Tower triplex penthouse was highly scrutinized at trial. From at least 2012 to 2016, it was valued in his financial statements as measuring 30,000 square feet — almost three times its actual size. Trump maintained his business “just made a mistake.”

“As we’re sitting here now, do you know how big your apartment is?” state lawyer Kevin Wallace asked.

“I have heard, obviously, because of the trial, they say 11-to-12-to-13,000 feet,” Trump replied.

Trump children’s roles

The trial gave fresh insight into the roles Trump’s adult children played in the family business — and their loyalty to it, which shone through in their testimonies.

Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump and Eric Trump each distanced themselves from their father’s financial statements while testifying, suggesting instead they relied on accountants and other experts to make sure the numbers were correct.  

When Ivanka Trump took to the stand, she offered subdued testimony and repeatedly said she did not recall the business exchanges she was being questioned over. Trump’s niece, Mary Trump, predicted ahead of Ivanka Trump’s testimony that she might not spring to the family business’s defense as quickly as her siblings and father, instead suggesting the former president’s daughter would “tell the truth and throw [former President Trump] under the bus.”

In his second bout on the witness stand, Donald Trump Jr. painted an idyllic picture of his father’s real estate business and lauded his “vision … to do things differently.”

Ivanka Trump was dropped from the case before it went to trial, but both of Trump’s adult sons are defendants. Their testimony could influence Engoron’s ruling that will determine the financial penalties each defendant will face for their fraud.

Banks found no fraud

The New York attorney general’s office hired an expert witness, who testified that the Trump Organization’s skewed financial statements may have cost banks more than $168 million in interest.

But when Deutsche Bank executives took to the stand, they testified that the bank wanted to work with the Trump Organization, did its due diligence and found no fraud — arguments Trump’s counsel has made from the start. 

After meeting Donald Trump Jr., Deutsche Bank managing director Rosemary Vrablic wrote in 2011 emails to her colleagues that they were “whale hunting” in pursuing a relationship with the Trumps. She testified in the trial that the bankers used “whale” to refer to very wealthy clients.  

Vrablic would become Trump’s lead banker, and their working relationship would span a decade.

David Williams, another Deutsche Bank managing director, testified that bankers viewed their clients’ statements of financial condition as “subjective or subject to estimates,” taking their look at the reports of net worth.

“I think we expect clients’ provided information to be accurate,” Williams said. “At the same time, it’s not an industry standard that these statements be audited.”

“They’re largely reliant on the use of estimates,” he added, so bankers routinely “make some adjustments.”

The executives’ testimony wasn’t all good for the former president, with former Deutsche Bank Risk Management Officer Nicholas Haigh testifying that Trump’s statements of financial condition played a vital role in the approval of two multi-million dollar loans the bank gave Trump — a $125 million loan in 2011 for Trump’s Doral, Fla., golf resort and a $107 million loan in 2012 for his Chicago hotel. 

Because of the financial documents, Trump was able to secure bigger loans with lower interest rates, Haigh said, bolstering the New York attorney general’s case. 

Still, the bankers offered the most robust defense of Trump’s business practices and could be central to the former president’s inevitable appeal of Engoron’s impending verdict. 

The Associated Press contributed.