UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ART COHEN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, CLASS ACTION Plaintiff, VS. DONALD J. TRUMP, Defendant. No. 3:13-cv-02519-GPC-WVG CONFIDENTIAL TRANSCRIPT VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DONALD J. TRUMP VOLUME II (Pages 371 to 485) January 21, 2016, Las Vegas, Nevada Reported By: Gale Salerno RMR, CSR No. 12375 Job No.: 10021313 Deposition of DONALD J. TRUMP, taken on behalf of the Class Counsel at 2000 Fashion Show Drive, Room 6104, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89109, beginning at 8:01 a.m. and ending at 10:53 a.m. on Thursday, January 21, 2016, before Gale Salerno, Registered Merit Reporter, Certified Shorthand Reporter No. 12375. VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DONALD J. TRUMP VOLUME II January 21, 2016 This begins the videotaped deposition of Donald J. Trump, Volume II. Today's date is January 21st, 2016, and the time is 8:01 a.m. We are at Trump International Hotel, 2000 Fashion Show Drive, in Las Vegas, Nevada, for the matter entitled Art Cohen, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, versus Donald J. Trump, case number 3:13-cv-02519-GPC-WVG, in the United States District Court, Southern District of California. I am the videographer, Becky Ulrey. The court reporter is Gale Salerno. We are representing Aptus Court Reporting of San Diego, California. Will counsel please identify yourselves, and then the reporter will administer the oath. Jason Forge, on behalf of Mr. Cohen and the Class. Rachel Jensen, on behalf of the Plaintiff and the Class. Charles McCue, on behalf of the Plaintiff and the Class. Daniel Petrocelli, for Mr. Trump. Jill Martin, for Mr. Trump and Trump University. DONALD J. TRUMP, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: EXAMINATION RESUMED BY MR. FORGE: Good morning, Mr. Trump. Good morning. If I could ask the court reporter to please mark this document as Exhibit 504. (Exhibit 504 was marked for identification.) I have just handed to you Exhibit 504. It's a National Review article from December 8th, 2015, which is titled, "No one was more influential than Donald Trump this year." Are you familiar with that article? No, I'm not. Do you consider yourself an influential person? Yes. And in what way are you influential? Well, I think I've set a certain standard. I think I have certain leadership abilities. I think in business I'm respected, and I would say that I guess now in politics I'm respected, because I'm the leading candidate on the Republican side. Do you want people to consider you trustworthy? Yes. Do you want people to consider you reliable? Yes. Did you get a sense that your level of influence grew after The Apprentice show started? The question is vague. I would say not really. The reason I was chosen for The Apprentice is my level of influence. But it possibly -- I think not necessarily influence, I think I became even better known. And by "better known," do you have fans? Yeah, I do. And if you consider someone to be a fan, what does that mean to you? People that really like a person and respect a person. I guess generally respect, but certainly like. Now, over the years you've promoted a variety of products, properties and services; is that fair to say? Golf courses? Yes. Resorts? Correct. Condominium projects? Right. Books? Yes. Products such as ties? Uh-huh. Is that a yes? Yes. Chocolates? Yes. And a fragrance, I believe? That's right. Now, sometimes you promote things that you own, such as a building that you might own and actually manage? Right. And other times you promote things that other people own; is that right? So under a licensing agreement? Correct. When you promote somebody else's project or service, do you generally do it for a fee? Yes. Of some kind, yes. All different, but of some kind. If we could mark this as Exhibit 505. (Exhibit 505 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, if you could take a minute to look at Exhibit 505 and just confirm for the record, if you could, please, that that is a one-page document, and it's a Trump blog posted by Donald J. Trump on 6/28/2005. It's kind of small print, but -- Yes, it is very small. Yes, it is. Now, in here in the last sentence of the first paragraph, you wrote, "The Trump brand carries a promise that whatever bears the name will be elite." Is that consistent with the image that you've cultivated over the years for the Trump brand? I tried to make it that way, yes. In the third paragraph it begins, "The Trump name carries with it a price tag. People pay a lot more to live or rent commercial space in my buildings because of the association with me and my ideals." Is that also true? I think so, yes. The next document, Exhibit 506. (Exhibit 506 was marked for identification.) If you could, please, Mr. Trump, confirm that Exhibit 506 is a true and correct copy of The Trump Blog from June 12th, 2008, posted by Donald J. Trump on that date. Yes, it is. If you look in the fourth paragraph, you're quoting something your father used to tell you, which is, "know everything you can about what you're doing." Right. And then you write, "I've followed that advice too, and I think it's apparent that it works. I'm very thorough, as he was, and it can save you a lot of time in the long run." Is that what you wrote in the blog? Yes. Now, in terms of writing these type of sentiments and publishing them, is that thoroughness part of the Trump image, your attention to details? I really don't know. I mean, I can't tell you if it's part of the image. I like to get involved in details as much as I can reasonably. I have many, many transactions. Everyone knows that. Many deals. And I can't go into details on every deal. I have people; I have very good people running different transactions. And I rely -- and I also discuss that. I mean, I rely on people, good people, to run things because I can't get involved in all of the details. In terms of the sentiment you expressed here, which is, "know everything you can about what you're doing," is one of the reasons why you're putting that out there, is to tell people that when they buy the Trump brand, they're getting something that you know everything about? Well, I think within reason, yeah. I mean, I also think people know that I'm not going to be, you know, involved in every little thing of every deal, because I have deals all over the world. I have many deals right now. As an example, right now all over the world, in addition to running for president, but I have deals going up all over the world. So obviously, I can't do them myself, and people understand that. So within reason, you're trying to express the sentiment that you know everything you can, but you're also a practical person? Yeah. Within practicality, yes. (Exhibits 507 and 508 were marked for identification.) Starting with Exhibit 507, Mr. Trump, can you just confirm that appears to be a true and correct copy of The Trump Blog from -- that you posted on June 8th, 2005? Yes. If you look at the end of the first paragraph, it reads, "It's good common sense that risk -- always an essential feature of business -- is substantially reduced when you make an effort to learn everything you can about what you're getting yourself into." Did I read that accurately? Yes. And is it fair to say that one of the messages you're trying to convey with that sentiment is that the Trump brand carries a low risk of not getting what you pay for because you're in charge and you try to, within practical limits, learn everything you can about anything that bears your name? The question is vague and overbroad. You can answer. Well, I don't think I'm saying that. I'm just saying that there is risk, but if you can learn more, your risk goes down a little bit, but I'm not saying having to do with me. I'm saying having to do with general and people and life, and that there is a big risk to life and a risk to deals. And if you can learn -- if you can learn things about specific industries or whatever you may be doing, perhaps your risk is going to be somewhat lessened. But there's always risk. You can never get rid of risk. If you could, turn to Exhibit 508, the second document I handed you, and just confirm that it appears to be a Trump Insider Newsletter by you. It is not -- it is not dated on the first page, I don't believe. And I don't see a date on the second, but does it appear to be a Trump newsletter titled The Importance of Education Will Open the Door of Knowledge? I haven't seen this, I don't believe. But it appears -- it's a long time ago, but it appears to be, yes. And if we look at the fourth paragraph down -- I'm sorry, fifth paragraph down, the sentence that reads, "These days we have few excuses for