Skip to content
Search AI Powered

Latest Stories

As the Clock Ticks Down on Trump Cases in New York, Prosecutors Catch a Possible Break

Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Image

Tick tick tick...

The clock has been the enemy lately for state and local investigators in New York who have been tackling what New York Attorney General Letitia James described as the “Russian nesting doll” of the Trump Organization’s finances. While state investigators face the expiration of the statute of limitations to bring a civil suit against the Trumps and their company for fraudulent financial statements, the authority of the Manhattan District Attorney’s grand jury investigating possible criminal charges for that fraud expired this week. And stonewalling by Trump reached such a crescendo lately that a judge imposed sanctions of $10,000 per day for his non-compliance with a request for responsive documents, raising questions over whether James ultimately will have all the evidence she needs to bring her civil suit.


And yet. Just as the likelihood of criminal charges for financial statement fraud has dropped precipitously within the Manhattan DA’s office, to the disbelief and howls of many, a new and unforced error by Donald Trump himself may have given life to the chances that he will join his CFO Allen Weisselberg and the Trump Organization in being charged with tax fraud. Let’s unpack.

The state of the New York AG Investigation

There are three important things to keep clear about James’s investigation.

First, it is a civil matter, so we are looking at monetary fines, perhaps big ones, and even the possibility that the Trump Organization could lose its corporate status granted long ago by the state. But no one is going to jail in this case, even if a complaint is brought. That said, James scored a major win when Trump’s longtime accountants at Mazars USA walked away from 10 years of financial statements, saying that in part due to the investigation, it could no longer stand by them.

Second, there are statutes of limitations for fraud that will soon expire. These kinds of laws generally prevent the filing of complaints about events that took place so long ago that evidence (like witness recollections) becomes unreliable. The parties here agreed to a “tolling” of the statute, meaning for some period of time, by agreement, the clock was not ticking. But that period is nearly up, and that means James had better file something soon. She is confident, however, that her office will soon conclude its investigation and be in a position to make a decision as to whether to proceed with a civil suit. Most observers believe one will be filed.

Third, while Trump plays games by refusing to cooperate with the investigation, the possible consequences of that go beyond the $10,000 per day fine he is now accumulating for his contempt of court. His behavior could be taken into consideration in any possible court case, with adverse inferences drawn for why he would rather face a contempt ruling and pay a fine than cooperate. This is similar to how pleading the Fifth Amendment can’t be used against defendants in a criminal proceeding, but in a civil one it can be cited as evidence that they have something to hide.

The State of the Manhattan DA cases

Financial fraud cases are difficult to prove, especially where the boss man doesn’t leave a paper trail and those below him who do his bidding are unwilling to flip. That difficulty level is the most likely reason the new District Attorney for Manhattan, Alvin Bragg, expressed doubts to the lead prosecutors over the strength of their case for financial statement fraud, much to their frustration. After all, Trump can still simply say he relied upon his CFO and his accountants and only signed where they told him to sign. To contradict that and prove fraud beyond a reasonable doubt, you need solid witnesses and evidence.

But the fraudulent financial statements case isn’t the only one on the docket against Trump in Manhattan. There is also the pending criminal case for more straightforward tax fraud, which has already snagged indictments of CFO Weisselberg and the Trump Organization itself. That case involves the use by the company of what amounts to two sets of books so that it could provide fancy perks (such as luxury apartments, expensive cars, and private tuition for their children) to high-level executives in the Trump Organization so that they and the company could avoid tax liability. That conduct, if proven, is very much illegal. Anyone who participated in that could also be charged with conspiracy if they could be shown to be in on the plan.

But once again, in that case prosecutors face the daunting task of getting Trump’s underlings to flip on him. Otherwise, Trump could simply plead ignorance of the details and wash his hands of any responsibility or authority. To date, prosecutors have been unable to crack Weisselberg, whose trial is set for later this year. So who else would ever come forward and say that Trump himself approved these illegal perks and oversaw the payments to top Trump executives?

The answer may be Donald Trump himself. In a court case unrelated to any of this, in which the plaintiffs sued the Trump Organization for the way its security guards manhandled protestors back in 2015, Donald Trump was finally ordered to testify and did so in October of 2021. In that deposition, Trump repeatedly asserted that he—and only he—oversaw the way the company’s Chief Operating Officer Matthew Calamari, Sr. was paid for his work. “It would be me,” Trump said multiple times when asked who had authority over Calamari’s pay. Excerpts from that deposition were only recently filed in court as part of that other lawsuit.

