In a lawsuit’s never-before-seen testimony, Donald Trump admitted to personally overseeing the compensation of an executive whose corporate perks have been under scrutiny by the Manhattan district attorney, potentially strengthening the case against the former president and his company for tax fraud.
Trump’s sworn testimony was filed in New York state court on Tuesday, as part of a lawsuit against the Trump Organization over the way its security guards manhandled protesters outside Trump Tower in 2015.
According to a transcript of the Oct. 18, 2021 deposition, Trump repeatedly asserted that he—and only he—oversaw the way Matthew Calamari Sr. was paid for his work as the family company’s chief operating officer.
“It would be me,” Trump repeatedly said, when asked who had “authority” over Calamari’s compensation.
That would potentially make Trump personally responsible for any tax dodging scheme, and more importantly, is useful evidence in the grand jury investigation that has yet to produce an indictment against him.
“That statement sounds as though it is adverse to Trump’s pecuniary interests, and therefore is admissible against him. Even though it’s made out of court and is hearsay,” said John Moscow, a renowned former prosecutor who spent 33 years at the Manhattan DA’s office.
For months, three sources familiar with the Manhattan DA’s investigation have told The Daily Beast that investigators have been probing the way Calamari was paid off-the-books with allegedly untaxed perks, such as an extravagant corporate apartment at the Trump Park Avenue in New York City’s expensive midtown and a Mercedes-Benz. Prosecutors went as far as having Calamari’s son—corporate security director Matt Calamari Jr.—receive total immunity for potential crimes and testify before a grand jury.
The circumstances are similar to the “fringe benefits” case that prosecutors have launched against the Trump Organization and its former chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, who were indicted last summer for tax fraud. Both were charged with criminal tax fraud, and Weisselberg faces trial this upcoming summer for receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in corporate perks in lieu of on-the-books, taxed salary.
Weisselberg received a luxury apartment and tuition for his grandchildrens’ costly private school.
In Calamari’s case, Manhattan DA investigators have been asking about the corporate perks since at least February 2021, according to one witness who was interviewed by prosecutors. It was clear to several witnesses that prosecutors had hoped to leverage a long-standing feud between the Calamari and Weisselberg families, a Shakespearean drama over who’s more loyal to the boss.
However, formal charges have yet to materialize against the elder Calamari. And prosecutors late last year indicated they had no current plans to indict him, according to his defense lawyer, Nicholas Gravante.
Prosecutors could present these newly available statements to the grand jury as additional evidence tying Trump to whatever illegal payment scheme the DA’s office is alleging took place at the Trump Organization. It would be a rare feat in a place like New York, where the court rules are far more strict than most other venues.
In most states and in the federal judicial system, grand juries can consider evidence that’s deemed hearsay, otherwise defined as statements made out of court. (The downside is that those jurors can’t observe a person’s physical demeanor or gestures to gauge how to accurately interpret what they’re saying.) Meanwhile, grand juries in New York typically only consider something if a witness comes in person and testifies under oath.
However, three former prosecutors told The Daily Beast that New York allows for a narrow exception: hearsay is allowed if a person is essentially incriminating…
Read More: Donald Trump Admits He Oversaw Pay for Executive Matthew Calamari, Who Got Fishy Perks