maintaining a blind spot." Do you see that? Yes. And that's what you wrote in this blog? Did I read that accurately? Yes. Now, Mr. Trump, generally speaking, do you believe that it's profitable -- a profitable business decision for others to pay you to promote their projects or products? Well, it has been. It continues to be. And do you set your fee based on your expectations of the value of your endorsement to the particular business or project? Well, each project is very different, and totally different fee structures. Sometimes it's a pure cash fee structure. Sometimes it's a percentage of profits. Sometimes it's a percentage of gross. It's always -- I mean, we don't have a set formula. It's always different. A lot of it has to do with the expectation of the person wanting the name or wanting the brand. And by being profitable for the business, that means basically that your endorsement brings in more customers and more revenue from the customers than they're paying you; is that fair? Hopefully, yes. And historically, you've seen that to be true? I would say yes. So whether it's promoting something that you own or promoting something that someone else owns, the purpose of the promotion is to try to influence other people's purchase decisions; is that fair? Well, to show that the product is a good product, yeah. And -- yeah, essentially. I'm going to play you a video exhibit, Mr. Trump. And just for the record, Dan, the same thing we did the last time. I have got all these videos on this thumbdrive. I'll identify the file number, and at the end we'll just delete the ones we didn't use, and leave everything with the court reporter, if that's acceptable to you? Sure. Last time you had these little CDs. You don't have those today? I have CDs for you to take with you. Do you want to do that after? Yeah, you can do that after. This first one is, we're going to call it Exhibit 509. Just for the record, though, it is file 204 on this thumbdrive. (Exhibit 509 was marked for identification.) (Playing Video From Thumbdrive Marked Exhibit 509.) Mr. Trump, you shot that video to promote Trump University, right? Yes. A long time ago. So you made that video to influence people to enroll in Trump University? Yes. Now, at one point you mentioned that there would be professors and adjunct professors. Do you have any idea what, if any, criteria determined who would be a professor versus an adjunct professor? Well, I see resumes, but mostly that was up to Michael Sexton, who was the president who ran Trump University. So that's not a decision process you were involved in, who would be a professor versus -- I would see resumes, but I told him, you know, I want very good people, yes. But in terms of determining this person will be a professor versus an adjunct professor -- No, that was not me. Do you know if any of the adjunct professors at Trump University were ever promoted to become professors? That I wouldn't know. I was not running the school. Do you know the identities of any of the adjunct professors? I know names, but I really don't know the identities, no. Were all the instructors at Trump University either a professor or an adjunct professor? I would rather have you ask Mr. Sexton. He ran the school. So you personally don't know? No, I don't know that. You mentioned in there that the people at Trump University that you were going to be putting forward were going to be the best of the best. What does that mean to you? Well, I mean, they had to be good instructors. And I wanted them to be good instructors, and I so instructed the people. I instructed Mr. Sexton we want to really have really great people working there. He was running it. I wasn't running it, but I wanted to have really good people. Can you identify any of the live events instructors? And by "live events," I mean in person instructors and mentors. Any of those live events instructors and mentors, can you identify any that you personally consider to be the best of the best? I just recognize names. It's too long ago; it's many years ago, and I just recognize names now. It's so long. But I know they had some very, very good instructors. But that was really up to Mr. Sexton, not up to me. So when you say you recognize names, recognize names of -- and again, this -- People who worked there. I'm talking people that worked there. I want to make sure we're distinguishing between the live events, which was something that Trump University started in the later years, which is in-person instruction, versus the Internet learning, which is where it began. Okay. And so in terms of recognizing names, we went through a bunch of names the last time. I'm not going to put you through that again. But there were a number of names you didn't recognize the last time. Right. Are there -- do any of those names, have you had a recognition of any of those names? Any of those names come to mind now as we sit here? No. So same memory or lack thereof, whatever your answers were still stand? It's a long time. Just off the record for a second. (A discussion was held off the record.) If we could please mark this next exhibit as 510. (Exhibits 510, 511 and 512 were marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, starting with Exhibit 510, does that appear to be a true copy of a special invitation from Donald J. Trump, and an attached letter that begins Dear Friend? It does seem to be. I don't remember this, but it does seem to be, yes. And that appears to be your signature at the bottom of that invitation on the second page? Yes. And this invitation is all part of the promotion of Trump University; is that fair to say? It looks like it. So again, this is something that was intended to influence people to enroll in Trump University? It would look that way, yes. Were you personally aware of any sort of proven real estate system that students would be learning at Trump University? The question is vague. Well, what I did is we gave a lot of big packages out. Again, it's a long time ago, but -- and including books that I've written, et cetera, et cetera. You have the information. But there is -- you know, there are methods that have been very successful for me, and that's what I would talk about. And, you know, starting with location. Starting with, you know, various forms of debt. We talked about the kind of debt you can put on properties. And we talked about a lot of different things. You can look at the books. But I've always -- and very strongly told them to stress location. I also put words out when I felt markets -- I've been very good at predicting markets, like the recent market. I've been very good at predicting over the years. And I've had many people, and I think they will be witnesses when the trial comes about, they were very thankful to me because I predicted markets both up and down. And I would tell people that, you know, this is what I think is going to happen. When people got caught in the early years with the bad -- with the, you know, exploding debt, I predicted that was going to happen so accurately. And I would pass the word. And I've had more people thank me for keeping them out of real estate as well as keeping them -- as well as getting them in. So I've been good at predicting markets, as you probably have read or heard. Does that summarize what it is about the proven real estate system? Yeah, well, I think it's a system that I've been using, yes. Now, you mentioned that these are things that you talk about. You're saying talk about in your books, right? Well, and I talk about at speeches, and I talk about elsewhere. Sure. But you don't mean actually talk about to the Trump University students? Well, I think that I would tell Michael. I would tell other people, you know, I'm feeling bad about the market or I'm feeling good about the market, I hope you can get that word out. But as far as personally conveying -- No, not personally, no. And as far as personally verifying that live events instructors were getting that word out, you didn't personally verify that they were -- No, I didn't. Because who knows if you're right? You know, it's just a guesstimate, so who knows? But it was my feeling, and I was right. But timing and location are key? Very important. Any other aspects, significant aspects of the system? Well, the method of financing, where you get your financing, who you're getting your financing from. The rate is always very important, depending on what you're doing. And the amount of financing you're getting. How it -- you know, how it relates to the different types of property you're talking about. You know, we gave very extensive manuals on things. And I think it's very much covered in the manuals and other books and things that they got as part of the course. Okay. And the amount of