A pair of legal experts weighed in on how former President Trump’s court testimony may have affected his case in New York. Trump testified in his non-jury civil trial on Monday stemming from New York Attorney General Leticia James’ lawsuit against him and his Empire State businesses.
The former president exchanged fire with Judge Arthur Engoron while being questioned by Kevin Wallace, a lawyer from the New York Attorney General’s Office. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News that watching “Trump being called for testimony is like waiting for the green flag at NASCAR” in that many “are coming for the car crashes.”
OPINION: Why Biden Administration Should Rethink Its Israeli-Palestinian Policies
“There was an obvious disconnect in the testimony,” Turley said. “Trump seemed to be speaking to the public, but neither a jury nor a television camera was present. Instead, he was technically speaking to a judge who repeatedly expressed frustration with the tenor and length of the answers.”
Turley said that the “fact is that these cases have only increased Trump’s popularity” and that with “every indictment, he seems to gain five percentage points.”
“At this rate, with four more indictments, he could be elected by general acclamation,” Turley said. “The problem for Trump is the underlying law. The New York law does not require an actual victim or even loss of money.”
“That law became an easy vehicle for James to fulfill her pledge to bag Trump if elected,” Turley continued, referencing the New York attorney general’s campaign promise to take legal action against the former president.
“There are two cases being made in that courtroom. James is making the case to bar Trump from business in New York while Trump is making the case for reelection,” he continued.
“Both may be succeeding,” he added. “James seems to have a sympathetic court while Trump seems to have an increasingly sympathetic public.”
Attorney and conservative commentator Andy McCarthy says he does not think the former president’s testimony will help or hurt his case because it “has already been decided.”
“The judge and state’s attorney general are elected Democrats,” McCarthy said. “The AG ran vowing to use the power of her office against Trump.”
“The judge told Trump before the trial even started that he had already lost the case and all the trial was going to be about was how much he was going to have to pay ($250M or more) in addition to being put out of business in [New York],” McCarthy continued.
“The judge is going to do what he’s going to do regardless of Trump’s testimony,” he added.
The civil trial is the result of James’ lawsuit against former President Trump, his family, and his companies. Trump, according to James, misled banks and exaggerated the worth of his assets.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing and has consistently stated that his assets are undervalued. Trump has consistently stated that his financial records contain disclaimers and that the statistics should be assessed by banks.
Following a brief pause in his testimony, Trump returned to the stand, defending himself and his businesses while denouncing the inquiry.
“We shouldn’t be having a case here because we have a disclaimer clause that every court holds up except this judge,” Trump said, referring to the disclaimers on all of his financial statements and statements of financial condition.
“They’re trying to hurt me – especially her,” Trump said, referring to James, “for political reasons.”
The former President also called James a “political hack,” saying she used her investigation and lawsuit against him “to become governor, to become attorney general.” Trump was referring to James’ campaigns in which she vowed to “get Trump.”
