New York investigations of the Trump Organization

Prosecutors filed 10 charges against the organization, alleging that it had conducted a 15-year "scheme to defraud" the government, and 15 felony counts against longtime chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg—who invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 500 times in his testimony.

He said he would give his opinion to chief financial officer (CFO) Allen Weisselberg, who "predominately" determined final values, which Trump called "conservative".

"[29] Following Cohen's testimony, in March, the New York State Department of Financial Services issued a subpoena to Aon, the organization's longtime insurance broker.

[34] By 2020, the Manhattan district attorney (DA) had opened a criminal investigation to determine whether The Trump Organization, including any individuals or business entities associated with it, had committed financial fraud.

[35] Prosecutors filed 10 charges against the organization, alleging that it had conducted a 15-year "scheme to defraud" the government, and 15 felony counts against Weisselberg, who agreed to a plea deal in August 2022, during Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's tenure.

[citation needed] After Trump's indictment, Republican U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan organized a hearing against Bragg, leading the DA to sue him for alleged interference.

[48][49][50][51] The Manhattan DA convened a second grand jury the last week of October 2021; it began to hear evidence on November 4, reportedly to consider charges related to the company's valuation of assets.

[55] Prosecutors were reportedly examining whether the organization provided its outside accountants, Mazars USA, with cherry-picked information with which to prepare favorable financial statements to present to prospective lenders.

[57] Also on February 22, 2022, Bragg told two of his lead prosecutors, Mark F. Pomerantz and Carey R. Dunne, that he was not ready to indict Trump based on the difficulty of proving that he had criminal intent.

"[70] According to Pomerantz, prosecutors were weeks away from charging Trump in late 2020 for the discrepancy in 40 Wall Street's valuation (with the "absurd" value reported to tax officials under penalty of perjury being less than the building's total annual rent), but the New York City Law Department downplayed this as a standard negotiating tactic.

In February 2024, Engoron concluded that the "defendants failed to accept responsibility or to impose internal controls to prevent future recurrences" of having "submitted blatantly false financial data" to "borrow more and at lower rates".

[97] At a political rally on July 3, 2021, Trump appeared to acknowledge the truth of the New York prosecutors' criminal charges against his company, then described filing taxes as generally confusing; journalist Andrew Feinberg referred to these statements as an "admission".

[101] In early July 2022, the Washington Examiner reported that Trump was considering announcing his presidential run soon, apparently in order to increase his sway against the "scathing hearings" in the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack.

"[104] In January 2022, NBC News cited a criminal defense lawyer it employs as a legal analyst, who observed: "Generally, lying to a bank to obtain a loan can be a crime.

"[105] A New York defense lawyer who worked for Cyrus Vance Jr. called a potential trial against Trump a "logistical nightmare" and "unprecedented in a courthouse that has seen many, many high-profile cases over the decades.

[112] On September 22, The Wall Street Journal editorial board—having written earlier in the year that the investigation "looks like more evidence of the decline of America's rule of law"—stated that "Trump has made a business and political career of getting away with whatever he can, and it's easy to imagine he crossed a line.

"[115] New York Times columnist Gail Collins opined that Trump supporters would not be alienated by the former president's apparent fraud due to his already being well-known for distorting the truth.

[122] In mid-November 2022, CBS News reported that three law firms involved in the criminal trial had received more than $500,000 from the Save America PAC and the RNC over the previous two months.

[124][j] Contrarily, some with inside knowledge of the investigations argue that Trump was personally implicated via the guilty verdict against his company, despite denials of wrongdoing made on his behalf.

[127] In February 2023, The New York Times reported that in 2021 and 2022, the Save America PAC spent $16 million in legal-related payments, some which were directed to firms representing Trump's company.

[128] On November 16, a New York appeals court ruled that Cohen could sue the organization to reimburse legal fees (in the range of millions of dollars) for Trump-related litigation including the investigations by the DA and AG.

[136] Writing for New York Daily News, investigative journalist David Cay Johnston opined that Trump could be convicted on "easy-to-prove state income tax fraud charges" based on documents available to the DA's office, including Trump's publicly released tax returns which Johnston said were "rich with what the IRS calls 'badges of fraud,'" such as "hundreds of thousands of dollars in unexplained expenses" on numerous Schedule C forms showing zero income and "revenues and expenses that [suspiciously match] to the dollar".

[137][l] The Independent pointed out that hours after the organization was sentenced, Donald Trump Jr. made a social-media post ridiculing paying taxes, implying it supports foreign interests, namely Ukraine in its defense against Russian invasion.

[125][m] Contrarily, some with inside knowledge of the investigations argue that Trump has been personally implicated via the guilty verdict against his company, despite denials of wrongdoing made on his behalf.

[139] Writing for The New York Times, Maggie Haberman cited the investigations as being two of several against Trump highlighting his similar defensive tactics, summarized by former U.S. attorney and FBI official Chuck Rosenberg as being that "he thinks that everything can be bought or fought.

They called Trump's potential indictment "an unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority" based on "a novel legal theory" including purportedly expired statutes of limitations,[144] saying the charge would "erode confidence in the evenhanded application of justice and unalterably interfere in the ... 2024 presidential election".

[145] Jordan defended Trump's alleged wrongdoing as a "bookkeeping error"[146] and asserted that Bragg's office was subject to congressional oversight because it receives federal grants.

[153] On April 11, Bragg sued Jordan over the House's efforts—calling them a "transparent campaign to intimidate and attack" his case as well as a "fishing expedition"—seeking to block the subpoena of Pomerantz and requests for other confidential evidence.

[158][159] Jordan set a Judiciary Committee hearing about Bragg on April 17, broadly alleging that his "pro-crime, anti-victim policies have led to an increase in violent crime".

[160][147] Mayor Adams and other city officials denounced the Judiciary Committee hearing, which Democrats painted as a Republican rouse against Bragg and C-SPAN opted not to televise.