financing you're getting, you mentioned how it relates to the different types of property, you're talking, were you -- have you financed properties in the past with no money down? Yes, I have. When would you say was the most recent time you've done that? Well, it was a while ago when the lenders were going absolutely crazy, when they were just throwing money at you. In fact, not only no money down. Where you walk out with money on the table and you own a property. But, you know, then you had the banks explode. So it was an epic crash that took down the world, or almost took down the world during those times. Today I think it's a little bit more conservative, but you can get 80 percent financing. But there was a time, Jason, where you could get 100 percent plus plus plus, and plenty of, you know, money left over. And that led to a real banking crisis. And the banking crisis was demonstrated by all the foreclosures going on? Yeah. So that period where you could get these properties with no money down and possibly a plus plus plus, that predated and actually led to all the foreclosures, right? That led to a lot of problems, and believe it or not, we're probably getting there again, from what I'm seeing. It's pretty easy to get money right now. And this interestingly would be a very good time for Trump University. There would a lot of people that would like to sign up. And this would be one of those times when you would probably tell people this is not a great time to get into -- I would say that this maybe is not a great time because it's so overheated, and that's what I told them in the past, and I was right about it. This would not be a great time. It would be a good word to get out to people actually, because a lot of people are going into real estate they shouldn't be right now. The next exhibit is Exhibit 511. If you can just take a look at that and confirm that that appears to be a true copy of another special invitation from you. Okay. Is that -- Yes. And that -- again, that is part of the promotion of Trump University? It would look like it. I mean, I didn't do this, but the people that ran Trump University. The next is Exhibit 512. Same thing, another invitation -- Yes. -- from you? Another thing, another invitation is part of the promotion of Trump University? It looks like it, yes. You mentioned earlier something that I think most people would agree with, it's impossible to eliminate risk? Totally impossible. So -- The safest deal -- I've seen deals that were 100 percent and they didn't go well. I've seen deals that had no chance and they were great deals. So there's no such thing as an airtight strategy? The greatest businessman in the world, Carl Icahn, many of the greatest businessmen in the world, I mean, I've seen them go into deals that were horrendous, that they were extremely excited about, and they thought they were going to be good. Friends of mine that do deals, and they're the best dealmakers in the world. They will hit deals that are so bad that they will lose a fortune. No matter how good you are, because things happen. The economy and lots of crazy -- You're talking about individual deals. I'm talking about strategies. There's no such thing as a sure thing strategy, right? Not even government bonds, because you don't know if the government is going to default. There you go. I mean, I guess you could say that U.S. bonds would be considered like the safe bet, even though they pay you no interest, essentially. But you know, bad things can happen even there. So there's no such thing as -- there's risk to everything. Right. So an airtight strategy is basically a unicorn? Yeah. I mean, you can do better and you can sort of guard against, you know, bad things happening a little bit. But basically -- and I think most people know this, there's no such thing as foolproof. Mr. Trump, do you have a certain number of steps that you use to complete deals, a set number of steps, or is it different depending -- I think it's different. I mean, you could have concepts, I guess, but it's different for deals. Have you ever engaged in a real estate transaction in which the contract is between the seller and you as the buyer, but it's listed as you and/or your assigns? I think a lot of contracts are done that way, because you may sell it before you even close, you know. A lot of people do that. Have you ever entered into one of those deals where at the time you entered into the agreement, you had no intention of actually buying the property, but rather you wanted to just cloud the title by recording the agreement, and while the title is clouded, go out and see if you could find somebody who was willing to pay more? I think so, yeah. You've done that? I mean, I would have to think about which, but it's something that is fairly common in the industry. And you believe you've done that -- Yeah. -- clouded the title? I think so. I've done deals where you close before you sell. I've done deals where you can cloud a title, and, you know, take your time to buy it. I'm talking about a deal where you go into it with that intention. You have no intention of buying the property, but you -- I wouldn't say no intention, but you do have maybe not a full intention, and you do cloud up the title. A lot of people do that, and make a living off of that. I think I did one, it's called -- I think it was 100 Wall Street, or 99 Wall Street, whatever. I could get you the exact. But where I probably didn't think I was going to close the deal, and ultimately the deal was sold before I closed, and it worked out very well. And sometimes you do a tremendous tax savings when you do that. You don't pay transfer taxes because the building is never transferred. Yeah, I mean, sometimes it's done. But again, and I don't mean to get too down to details on it, but in terms of walking into the deal, shaking hands with someone with the present intention of definitely not buying that property -- I don't know if I've done that. In fact, no means of buying the property? I don't know if I've done it, but I can tell you it's done, and people make money with it. I don't know that I've done that. I don't think I've done it per se. I think that -- I go into deals to close. Plenty of people go into deals. They call them "not to close." They go into deals not to close. Do you consider that to be ethical? To go into a deal without telling the seller, Hey, basically in the back of your head you know I can't buy this property, and I'm not going to buy this property, but if I tie it up, maybe I can find somebody else who is going to buy it and make some money? The question is vague. Well, I think it's ethical in that it's fairly common in real estate. People make a lot of money doing that. And if the other side has a good lawyer, like you, you won't allow that to happen, because you'll ask for a very large deposit, and to a point where you don't mind it happening. In other words, if somebody puts up a 25 percent deposit and wants to cloud up title, you'll say, Hey, I'll suffer with my lawyer for a year, and I'll keep the money, and then I'll sell it a year from now. Because ultimately, they will get the property back. They always get the property back. So you can delay things, and you can -- you know, you can deal a certain way. People make a big living doing that. But if you have good legal representation, it's very hard to do it. And what happens is when you ask for the bigger deposit, usually the buyer says I'm not going to do the deal. So you don't have a clouded title. Flipping the script a little bit. With you as the seller, you have always been pretty shrewd in your deals, or try to be. Is that fair to say? Yes. And so you have, through your legal counsel, just through your own due diligence, made sure that you're protected against that sort of thing; is that fair to say? When I think a deal isn't going to close, or it's suspect, or if I'm not in love with the people that I'm dealing with, I will usually ask for a much larger deposit. So if it doesn't close, I don't care, because it would be a nonrefundable deposit where I keep the money. So that if it doesn't happen, I keep the money. I mean, I've had deals that didn't close where I kept money. And sometimes you have to go through to get your property back because, you know, it's a legal process basically, like we're going through, but it doesn't take as long. It's -- Few things do. No, few things do. We'll set a record. We might. But it's something that is pretty common in the real estate industry. I think we're at 513. (Exhibit 513 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, does Exhibit 513 appear to be a true and correct copy of an advertisement for Trump University for presentations that were going to be occurring in