It's clear why the "Trumps wanted to keep Ivanka away" from testifying at the New York fraud trial, according to former Manhattan prosecutor and MSNBC legal analyst Jordan Rubin. Though Ivanka Trump's testimony on Wednesday was calmer than those of former President Donald Trump and his sons Don Jr. and Eric, the questioning showed why New York Attorney General Letitia James "fought to put her on" the stand, he wrote.
Though Ivanka Trump repeatedly said she could not remember certain details when presented with documents related to the Trump Organization's loans, "the government may nonetheless be using her testimony to tell a devastating story about the family business, including through an email in which Ivanka wrote that terms offered by Deutsche Bank’s private wealth management group were as good as it gets," Rubin wrote.
Rubin also highlighted a "mostly untrue or misleading" post Trump published on Truth Social during Ivanka's "potentially damning testimony implicating the family business." Trump wrote: “No Victims, No Defaults, Conservative Financial Statements, 100% Disclaimer Clause, Corrupt A.G., Trump Hating Judge = NO CASE!!!” But Rubin pointed out that, among other things, the law at issue "does not require a victim."
Shares