In the state attorney general’s civil probe into the Trump Organization, a New York judge ordered former President Donald Trump and two of his children to answer questions under oath about the company’s business activities.
Attorneys for Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Ivanka Trump had sought to have the subpoenas from Attorney General Letitia James’ office quashed, claiming that her investigation is politically motivated and intended to provide fuel for the Manhattan district attorney’s ongoing criminal investigation into the company.
Justice Arthur Engoron of the state Supreme Court gave the go-ahead for the three to be deposed within the next three weeks in his ruling. He also told the former president that he had two weeks to turn up records and material that had been subpoenaed, and that the Trumps’ accusations of being singled out were exaggerated.
“In the final analysis, a state attorney general commences investigating a business entity, uncovers copious evidence of possible financial fraud, and wants to question, under oath, several of the entities’ principals, including its namesake. She has the clear right to do so,” the judge wrote in his eight-page decision.
The Trumps’ lawyers indicated at a hearing earlier in the day that they would appeal if the judge let the depositions proceed. “There is a likelihood that we will appeal,” Alan Futerfas, the attorney for the Trump children, said.
James celebrated the ruling in a statement, saying, “Today, justice prevailed.”
“No one will be permitted to stand in the way of the pursuit of justice, no matter how powerful they are. No one is above the law,” she added.
James’ office is considering filing a civil suit against the Trump Organization for allegedly falsified financial records. Her agency claims it has “uncovered substantial evidence confirming many misrepresentations in Mr. Trump’s financial statements presented to banks, insurers, and the Internal Revenue Service,” according to court filings.
Among the items James wants to ask Trump about are several “Statements of Financial Condition” involving the company that the attorney general says were inflated by hundreds of millions of dollars and that had been signed off on by the former president.
The attorney general’s office said in January that it has not yet reached a final decision about whether the evidence it says it has found merits legal action.
Lawyers for the Trumps contended James wants to question the trio to improperly gather evidence in a related criminal probe by the Manhattan district attorney’s office.
Two lawyers from James’ office are assisting in the district attorney’s investigation, which has led to criminal charges against the Trump Organization and its former chief financial officer, Allan Weisselberg. Both the company and Weisselberg have pleaded not guilty to the charges, which include allegations of tax fraud and falsifying business records.
The judge noted that the Trumps would be able to invoke their Fifth Amendment rights during the depositions if they had concerns about self-incrimination, and noted that Trump’s son Eric had taken the Fifth more than 500 times when he was deposed for the probe back in 2020.
Donald Trump lawyer Ron Fischetti said this case is “special” because “this is a former president of the United States,” and if he takes the Fifth while answering questions, “he’ll be on every front page in the world.”
Engoron countered that there’s nothing in the law making a former president special. “To me, he’s a citizen,” the judge said.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that asserting one’s Fifth Amendment rights is not an admission of guilt, but Trump offered a different perspective while running for president in 2016. “The mob takes the Fifth. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” he said at a rally in Iowa after an aide of rival Hillary Clinton had taken the Fifth in an investigation of her email server.
The allegations involving the financial statements have caused other problems for Trump over the past week, including his longtime accounting firm Mazars’ decision to cut ties with the Trump Organization after reviewing the statements it helped prepare.
“We write to advise that the Statements of Financial Condition for Donald J. Trump for the years ending June 30, 2011 — June 30, 2020, should no longer be relied upon,” the company said in a letter.
“While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate,” it added.
In a statement Monday, the Trump Organization pointed to the line about lack of “material discrepancies” as “confirmation (that) effectively renders the investigations by the DA and AG moot.”
Engoron mocked that claim in his ruling. “To proclaim that the Mazars’ red-flag warning that the Trump financial statements are unreliable suddenly renders the OAG’s long-running investigation moot is as audacious as it is preposterous,” the judge wrote.
On Thursday, the Democratic-controlled House Oversight Committee, citing Mazars’ disavowal of the statements, urged the General Services Administration to cancel its lease for Trump’s Washington, D.C., hotel. Trump reportedly struck a deal to sell the lease late last year, and he stands to make a $100 million profit if the GSA approves the sale, the committee noted.
In a filing responding to specific allegations from the attorney general about the financial statements earlier this week, Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba said the former president denies “knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.”
The day after that filing, however, Trump issued a lengthy statement defending his company’s accounting, saying, “We have a great company with fantastic assets that are unique, extremely valuable and, in many cases, far more valuable than what was listed in our Financial Statements.”
He said that Mazars had been “essentially forced to resign from a great long-term account by the prosecutorial misconduct of a highly political, but failed, gubernatorial candidate, Letitia James, and the Hillary Clinton run District Attorney’s Office of Manhattan.”
The attorney general’s office flagged the statement to the judge in a letter Wednesday.
“It is not unusual for parties to a legal proceeding to disagree about the facts,” the letter said. “But it is truly rare for a party to publicly disagree with statements submitted by his own attorneys in a signed pleading — let alone one day after the pleading was filed.”
The letter urged the judge to ignore the legal responses from Trump and his children, arguing they “improperly deny knowledge about subjects indisputably known” to them, including what Trump’s positions were at the company and what Trump Jr.’s job is.
“Despite currently serving as an executive vice president of the Trump Organization, Donald Trump, Jr. denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to allegations that he is an executive vice president of the Trump Organization,” the attorney general’s letter said.
Futerfas responded in his own letter to the judge that the attorney general’s recital of its case included “vague” allegations and the Trumps’ responses were all made in “good faith.”
Also Thursday, a judge in Washington set a trial date for a separate civil case that’s been brought against the Trump Organization and Trump’s presidential inaugural committee by Washington Attorney General Karl Racine. It alleges that the inaugural committee improperly used inaugural funds to enrich the Trump family. The company and the committee have denied any wrongdoing. The case is scheduled to go to trial Sept. 26.
The Chenab Times News Desk