“David Williams, a Deutsche Bank managing director who was involved in approving loans to the Trump Organization for several of its most prominent properties, testified as a defense witness. Williams said that before making the loans, Deutsche Bank did its own due diligence on Trump’s net worth and the values of his properties. When a Trump lawyer asked, ‘Is the bank capable of reaching its own judgment based on the evaluation it makes of the guarantor’s financial condition?’ Williams answered, ‘Certainly, yes.’”Then Williams said, ‘As part of our due diligence, we subject a client’s asset value to adjustments. It’s part of our underwriting process. We apply it to every client regardless of what’s reported.’ Trump’s lawyer asked: ‘Is a difference of opinion in asset values between the client and the bank a disqualifying factor to extend credit?’ Williams answered, ‘No.’ The lawyer asked why not. Williams answered, ‘It’s just a difference of opinion.’” https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/trump-mounts-strong-defense-in-trial-already-lost
Search Posts
4 results for "tag:deutsche_bank_testimony"
Bloomberg: “Is the bank capable of reaching its own judgment based on the evaluation it makes of the guarantor’s financial condition?” Trump attorney Jesus Suarez asked Williams, a managing director at the German bank. “Certainly, yes,” Williams said.
ABC News: “He reported both a net worth and investable assets well in excess of our minimum requirements,” Williams said, confirming that the bank set the interest rate for Trump’s commercial loans between 2%-2.5%. The testimony also appeared to bolster Trump’s arguments that his lenders did their own due diligence, diminishing the importance of his statements of financial condition that are at the center of the case.
ABC News: “Was an event of default ever declared by Deutsche Bank on the loans to the Trump Organization?” defense attorney Jesus Suarez asked Williams at the end of Williams’ testimony. “No,” Williams replied, prompting Kise to jump up and make his request. “This witness has again testified the bank conducted its own due diligence” and was not defrauded by Trump’s statements of financial condition, Kise argued. “This is a subjective exercise. There isn’t a right answer. There isn’t an ‘Ah-ha, you picked the wrong number,’” Kise said. “The bank is in a relationship whose job it is to make these determinations. It’s not the attorney general’s job to insert herself into a private transaction ten years later.”