Testimony Adds To Drama In Trump Fraud Case

In a recent turn of events, it seems that New York Attorney General Letitia James may have hit a roadblock in her lawsuit against former President Donald Trump. The case, which centers around allegations of fraud and misrepresentation against Trump and his company, has relied heavily on framing the German bank Deutsche Bank as a victim in Trump’s alleged scheme to inflate his assets.

However, new testimony from Deutsche Bank executive David Williams, who worked directly on at least one of Trump’s loans over several decades, cast doubt on this narrative. According to Williams’ testimony on Tuesday, it is not uncommon for banks to internally slash a client’s stated asset values by 50% and still approve a loan, as they did with Trump.

He also revealed that this practice was not specific to Trump and was applied to all clients as a part of the bank’s due diligence process.

This testimony has raised questions about the validity of James’ case against Trump. As Williams stated, a difference of opinion in asset values between the client and the bank is not a disqualifying factor for extending credit.

This goes against the assumption of the Attorney General that Trump had misled the bank and caused them harm. It also undermines the earlier ruling of Judge Arthur Engoron, who held Trump liable for fraud without considering all the facts and statements from witnesses.

Moreover, Trump and his sons have testified that no banks have been harmed by the alleged inflated valuations and that multiple lenders have profited from the loans. Trump also claimed that the earlier assessments took into account his name and the potential for future development, which may have contributed to the differences in asset values between Trump and the bank.

This news will surely have an impact on the ongoing trials against Trump, not just in New York but also in Fulton County, where he is facing a “racketeering” case led by District Attorney Fani Willis. The indictment document against Trump appeared on the court’s server before the grand jury had rendered a decision, raising concerns about the partisan nature of these trials.

It’s clear that these cases are being driven by political motivations and have little to do with seeking justice. The witnesses being called by the prosecution are all current or former Deutsche Bank employees, including the family’s former private banker.

This gives the impression that these trials are nothing but partisan show trials aimed at “getting Trump” at all costs, even if it means compromising the integrity of our judicial system.