Northern California in August of 2009? Yes. Again, similar to the invitations, this was part of the promotion of Trump University? Yes. And if they had followed that advice, they would have done very well. Because from 2009 until the present -- because I owned real estate from that period in California, and it has gone through the roof. Too bad they didn't listen to me. I hope you're listening to me, Mr. Attorney. That was very good advice. That's what I mean. This was incredible advice. Because from that date until now, the real estate has gone very, very high up. That's what I meant, Jason, when I said -- Timing? Timing. That was the time to get in? It could have been that they put that ad in because I was saying tell the classes to, you know, it's a good time to buy, in my opinion. It's only my opinion. You know, what do I know? I mean, I think I know a lot, but what do I know? But I thought it was a good time to buy. Now, the instructors -- I'll represent to you, Mr. Trump, that you don't know who the instructors were for this particular -- I don't know. I may know the names, but I don't know them. And I'll represent to you that based on the documents that have been produced in the case, Keith Sperry is one of the instructors. That's someone you mentioned earlier. You don't know who he is? Don't know the name. (A discussion was held off the record.) (Exhibit 514 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, I've placed in front of you a document marked as Exhibit 514. And could you just confirm that that appears to be a copy of another one of the special invitations from you promoting Trump University? Yes. And this one is a special invitation again for classes in Northern California, this time in November of 2009; is that right? Correct. Now, Mr. Trump, were you aware that the instructors for these previews were paid entirely based on commission? I think there was maybe commission involved, but I wasn't involved in that. That was up to the people running the school. You know just generally speaking, though, that commissions are used as an incentive to get people to sell something; is that fair? Yes. Most things I would say. Almost everything. Now, I'm sure you're not aware, but correct me if I'm wrong, but were you aware that Mr. Cohen eventually wound up with a mentor by the name of Kerry Lucas? No, I don't know anything about that. You don't know how much the mentorship cost? I don't know. And you don't know what was provided during that three-day one-on-one mentorship? No. And I don't know Mr. Cohen. Or Mr. Lucas? Or Mr. Lucas, no. I'm going to play for you now -- we're going to mark this as -- this is going to be 515. Mr. Trump, I'll warn you in advance, it's about 13 and a half minutes of Mr. Lucas' deposition testimony. So if you want to make some calls before we do it, you tell me. Let's do it after. We'll take off after. What's the file number? The file number is 213. He's a mentor, not a professor, is what you're saying? He's not a class person? I think he was brought in for both. But with Mr. Cohen, he was a mentor. This is Kerry Lucas' deposition? This is Kerry Lucas' deposition. Taken on what date? Taken on June 11th of last year. In this case? Yes, sir. When was it? Of last year? (Exhibit 515 was marked for identification.) Yes. This was taken last year; last June. But when was he the mentor? The mentorship was back in the 2009 time frame. So is this only Mr. Cohen's case? We're talking about Mr. Cohen's case, yes, sir. I mean, had they bought real estate in 2009, like I told them to do, they would have made a fortune. They would have to be able to afford it, though. It was hard to buy real estate with other people's money in 2009, wasn't it? You could get real estate. With other people's money? No. With the sellers that take back mortgages a lot of times. And banks, too. I mean, you could get mortgages. You could get mortgages? People could get mortgages. It was tough to get financing back in '09, wasn't it? The prices were -- you know the prices from '09 until now have gone through the roof. If people were able to, either through seller financing, which was, you know, where the seller takes back a mortgage on the property, which was done all the time, or banks. If you had a good property, you could get bank financing. But if they did, the value of the property -- I mean, I can tell property value by year bought, year sold. (A cellular phone rang.) (A discussion was held off the record.) Mr. Trump, you didn't have any -- for the average Joe to get financing back when the markets crashed, did you have any special techniques for them to do that, for the average person? Not the Donald Trumps of the world? The special technique was to find institutions. There were many institutions that had money that were lending. And if you had the right property, you could get financing. And 2009 was really, it was starting to be on the way up. You know, when he was in the program, had he followed the advice that we were saying, he would have made a lot of money. I mean, you could get financing in 2009. And you could certainly get seller financing, because a lot of sellers became bankers essentially. They wanted to sell their property, and they would take back a mortgage for ten years or five years or two years. So there were many ways of getting financing. And I didn't mean to suggest that it was impossible to get financing. What I'm saying is 2009 wasn't prime time for not getting financing. I mean, there were times when it was tougher. But 2009 was -- I mean, that was a great time to buy. That was like the bottom of the market just before it started going up. What I'm getting at is -- He should have bought property then. Maybe he did. He didn't study the course well enough. He would have made a lot of money, Dan. What I'm getting at, though, is you didn't have any unique techniques for getting financing for the average person. But it's just a matter that there was financing out there to be had? You go to institutions, and sometimes you'll go to many institutions, and you'll find one that -- and I would tell that to people. Sometimes you would go to five or ten institutions, and one wants to do it. And a lot of that had to do with the location of the property, of the quality of the property, the price you're paying for the property. And a lot of times you would get seller financing. You wouldn't even have to go to the banks, because sellers were moving, leaving, in bad health. I mean, a lot of things. The only time they couldn't give you financing is if they had no money. But a lot of times they're selling the property because of their health, because of their age. You know, things where they just want to sort of go into other things. And this way they get interest on their money. And seller financing is a thing that I always have -- I've done seller deals where sellers would give financing for things that I've bought. I feel strongly about seller financing. And you don't have to pay points. You don't have to pay big legal fees. But you know, a lot of the institutions wanted points. With seller financing, rarely does the seller ask for points. So good thing. Okay. Go ahead. I'll watch this. (Playing video.) Just to be clear, we're not listening to a continuous examination? Exactly. These are edited clips? Exactly. But they're complete questions and answers. Okay. Because I noticed the time code is jumping around. Yeah, it jumps around. But none of the questions or answers are -- You'll give me the file? Yes. The CD, and then I can go back and review the transcript? Yes. Thank you. (Playing video.) Take our break now? Do you want to go through this first? Let me ask just a few questions. I would rather go through this. And I think you were chomping at the bit to say this, but Mr. Trump, you did not select this man to be a Trump University instructor or mentor, did you? No, I didn't. And you did not consider him to be a top certified mentor, did you? No. You did not certify him in any way, did you? No, I didn't. Now, you could have actually insisted upon meeting and interviewing each of the mentors, right? I could have. Other than I'm doing, running a massive company that everybody knows that. But so you could have, but you didn't? I did not, no. And so you didn't know that a man with this kind of background was being held out as a top Trump certified mentor, did you? No. But in watching, it sounded to me like he would have embellished his record and he slipped through the cracks. Frankly, I think he probably, just by the way he had answered a couple of the questions reminded me of Saturday Night Live. But I think he probably embellished his record to the people that did the hiring. And nevertheless, they all got the materials, and