TRUMP TRIAL, DAY 3: The defendants in the Trump Org. trial are Trump, his grown sons, Allen Weisselberg, Jeff McConney, and a host of companies. But you would not know that from sitting in the courtroom today. 1/
Instead, you might think Donald Bender, Trump's former lead accountant at Mazars, was on trial. That's clearly what Team Trump's *trying* to do: prove that Bender, the sole CPA involved in preparing Trump's financial statements, never objected to the values or valuation methods. 2/
Yes, Bender was obliged, under accounting industry guidelines, to familiarize himself with the bases for asset valuations; to object to any failures to disclose those methods; and to point out any dispute with the overall presentation of his financial statements. 3/
But Bender's failure to do what a good accountant *should have done* doesn't make the financial statements reasonable or appropriate. Contrary to Chris Kise and Alina Habba's protests, he is not, in fact, on trial. 4/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
TRUMP TRIAL, day 3, continued: Though Donald Bender is still on cross, the parties have agreed to interrupt his testimony to accommodate witness 2, Cameron Harris. 1/
As we await Harris’s arrival in the courtroom, Engoron took a moment to celebrate “a very important day,” the birthday of assistant AG Kevin Wallace. 2/
(And while I always welcome a judge with levity, calling Wallace’s birthday “important” was maybe not the best choice of words for a judge already accused of favoritism.)
Good morning from downtown Manhattan, where I will be watching day 3 of the Trump civil trial with Trump himself expected to attend again. With his former accountant Donald Bender still on cross-examination, why is 45 still here? 1/
One possibility is that he told a Florida court last week that he could not honor an October 3 date for his deposition in a case he brought against Michael Cohen because he intended to be in court for the trial. Skipping out, therefore, could cost him with that judge. 2/
But the more likely explanation, I think, is that Trump can achieve a number of his short-term goals simply by showing up. He can physically show his contempt for — and potentially rattle — witnesses, the judge, prosecutors, and the AG herself just by being there. 3/
The issue is not whether Donald Bender was an exemplary accountant or even whether he was beholden to the Trump Org. for his livelihood. (He wasn’t and he was.) 1/
It was whether the Trump Org. and Trump specifically was entitled to rely on Mazars, notwithstanding engagement letters and representation letters that clearly delineated the limits of Mazars’s work in compiling the statements of financial condition. 2/
Trump’s team are trying to pin the blame on Mazars and insinuate that its failure to identify a major change in the square footage of the Trump Tower triplex was a violation of Mazars’s promise to point out material errors to Trump. 3/
The New York Attorney General’s trial has definitely gotten under Trump’s skin. Yet he was far calmer at his arraignment on 30-plus counts of unlawfully retaining classified documents. Why is he stressing? 1/
Part of it is image. Trump’s self concept and public persona alike rest on his King of All Real Estate construct. Although the Attorney General has already exposed how much of it is a fiction, the trial will methodically unspool his legend, witness by email by letter. 2/
But it’s more than that. The remedies the AG is seeking — which Trump himself acknowledges constitutes a sort of “corporate death penalty” — are the only ones he can’t campaign away. If restored to the presidency, he can pardon himself for his alleged federal crimes. 3/
Color me unsurprised. Trump's GA lawyer has been seen watching all the removal hearings. He also understands that defendants bears the burden of proof to remove a state case to federal court. 1/
Yet Trump on the witness stand could endanger his actual defense, no matter what court he's ultimately in. And with no just one but two pending criminal cases revolving around the aftermath of the 2020 election, that's not a risk worth taking. 2/
That's especially true where, as here, the trade-offs of being in federal court are minimal. Want to slow things down? That Chesebro and Powell's first, severed trial is expected to last 4 months--and that's after jury selection--already does that. 3/
In denying Trump’s motion to recuse, Judge Chutkan shows she knew what she knew from the cases before her; the challenged comments specifically responded to each defendant’s mitigation request; and especially in context, her statements did not reflect bias against Trump. 1/
None of that—or her differentiating the cases cited by Team Trump—is surprising. But it is significant nonetheless. Recall that the government requested limits on Trump’s and his lawyers’ out-of-court speech *before* the recusal motion was filed. 2/
But Chutkan, as I and others expected, decided the recusal motion first. Why? To demonstrate that her statements were justifiable and appropriate and that she remains in charge, free of the stain of Team Trump’s speculative interpretations of her words. 3/