It may have been a bad mistake by Trump to admit that authority. In the Manhattan DA’s ongoing tax fraud case, Calamari Sr. is alleged to have received the very kind of illegal, tax-evading perks that landed Weisselberg with an indictment. If Trump himself, and not an intermediary like Weisselberg, had authority over Calamari’s pay, that would tie Trump to direct knowledge and participation in the scheme to avoid taxes by paying under the table, off-the-books benefits.

There remains a question over whether this testimony can go before the grand jury so that it might consider a new indictment against Trump himself. As an “out of court statement,” the testimony is considered hearsay, and New York state is unlike other jurisdictions in that the rules of evidence, including hearsay, apply even in grand jury settings. Prosecutors could seek to get around this by arguing that the statement is an exception to the hearsay rule, e.g. because it is a statement by a party against his own financial or criminal interest, but that would have to be decided by a judge.

It’s unclear why, when their client was faced with the key question of whether he had authority over the pay structure of one of his top executives—the very question at the heart of the Manhattan DA’s active tax fraud case—Trump’s attorneys would not have immediately advised him to assert his privilege against self-incrimination. This was only a civil suit for damages, after all, and it shouldn’t result in such a disastrous admission. It’s early to tell, but there is a thread here that Manhattan prosecutors now may wish to pull, especially as that office faces renewed criticism for having backed off of its other case on grounds there was not sufficient evidence to charge Trump.

How ironic but fitting it would be should Trump ultimately face criminal charges for tax fraud because he didn’t keep his mouth shut when it truly mattered.

More from News

Screenshot of Rob Schneider
Fox News

Rob Schneider Is Launching His Own 'All Ladies Talk Show' To Compete With 'The View'—And Oh Brother

Actor Rob Schneider was widely mocked after he announced during a Fox News appearance that he is launching a women’s talk show to "compete" against The View.

Schneider announced that filming for the episodes will kick off in January in Los Angeles. He and his production company, No Apologies Media, are inviting fans to submit title suggestions on X (formerly Twitter).

Keep ReadingShow less
Kylie Kelce; Jason Kelce
Not Gonna Lie with Kylie Kelce; Ric Tapia/Getty Images

Jason Kelce's Wife Sparks Debate After Revealing He Never Watches The Kids When She's Busy

The profiles of Travis and Jason Kelce have skyrocketed since the former took up dating superstar Taylor Swift last year.

With this rise in popularity beyond the realm of NFL devotees came an interest in the family lives of the Kelces, including that of Kylie Kelce and husband Jason.

Keep ReadingShow less
Nikko Santo Pietro; Nikko and Vanna White from Instagram video
Entertainment Tonight; @officialvannawhite/Instagram

Vanna White's Son Reacts To Becoming Instant 'Heartthrob' After Viral Cooking Video

Wheel of Fortune's co-host Vanna White responded to her son Nikko Santo Pietro's sudden heartthrob status after their December 2 Instagram cooking video went viral.

In honor of the game show's "Fabulous Food Week," White, who at 67 continues turning letters on WOF's puzzle board since starting in 1982, was joined by her 30-year-old son, Nikko, in the kitchen to share the creation of her favorite dish, "Uncle Roy’s Chicken" for fans.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman with cherry in mouth; Usher
@travelmoore2022/TikTok

Usher Hilariously Shocked By Fan's Overtly Suggestive Way Of Eating A Cherry At His Concert

Usher was not expecting his popular cherry challenge to reach an erotic high during a stop on his ongoing Past Present and Future tour.

The suggestive cherry-eating gimmick involves the "Hey Daddy" singer feeding women in the audience cherries or handing them out to couples in the audience to feed each other.

Keep ReadingShow less
Blue sticky note that reads, 'Fun Fact'
Photo by Walls.io on Unsplash

People Break Down The Most Unusual Facts They Know

Everyone loves a good fun fact, especially one that's unexpected, unusual, and can lead to a quirky conversation.

Anyone who wants a good conversation starter for a holiday party or a company event could use some interesting pieces of trivia they could bring out at a moment's notice when the conversation has stalled.

Keep ReadingShow less