they got very good advice as far as real estate is concerned. And I have to say this, and I was just thinking it as I was going by, some of the biggest real estate developers in the country, and I can tell you in New York and elsewhere, don't have licenses. They build. They're developers. And they build. And they never went to school, and they never went for licensing and they didn't do all of the things, many of the things that you're asking. That's not to say anything positive or negative. But I will say that many, many real estate people don't have licenses. They're not salesmen, they're not brokers, and they just don't have licenses. They just build. But he also lacked experience? He doesn't have great experience, no. He doesn't have any experience buying or selling? He has a little with his house or whatever it was, but not a lot. And this is not someone you would have found to be fairly described as a top Trump certified mentor? No, I would not have hired him. Now, were you aware that Trump University charged Mr. Cohen and others tens of thousands of dollars for three days of one-on-one walking around looking at properties with this man? Well, you know, frankly, the fact that he's not -- if he took the advice of this particular sheet right here, Mr. Cohen would have made a fortune. He would have bought real estate. Putting that aside -- They're walking around looking at property, and somebody has to walk around. A real estate broker oftentimes will use children. I mean, they will use people that are 18 years old to send people around to look at properties. That's standard. What I'm saying is -- It's very standard, Jason, in the business. I mean, they don't do it themselves. They have drivers take them around. They have people take them around. They look at properties all day long, and the brokers don't go with them. It's very standard in the industry. And maybe I should have clarified this. I couldn't play all of it, even though it was lengthy -- That's right. -- but you will see, if you care to look, that he did not find any properties or suggest any properties for Mr. Cohen, as he indicated in his deposition testimony. That was up to the Realtor, and the Realtors were showing these properties. So it wasn't as if -- he wasn't the arm of the Realtor. But he said go through the realtors, right? The students would find the realtors and go through them? And if the students found the realtors, and if the realtors sold them a property, I don't know if Mr. Cohen bought a property. Did he buy a property? If he did, he made a lot of money -- But what I'm getting at, Mr. Trump, is -- -- between 2009 and now. -- do you think it's fair to charge someone tens of thousands of dollars for a mentorship with Kerry Lucas, given his complete lack of experience? The question lacks foundation. Improper opinion testimony. You can answer. Well, in addition to him, you have got tremendous amounts of materials and books and other things. And based on what my views were at that time -- because I was a big buyer. That's when I felt we should go back into the market and buy. That had he -- the big picture, not the small picture. This guy maybe came through the cracks. I don't know. It sounded to me like he might have misrepresented his experience in real estate to get the job. Because we had some excellent people, as I'm sure you know. And you'll see them when we testify. But we have some excellent, excellent instructors and people. But this one is not somebody that I would have picked personally. I will say, though, added to him is you have got very good books and very good materials from the school. They have beautiful and very good material, and, you know, it depends on what he did with it. If he was a buyer at the time, he made a lot of money, Mr. Cohen. But he made a lot of money at the time if he was a buyer because the timing was right, correct? Because I said buy. Right. And you said buy at the right time? I said buy at the right time. And you said buy in the ads? I said buy in the ads. Right. And so in terms of beyond that, as far as Kerry Lucas -- That's the big picture though, Jason. Yes, that is the big picture. That's bigger than -- well, he knew a little bit more or a little bit less about real estate. The big picture was buy now. That's the time. That was my instinct, and that's what I said. And I put it in ads, and I'm glad we put it in ads. But the big picture is buy now. It's not the minutia, okay? And he went around with realtors. And, you know, my idea was to buy. If Mr. Cohen, who I don't know, if he would have bought, he would have made a lot of money. But he didn't buy, therefore, he didn't listen. Mr. Trump, did anybody who paid tens of thousands of dollars to be mentored by Kerry Lucas, that's tens of thousands of dollars less money they have to buy property, right? I know, but in addition to this gentleman, who again may have -- you know, he may have embellished. You used the word "embellish." He may have embellished his credentials and gotten the job. But in addition to him, and he may be just a good salesman, frankly. And he may be a positive salesman. I know people that have great credentials and are terrible teachers. But in addition to that, they get tremendous materials. I mean, the materials, if you read the materials, with not strong instruction, the materials are very strong. And the materials that you're talking about are the free CDs -- The books. -- that will be given away, right? There was a lot of things that were given. It's so many years right now that I can't remember exactly what. But I remember it was a large amount of material that was given to the various students. So for example, if you look back at Exhibit 513, at the bottom it references that attendees receive a free Secrets of Real Estate Marketing. That's the CD. But I'm not talking about -- I'm talking about if they took the course, they got a lot of material. Are you personally aware of any actual materials that the students received if they took the course? I'm aware of materials. Do you know how many years it is now? It's so many years, but I don't know exactly what the material was. But I remember they got a lot of material when they took the course. But you don't personally know -- No, but I saw a lot of material. This is years ago. But many years ago I saw the material that they got, and it was very impressive. So were you -- and those materials, were you familiar with the fact that in, say, the PowerPoint presentations, the instructors were falsely representing you had handpicked them? No, I wasn't -- Excuse me, what was the question again? Sure. In those materials, did they include the PowerPoint presentations in which the instructors falsely represented that you had handpicked them? Assumes facts not in evidence. You can answer. Well, my representatives picked them. I mean, my representatives. So you were aware that the instructors were falsely telling students you handpicked them? No, that I didn't know. And were you familiar enough with the materials to know the instructors were falsely representing that you had personally called them and asked them to join Trump University? Again, the question assumes facts not in evidence. Asked the instructor to join? Yes. No, I never did that. But you were aware -- There may have been a couple of times, but I certainly didn't do it with him. As you know, I had professors or instructors up in my office on occasions. Those were the e-learning, the internet -- Right, whatever. But they were up in my office. Again, I'm talking live events, one-on-one. Guys like Kerry Lucas? I don't differentiate that much. I mean, I just tell you I had people coming up to my office that were instructors. But you understand, Mr. Trump, this case is strictly about the live instruction? Okay. The one on one. Okay. So it's not about those instructors, those professors. So were you familiar enough with the materials to know that the instructors were falsely representing that they were so close to you, you had dinner with them and shared your views in real estate with them? It's overbroad, and assumes facts. You can answer. No, I didn't know that. Were you familiar enough with the materials to know that the instructors were falsely representing that if they would enroll in Trump University, you, Donald Trump, would be their friend, would befriend the students? Same objections. I didn't. I can't imagine a student believing that either, frankly. Were you familiar enough with the materials to know that the instructors were falsely representing that you were so involved with overseeing the instructors, they had to personally ask you for permission to give out their cell phone number to the students? Same objections. No. And you didn't authorize