Trump Organization Accuses Court Monitor of False Reporting and Questions Motives
The Trumps launch a scathing attack on Judge Barbara S. Jones, calling her latest report on the family company a lie and a ploy to bolster the New York Attorney General’s case.
In a dramatic turn of events, the Trump Organization has responded to the recent revelations of potential tax fraud by accusing the court monitor, Judge Barbara S. Jones, of spreading falsehoods. The Trumps have launched a scathing attack on Jones, questioning her motives and calling her latest report a last-minute attempt to support the New York Attorney General’s case. This development comes after Jones uncovered a potentially significant discrepancy in former President Donald Trump’s finances, suggesting he may have lied about a personal loan to avoid taxes. The Trumps’ lawyer has vehemently denied these allegations, labeling them as a “demonstrable falsehood” and raising doubts about Jones’ competency.
The Trumps’ Counterpunch
The Trumps’ lawyer filed an indignant court document on Monday, launching a fierce counterattack on Judge Barbara S. Jones. The document accuses Jones of spreading lies and attempting to unjustly enrich herself as she performs her court-mandated duties. The Trumps also expressed their dissatisfaction with the $2.6 million they have had to pay Jones for her services, dismissing her findings as baseless.
The Bombshell Revelation
Judge Jones’ report revealed a potentially explosive piece of information about Donald Trump’s finances. The report suggests that Trump may have lied about a personal loan he made to one of his own companies, which could have allowed him to evade taxes on nearly $50 million in income. This revelation comes at a crucial time, as Trump recently lost a defamation trial and was ordered to pay $83 million to journalist E. Jean Carroll.
The Trumps’ Response
The Trumps’ lawyer vehemently denied the allegations made in Judge Jones’ report. He claimed that the Trump entities never denied the existence of the loan, but rather provided a memorandum stating that no liabilities or obligations were outstanding at the time. However, this memo does not confirm the existence of the loan itself, casting doubt on the Trumps’ defense. The lawyer also called into question Jones’ competency and veracity, suggesting that she deliberately mischaracterized the situation.
The Trumps’ Own Accountant
In an attempt to refute Judge Jones’ findings, the Trumps have enlisted the support of their own certified public accountant. The accountant wrote a statement asserting that there was no financial reporting misconduct, suspicious activity, or fraud identified in the reports. However, the credibility of this accountant, Jason Flemmons, was called into question during a recent bank fraud trial, where he contradicted himself multiple times and seemed biased towards the Trumps.
Judge Engoron’s Perspective
Justice Arthur F. Engoron, who has presided over the Trumps’ cases, is likely to view the Trumps’ defense with suspicion. Engoron has previously criticized the Trumps for withholding evidence and has deemed their experts and testimony unreliable. Additionally, the Trump Organization is currently facing charges related to faking internal paperwork, further damaging their credibility.
Jones Strikes a Nerve
Judge Jones’ latest report has clearly struck a nerve with the Trumps, who are now scrambling to discredit her and end the monitoring process. The Trumps’ lawyer downplayed Jones’ year-long investigation, dismissing it as a costly exercise in finding minor mistakes. He labeled her recent findings as “self-serving hyperbole” and called for an end to the process.
Conclusion: The Trump Organization’s response to the court monitor’s latest report reveals the increasing tension surrounding the ongoing investigation into potential tax fraud. Accusing Judge Barbara S. Jones of spreading falsehoods and questioning her motives, the Trumps are desperately trying to undermine her credibility. However, with Judge Engoron’s skepticism and the Trumps’ own credibility issues, it remains to be seen how successful their counterpunch will be. As the legal battle continues, the public watches closely, waiting for the truth to emerge.