Bank executive surprises during Trump’s NY fraud trial testimony
A Deutsche Bank Executive Confirms Trump’s Claims in NY Fraud Trial
In a surprising turn of events, a Deutsche Bank AG executive has confirmed what former President Donald Trump has been saying all along about the fraud lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James: there were no victims.
James’ civil case is based on the allegation that the Trump Organization overvalued its properties, leading to fraud against banks like Deutsche when obtaining business loans.
The lawsuit claims that the company inflated property values by up to $3.6 billion to secure better loan terms, according to Bloomberg.
New York is seeking $250 million in penalties and a ruling that would prevent the Trump Organization from doing business in the state.
During the trial, Trump’s attorney Jesus Suarez questioned David Williams, a managing director at Deutsche Bank, about the bank’s ability to assess a client’s financial condition. Williams confirmed that the bank is capable of making its own judgment based on its evaluation.
Williams further testified that Deutsche Bank always reviews a client’s financial statements and adjusts the company’s worth based on its own assessment. He emphasized that a difference of opinion in asset values between the client and the bank is not a disqualifying factor for extending credit.
Trump has consistently maintained that his company’s financial statements were conservative and that lenders should conduct their own due diligence to determine asset values.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy supports Trump’s claims, stating that banks in high-end lending are sophisticated financial actors who rely on experienced appraisers to assess values. McCarthy argues that the banks were not deceived into loaning money to the Trump Organization.
Furthermore, McCarthy points out that even if Trump’s properties were overvalued, there is no evidence that the banks would have charged a higher interest rate. The banks set loan terms based on various factors, including Trump’s payment history and their own desire to earn money.
After Williams’ testimony, Trump’s attorney Christopher Kise requested an immediate directed verdict in his client’s favor, arguing that the allegedly inflated property values were not material to the bank’s decision to loan to the Trump Organization. The judge has yet to rule on this request.
It is clear that this case would not have been brought if it weren’t for Trump’s presidential candidacy in 2024. James seems to be using the lawsuit to raise her profile and damage the front-runner for the Republican nomination.
In conclusion, the testimony of the Deutsche Bank executive has provided a boost to Trump’s defense in the NY fraud trial, challenging the notion that there were victims and highlighting the banks’ own assessment processes.
Do you think Trump is getting a fair trial?
- Yes
- No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge via email. You may opt out at any time. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Read more on The Western Journal.
What role does the difference of opinion in asset values play in the bank’s decision to extend credit, and how does this align with Trump’s argument?
This confirmation by a Deutsche Bank executive adds weight to Trump’s assertions and raises questions about the validity of the fraud lawsuit brought against him by the New York Attorney General.
The allegations made by Letitia James suggest that the Trump Organization intentionally inflated the value of its properties in order to secure more favorable loan terms from banks such as Deutsche. However, the executive’s testimony suggests that the bank is fully capable of assessing a client’s financial condition and making its own judgment based on its evaluation.
It is important to note that a difference of opinion in asset values between the client and the bank is not a disqualifying factor for extending credit. This aligns with Trump’s argument that his company’s financial statements were conservative and that lenders should conduct their own due diligence to determine asset values.
Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor, supports Trump’s claims and states that banks in high-end lending are sophisticated financial actors who rely on experienced appraisers to assess values. This further strengthens the argument that the Trump Organization did not engage in fraudulent activities, as alleged by the New York Attorney General.
The outcome of this trial could have significant implications for both Trump and the Trump Organization. If the court rules in favor of James and imposes the sought-after penalties, it could severely impact the organization’s ability to do business in the state of New York. On the other hand, if the court finds in favor of Trump, it could discredit the fraud allegations and vindicate his claims.
Regardless of the outcome, this case highlights the importance of transparency and due diligence in the lending process. Lenders must take responsibility for conducting thorough evaluations and not solely rely on the statements provided by borrowers. This ensures the integrity of the lending system and protects both parties involved.
As the trial continues, it remains to be seen how the court will interpret the evidence presented. However, the confirmation by a Deutsche Bank executive certainly adds a compelling layer to the ongoing legal battle between Donald Trump and the New York Attorney General.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...