Letitia James Declares Trump’s ‘Expert Witnesses’ Weren’t Actually ‘Experts’


In a video message released at the tail end of last week, New York state Attorney General Letitia James declared purported expert witnesses trotted out by the Trump team in her case alleging years of fraud at the Trump family businesses weren’t really experts, as relevant here, at all.

The case accuses the Trumps of a years-long usage of deceptive valuations for various assets that ostensibly set up the Trump family business for substantial financial benefits, including better terms on loans. An expert witness previously appearing for the state estimated that the Trump family actually saved some $168 million via the implementation of interest rates lower than the levels that authorities say would have more accurately reflected the Trumps’ financial state.

“We heard testimony from their many expert witnesses, but they weren’t really experts,” James declared. “Not one of them could refute the facts of this case. Their accounting expert has never once worked on the types of financial statements at the heart of Donald Trump’s fraud. Their so-called contract procurement expert, who they called to testify about government contract procurement, has little experience with government contracts.”

James dropped a perhaps unsurprising bombshell, characterizing the Trump team’s roster of ostensible experts as including individuals who are personal associates of Donald. For one, she said his son got married at Mar-a-Lago, a property important to the case! Those backgrounds could certainly explain how some of these figures ended up on the stand.

Trump, meanwhile, keeps leaning on his public complaints — a stream of commentary in which he has repeatedly claimed an unsubstantiated value for Mar-a-Lago sending the Florida property likely into the range of billions of dollars. He was recently freed, for now, from a gag order imposed by the trial judge in the civil lawsuit blocking attacks on court staff. He promptly began again targeting a clerk for the judge online, glibly jumping past comprehensively stated concerns from the judge about public targeting escalating into threats.