The bank had no problem with a $2 billion or a $3 billion difference,” defense lawyer Christopher Kise said.
“The bank conducted its own due diligence. They argued the bank executive had neutralized any allegations that the defendants deceived the lender about Trump’s wealth. No payments were missed, and the loans were never found to be in default, Williams said.Īfter Williams finished testifying, Trump’s lawyers sought - as they repeatedly had before - to have the case thrown out. At one point, Trump moved $8.6 million into the Washington hotel’s coffers after its cash flow fell short of a requirement.
Trump acted as the guarantor for the loans and was quick to act when the bank raised concerns that the properties weren’t generating enough cash to make payments, Williams said. A now-retired Deutsche Bank executive, Nicholas Haigh, testified earlier in the trial that he assumed the figures “were broadly accurate,” though the bank subjected them to ”sanity checks” and sometimes made sizable “haircuts.”
The attorney general’s office, however, has maintained that such adjustments were never intended to account for the alleged fraud. “It’s a conservative measure to make these adjustments,” he testified, characterizing them as “standard” and a “stress test” of financial strength.
