New York AG suggests Trump experts helped push her fraud case forward

New York Attorney General Letitia James said that experts called for former President Trump’s defense this week actually helped her legal case alleging Trump and his company falsified business records.

“Donald Trump can continue to try to distract from reality. You can continue to call me names,” she said in a video message Friday. “But as the judge said today, ‘The standard is truth.’ And the truth is on our side.”

With a smile on her face, James recapped the testimonies of three expert witnesses called for Trump’s defense and explained how each one actually helped prove her case that Trump and his company committed fraud.

James’s case specifically alleges that Trump and his company knowingly falsified financial statements, inflating and deflating the values of assets to get better insurance and loan terms.

“Over the past few days, we continue to hear testimony from the defendants’ many expert witnesses,” she said. “And one of these experts admitted that the valuations of some of the properties on Donald Trump’s statement of financial condition were neither ‘proper,’ nor ‘reasonable.’”

Another witness, James said, was asked by Trump personally to help his case at his Mar-a-Lago club, a conflict of interest. A third had their fees paid by Trump’s political action committee.

“He testified that the value of Donald Trump’s triplex was inflated. That we can agree,” she said of the third witness. “But he also had a lot to say about Donald Trump’s statements of financial condition, even though he has not prepared a financial statement since the 1980s.”

Trump himself is expected to testify in court Monday, the second time he takes the stand in the case. He will take questions from his attorneys as part of his defense.

“When he has nothing to hide, it’s the best thing you could do is put this great witness on that is going to stand up and tell you the truth,” lawyer Alina Habba said in a Fox News interview Friday.

Trump’s previous stint on the stand was bombastic and met with pushback from the judge, who said his testimony was akin to a political rally. 

He also faces a gag order in the case, limiting what he can say about court employees and certain details of the case publicly. He has challenged the order.