‘Going To Be Here Until Midnight’: Trump Reportedly Rambled Non-Stop During NY Deposition
(Evan Vucci/AP)
In a deposition last year, New York Attorney General Letitia James accused the Trump Organization of illegally inflating property values to ramp up their profits by hundreds of millions. Recently released transcripts shed light on former President Donald Trump’s meandering responses throughout the interview. An attorney even remarked about the session’s length, suggesting, “We’re going to be here until midnight.”
The deposition took place before Trump’s September 22 hearing concerning allegations of business fraud that supposedly enhanced his net worth by approximately $2 billion. Prosecutors claim Trump, his two eldest sons, and two ex-senior executives consistently exaggerated his net worth in financial statements. This, they assert, aided Trump in acquiring more favorable loan terms, saving him substantial sums in interest payments.
However, the seven-hour-long deposition was marked by Trump’s diversions. He digressed into discussions about his “beautiful” marble bathrooms, drew parallels with George Washington, and bragged about potential sales during his presidential term. When quizzed about his children’s roles in his the presidential election, he inexplicably switched to talking about North Korea.
Trump’s tangents persisted when discussing the Trump Organization’s assets. He extensively praised properties, mentioning Turnberry in Scotland and its significance in golf championships. Trump’s self-praising tangent led to him declaring, “I became president because of the brand.”
The conversation took another twist when Trump’s brand value was addressed. A lawyer pointed out its irrelevance to the discussion, to which Trump defensively claimed its intrinsic importance. The dialogue continued to pivot around his relationship with banks, his reasons for seeking loans, and his claims of repaying all debts.
The exchanges often grew tense, with Wallace, one of the lawyers, and Kise, presumably representing Trump, clashing over the clarity of inquiries and their temporal scope.
This lengthy deposition paints a chaotic and often off-topic conversation, raising more questions about the central issues at hand.
