Tapper Plays Devil’s Advocate On Trump’s Behalf Amid Fraud Trial: ‘A Lot Of Folks In Real Estate Are Kinda Shady’

On Monday’s edition of CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper, the eponymous host asked a question about the New York fraud trial of former President Donald Trump: Doesn’t everyone already know that people who work in real estate “kind of shady?”

The case against Trump and his two older sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, is a civil case, not a criminal case, and it will be decided by a judge, not a jury. Anchor Jake Tapper also pointed out to his panelists, CNN anchor Laura Coates and legal analyst Elie Honig, that “there are no victims, everybody got paid back.” But trying to put the case in context, he cited the real estate industry in which Trump worked for decades before he chased the folly of becoming a politician:

I don’t want to impugn everybody in real estate. I’m sure that there are a lot of people in real estate who are fine, upstanding, ethical men and women. But to me, it looks like a lot of folks in real estate are kind of shady and kind of play with numbers and worth of assets all the time. I mean, look, obviously, Donald Trump lies a lot, and obviously he inflates the worth of his properties and such. But the argument that I mean, look, this this is a judge trial, not a jury trial. But if this were a jury trial, I mean, the argument that, like, look, no one got hurt and the banks and the insurance companies got everything they wanted back and then some, I mean, might that not be convincing for a jury?

Both Coates and Honig had responses to this, and Honig reminded everyone that Trump was facing six other counts in this case. But Coates explained that even though there was “no victim” in Trump’s case, someone else who committed the same violation who wasn’t in the same financial position as Trump would be subject to penalties under the law:

How about the people who don’t get the same benefits based on inflated assets, but people who have tax that is owed, people who have to actually give the accurate assessment of the value of their property if they’re lucky enough to own it, according to the so-called American dream? If they’re able to secure a loan in an industry which oftentimes lays bare bias, whether it’s implicit or otherwise or, you know, algorithm-based or otherwise? What about those people who say, “Well, you know what, all’s well did not end well for me because I didn’t have the benefit that perhaps Trump did.” I suspect on a jury of people who have either tried to get a loan, who have had to pay their taxes, who have had to do that which is required, will look at it very differently. But again, now it’s just a judge doing that, who I’m sure has to pay his taxes as well.

Watch the video above via CNN.