any of those types of representations, did you? No, I didn't. Did you want to take a break? Yeah. This concludes digital tape number one. We're off the video record at 9:10 a.m. (A recess was taken from 9:10 a.m. to 9:25 a.m.) We are back on the video record. The time is 9:25 a.m. This begins digital tape number two. Welcome back, Mr. Trump. Thank you. Mr. Trump, you might have picked up at one point Kerry Lucas mentioned Dee Caldwell is the woman he contacted, his contact at Trump University. You didn't know Dee Caldwell, did you? No. I've heard the name, but I don't know who it is. You didn't personally select her to work at Trump University, did you? No. Now, as you mentioned, Mr. Lucas could have slipped through the cracks in getting into Trump University as an instructor or mentor; is that right? I don't know how. I mean, I don't know how. I think he could have embellished. Or maybe they thought he did a good job. You said he worked for another company for quite a while. Maybe he did a great job there. I don't know exactly why they hired him or how they hired him. But I know that he worked for another company named Dyna-something. Dynatech? Dynatech. And perhaps he was outstanding at Dynatech. So you would really have to ask the people. I mean, maybe he was really good at what he did. I just don't know. And you don't know whether other people slipped through the cracks to get in as live event instructors or mentors, do you? Personally? In every business, people slip through the cracks. No matter how well run a business, people come in and they're not good, and you wonder, you know, how did they get there, et cetera. No matter, you can take the best business where they just come back and, you know, they embellish or they for some reason something happens. But there's no business in America where people don't slip through the cracks. So you don't know, for example, if Steve Goff is one of the guys who slipped through the cracks? I don't know. You don't know if Chris -- It happens. It does happen. And you don't know if Chris Goff is one of the guys that -- I don't know him. James Harris, you don't know if he slipped through the cracks? Don't know him. So you don't know if he slipped through the cracks? Don't know. So you don't know one way or the other? No. I know we had very good people, too. We have a lot of good people. But some people, you know, when you're running a business, it happens that you don't always get tens. Gerald Martin, you don't know if he slipped through the cracks? Don't know him. And if I didn't say, Keith Sperry, you don't know if he slipped through the cracks? Don't know him. Mr. Trump, you could have sat down and personally interviewed each of these folks, correct? I think from a time standpoint, I think it would have been very difficult. Because of my schedule and because of the fact that I am doing many deals all over the world, I think it would have been very tough. I mean, this was a very important thing for me. It wasn't a big monetary thing, the Trump, the school. But it was very important to me. And actually, more important to -- you know, you can impart certain wisdom that you learn the hard way. And you can impart that to people. I love the idea of the educational aspect of it. But to be honest, I wouldn't have had the time to interview everybody because my business is too big. I don't do it on any business. I hire people, and hopefully they're the right people at the top, and they'll hopefully do a good job. And I'm just going to ask you to accept this as true. You can check your own records to confirm it, but there were fewer than -- there were a half a dozen or so people who did the majority of the live events for Trump University. And accepting that as true, I'm not asking you to endorse it, but you certainly had time to do a final interview of six people, right? Well, look, I have people at the top who I know. And, you know, as an example, Mr. Sexton, who I have confidence in. And I would have assumed they would have done that. And frankly, I got so many good reviews, and I would see the reviews a lot. You know, they would send me, when people leave the course, they would send -- I call them report cards. I don't know what the official name is, but they would give us so many good marks. I actually thought that people were very happy at the school. I was very surprised. That's why I didn't settle this case, which I could have settled very easily a long time ago. And we'll get to the reviews and the settlement. All -- I'm just saying it seemed like things were going very good. But you certainly had time to do a, conduct a final interview for the six most prolific live events? It didn't seem necessary, because I always thought the school was doing well. You know, when I have a job that's not going well, people tell you. Like if you have unhappy tenants, or if you have unhappy -- an office building where the tenants aren't happy, or an apartment house where tenants -- you always find out. They write you letters. I just -- I've heard so -- I heard so many good things about the school that I honestly thought that it was really being well, you know, well run. Even since then, I still have people calling saying they love the school. But I'm talking about before they're actually being put out -- There's a reason I didn't do that. I could have found the time, but the reason I didn't do that is I heard the school was running very well. But I'm talking about before being put out as instructors. Before you say my handpicked instructor is going to be there, you could have sat down and personally interviewed the person, right? I guess I could have. I just thought that the school was doing so well, you know, from all of the reviews it's gotten. And, you know, just people telling me. I don't know that I've ever heard one person, you know, back then say anything bad about it. But you realize that the school shifted models. It shifted models from an Internet learning model to a live events model. Do you understand that? Right, sure. And do you understand that there's a complete disparity between the instructors for the Internet model versus the new wave of instructors for the live events? The question is vague. Well, to me it's one school, though. I understand what you're saying. And I heard great things about the Internet. And to me it's one school, Jason. You know, I mean, it was just overall, it was a positive experience, I felt. And I didn't feel they needed a lot of more guidance, other than I would tell them, you know, like this ad, talking about buy real estate now. I would say that. You know, tell them to buy. This is a great time to buy. Tell them to buy. But I didn't feel that they needed much help because it was a positive experience. People were saying positive things about it. You talked about -- I have things where people will, you know, I'll get little clues where a building isn't running great, and all of a sudden I'll see somebody someplace, oh, Mr. Trump, you ought to look at this building. I never heard that with this until all this litigation started. You have golf courses, right? Yeah. And you have hotels? Right. Now, you would agree with me, whether it's your property or somebody else's property, one of the ways of expressing dissatisfaction is customers will request a refund? Well, no. One of the ways is you get letters from people. And they say, you know, I'm not happy with something. Another way is that they'll see you. They'll say -- That's certainly -- People will see you. They say, Mr. Trump, I live in your building here, and it's not good. The superintendent is not good, and it's not clean. And I'll go and check and I'll make sure. With this, I had so many positive reports, especially when the people leave the course, they were writing these beautiful reports. But you understand though, generally speaking, one way of expressing dissatisfaction, say with the stay at a hotel, is to request a refund? Yeah. Okay. And -- And by the way, we did give refunds. Well, do you know what the percentage was of the refunds -- No, I didn't. I know we gave a lot of refunds, yeah. But did you know -- hold on, Mr. Trump. Did you know it was over 25 percent? I didn't know what the percentage, but I know we gave them. By the way, most people wouldn't give them. There was no reason to give them. We could have let you sue for the rest of our lives. But when you say you're not familiar with any sort of expressions of dissatisfaction, you weren't aware that over 25 percent of the people who paid for live -- I heard -- -- received refunds? I heard people received refunds. But I think that's instinctual. If people think they can get a refund, they're going to ask. And I probably foolishly gave it to them. I shouldn't have given it to them because, frankly, they could have been tied up all in this litigation and, you know, whatever happens happens. I viewed that as a lot of times that happens. You go to the Home Shopping Network, whatever it's called. The refunds are unbelievable. The people use the product, wear the product, and then they send it back. The refunds are massive. That's their biggest problem is the refunds. So you know, when people were asking for their money back, frankly -- and I would have these good reports, but people would ask for their money back. We gave them their money back. I shouldn't have given their money back. I gave back millions of dollars because I'm an honest guy. I should have said I'm not giving it back, and you would have it in your litigation. We're here in one of your hotels right now, right? Right. Would you be satisfied with the performance of this hotel if it had a refund rate of 25 percent? But it's different, though. It's different. Would you be satisfied? With Home Shopping Network, if you look, their refunds are tremendous. They're tremendous. They buy a dress, and you're allowed to give it back. I don't know what they call it. They send it back. They just send it back. They give their money back. I don't know if they use the dress, if they don't use the dress. Probably they do, but it's different. And with this one, they take the course, and they'll ask for a refund. But why do so many people, why have so many people, including your client on this case, signed these letters that were so beautiful about the course? I mean, I think, I'm not sure, but I haven't read it in a long time, but I think your client on this case, and certainly your client on the other cases, signed these incredible letters about how good the course was. And, Mr. Trump, you're an interesting guy. I could talk to you all day long. But I have to ask you specific questions I need to get answers for. So what I'm asking you now is would you be satisfied if the refund rate at your hotel was 25 percent? The question is vague, and lacks foundation. It doesn't happen. It doesn't happen. It's a different business. It doesn't happen. With hotels it doesn't happen. So you would find that to be unacceptable? No. People wouldn't come back to the hotel. They wouldn't ask for a refund because they wouldn't get it. You wouldn't give a refund on a hotel. But they won't come back. And your number would go way up. Your vacancy number. Your unoccupied -- Would you consider it acceptable if the rate of requesting refunds was 25 percent of people who were staying in the hotel? Wouldn't happen. They don't come back. In the hotel business, they don't come back. But would you be satisfied if that happened? The Home Shopping Network they give refunds. No, because -- yeah, I would be unhappy if they didn't come back, and my vacancy factor would go up, up, up, up, and then all of a sudden the hotel would do very badly. And you would have to change something to satisfy them? Yeah, well, it's a different thing. It's a different business. But the bottom line is if you found out one of your hotels had a rate of refunds being requested at 25 percent, you would not consider that to be acceptable? I told you, they don't do that with the hotel business. They don't ask for refunds. They don't come back. But what I'm asking you, though, is if that happened -- You can't go after it. It's not in that business. It's a different business. Home Shopping Network has tremendous percentages of refunds, and yet it's a very successful enterprise. How about Wharton, do you think that the folks -- where you attended, do you think the folks at Wharton would be happy, would be satisfied if the students requested refunds at a 25 percent rate? Well, again, it's a much different kind of a thing. It's a school where you go and you go. I mean, we had a lot of -- a lot of people started complaining after they heard about the lawsuit because they figured they can get their money back. That's a natural business instinct. So Wharton and the hotel is over here, and the Home Shopping Network -- I think it's more Home Shopping Network. It's a short-term situation. You're not staying at the school and living there and everything else. (Exhibit 516 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, I'm handing you an exhibit that's been marked as Exhibit 516. It's an index of materials from Trump University's live events. And it also includes the first page of each of the documents in there. Looking at that index, you didn't review the materials that are indexed there, did you? It's so long ago, Jason. I just don't know. I mean, you're talking about many years ago. I may have seen it. I just don't recognize it. Let me -- Gary Eldred was one of the Stanford, was a guy who used to be a professor at Stanford. He was one of the professors during the Internet learning phase with Trump University, right? Okay. Yes. Let me -- I'm putting that in front of you because these are materials he reviewed prior to his deposition. And now we're going to play -- this is clip 16, for the record. And play his -- when he's questioned actually by your attorney about what he felt after reviewing these materials. (Playing video.) Excuse me, Jason, can we go off for a second? Yeah. Hold on a second. Yes. Hold on. Certainly. First of all, this is an index, Exhibit 516, that your firm prepared? Or is this a -- That's the actual exhibit that was used in his deposition. But was this exhibit compiled by your office? Yes. Okay. So this is a collection of documents that you then indexed and showed the witness? Exactly. Is this witness -- who is this witness? Just so we have an understanding. His name is Gary Eldred. Professor Gary Eldred. And he's a fact witness, or an expert, or what? He's a witness who was deposed. Okay. By you? Yes. Okay. And this is -- actually the question right now that I'm going to play is by Mr. Trump's lawyer. Okay. Who is my lawyer? Nancy Stagg. So this is questioning from a June 25th, 2015 deposition. And again, this is file number 16. (Exhibit 516-A was marked for identification.) (Playing video.) Mr. Trump, you don't have any basis and personal knowledge to dispute Professor Eldred's assessment of these materials, do you? The question is vague and overbroad. You can answer. How much money did he make in real estate? I don't know. How much money did he make in real estate? I don't know, sir. You will have to ask him. What was the file number? 16. 16? Yes, 16. Thank you. No, I don't know him. What I'm saying is you didn't review the same materials he did? No. And so you don't have any basis or personal knowledge to dispute his assessment? No. (Exhibit 517 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, I'll represent to you that Exhibit 517 is a general ledger printout that your folks produced to us in the course of this litigation. And if you could, just take a minute to look it over. I don't know if you're familiar with it? I'm not. Okay. Now, if you look on here, you can see that in 2004, 2005 and 2006, you were providing funding for Trump University. Is that consistent with your memory? No. I really don't know. I mean, you would have to ask my accountants. But you don't have any reason to disagree with the ledger that they provided? No. You would have to ask my accountants. Okay. And this is from your accountants. Okay. Just so you know. This is not something that we created. That's fine. And so if you look to, by April of 2010, at that point, you had put in Do you see that? Yes. And then by, if you look at the distributions, which is the second part, you had received back, by April of 2010, you had received back 7.2 million dollars. Do you see that? Yes. What page? This is page number DT0026971. Do you guys have that page number? No. Mine starts at 72. It might be at the very end, Dan. It might be the last page. Because basically, there's a ledger of, a funding ledger, and then a distribution ledger. Mine goes to 75. 75? Okay. Mr. Trump, do you have that page? Probably not? No. I have the same as he does. I think I have a different -- let me mark this as A. Let's make this 517-A. (Exhibit 517-A was marked for identification.) Because the one you have as 517 is money you put in. The 517-A is money you get back. Okay. And so the money you got back by April of 2010 was dollars. Do you see that? Yes. So that averages out to be receiving a profit of a little over a year, right? Yeah, I guess. Is that -- I know you have a lot of endeavors, but a year, in your mind, is not enough to justify your full-time attention to Trump University? No, it's not that. I mean, I, you know, was very proud of the school. I thought the school was doing very well and I wanted it to do well. It's not a question of how much money I make. I have things that make much more money than that, and I don't devote any time to them. Leases that you sign that you don't even know you have them, and they're much bigger than this. But no, that has nothing to do with it. So the money is not a reason why you didn't personally interview each of the -- It's not a large transaction. But it's not a reason that I wouldn't have -- you know, I cared about it. And you've mentioned a few times today that Michael Sexton was the one you trusted to put in charge of Trump University? Yes. You trusted him to make the hiring decisions, right? I hope so. And you trusted him to oversee the curriculum, right? Yes. But you did not trust him to have signature authority on the bank accounts for Trump University, did you? My accountants would tell you that. Generally, I wouldn't do that. You know, I generally wouldn't do that. You wouldn't give him that sort of type of authority? No. I wouldn't generally do that with businesses. I like to keep that separate. 518. (Exhibit 518 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, you gave an interview to Steve Brill that was published in Time Magazine; is that right? Yes. Now, one of the things you said in here is that the -- at least he quoted you as saying, is the plaintiff's lawyers in this case are known scam artists. Do you remember saying that? Right. And you know I'm one of the plaintiff's lawyers? Okay. Did you say that? Yes. I'm relating it to Mel Weiss and the other gentleman, because somehow the firm was -- it was an offshoot. And some of the people were involved. I knew Mel Weiss. I considered him to be a scam artist. So is that who you were referring to? Yes. You weren't referring to me, Jason Forge? I don't know you. So you don't -- and you weren't referring to Ms. Jensen? No, I don't know Ms. Jensen either. So you weren't referring to any of the lawyers that are actually on this case? No. But there was an offshoot of Mel Weiss, and the other gentleman went to jail also, I guess, whatever his name was, LaRoe. Lerach? Lerach. You're aware that neither of them ever had any involvement with this case, right? I don't know about the case. I know the firm was somehow an offshoot. And you're aware that neither one of them had any involvement with the firm -- That I don't know. -- when this case was brought? I heard they were -- not any more involved. But I hear that people were involved years ago. Did you ever hear that either one of them was involved with this case in any way? Not this case, no. Did you ever hear -- I don't know. I mean, I know nothing about -- I haven't spoken to them in a long time. But I knew Mel Weiss was a bad guy, and I thought he was a crook; I thought he was a total crook. You say in here the people representing the plaintiffs. Well, I'm talking about the -- when I say the people, I'm talking about and referring to Mel Weiss. And I think I made it clear, I thought I made it clear, the people that were -- the firm was represented a long time ago and owned, I guess, by Mel Weiss and the other gentleman. And I think it's an offshoot of that firm. I think the firm paid money to -- from what I hear, he paid, you know, fairly recently campaign contributions to Attorney General Schneiderman in New York. That's what I hear, that your firm paid campaign contributions to Schneiderman in New York. And I don't think that's appropriate that you have done that, but that's okay. I mean, that's what you do. But I think that any firm that's, you know, touching Mel Weiss in any way, or touching the other gentleman that you named, I think is probably suspect. And again, these people that you mentioned, you don't have any awareness they had anything to do with the firm when this case was brought, do you? I was told that they did. You were told that they were affiliated with the firm when this case was brought? In some form, affiliated or were at some point involved with the firm, yes. At some prior point? Yes, at some prior point. That's what I'm getting at. Do you have any basis to believe they were involved with the firm at the time this case was brought? I would say they were involved with the firm, because I think they essentially started either the firm or an offshoot of the firm. Okay. So that's it, that they were involved in -- one of them or both of them might have been involved in a different iteration of the firm? Well, a different iteration, but with the firm. And I guess some of the people knew them very well, and you know... I knew Mel Weiss. Mel Weiss was a thief. You might have known Mel Weiss, but do you have any reason to believe I did? I don't know. Actually, you came in much later, right? Didn't you come in much later? Yes. So what I'm getting at here is obviously you have a big voice, right? I guess, yeah. I mean, you're going to be quoted a lot more than Jason Forge is going to be quoted? Maybe. And things you say are going to get more publicity than things I say, generally speaking? Okay. And you chose to say that the lawyers on the plaintiff's side are known scam artists? Well, I'm talking about Mel Weiss and the other gentleman, yeah. That's who I'm talking about. So you're not talking about the actual lawyers on the case? No. I'm talking about Mel Weiss. And I don't know how he's involved anymore. I wouldn't know. I'm happy not to know where he is. Now, at page 8 of this article, if you turn to it, it attributes you to a statement that you were not familiar with the -- What paragraph, Jason? Third paragraph from the bottom. You were not familiar with the numbers related to the surveys or the refund rates, but you promised to have one of your lawyers get back to Mr. Brill. These are not quotes, right? Correct. Is that an accurate description of what you told Mr. Brill? I don't remember, really. It was a quick conversation. Have you, since this interview, familiarized yourself with the numbers of -- the survey numbers and the refund rate numbers? No. So I take it you have -- as you sit here today, you have no explanation for the discrepancy between the number of surveys versus the number of customers who actually paid for the live events? No. That's up to my people. I really don't. I just have a lot of good reports on the school. We have many, many reports saying that the school was very good. That's what I know. And you don't have reports, though, talking about the number of refunds? No. I mean, I'm sure my accountants have, but I don't have them. Now, you mentioned -- I think we were very nice to give the refunds, actually. You mentioned in here, page 9, and you mentioned this earlier today, you say in here that -- at least Mr. Brill attributes to you a statement that plaintiff's lawyers have been dying to settle. And you said earlier, you could have settled this case very early on. Did you express that sentiment -- Yes. -- to Mr. Brill, the plaintiff's lawyer? Yes. And what is that basis -- I said that's based on what Mr. Garten told me. Well, we can't get into what -- It's based on conversations with Alan Garten? With a lawyer, yes. And you don't know the basis of -- No. It's what I was told. Mr. Trump, are you aware that one of the benefits that students were promised at Trump University was networking opportunities? Assumes facts. I would say that that would be a natural benefit, yeah. Are you aware that one of the promises that was made to students that the Trump University mentors would be their mentors for life? I wasn't aware of that. But it depends on the mentor. Some of the mentors may have become friendly with them. I mean, you never know. But, no, I wasn't aware of it. Are you aware that the surveys were not anonymous? What does that mean? Assumes facts. Note The surveys that Trump University took, they were not anonymous? They had students actually put their names on them? Oh, yeah. Well, that's much better, I think. So in other words, if the students said something critical about an instructor or about someone who is supposed to be their mentor for life, that person would see the critical comment? You're aware of that? Oh, I think the other way, they don't mean anything, actually. I think it's much better when a student puts their name on it. You mean they don't want to hurt anybody's feelings, is what you're saying? Well, Trump University, one of the selling points was networking, and another one was having a mentor for life. And so if the mentor for life was someone you had just got done criticizing -- Only a lawyer could think of that. So you don't think that anticipating -- I think the surveys are much more important with a signature. I think it's -- it's more meaningful. You don't think the anticipation of possibly needing help from these folks in the future would influence the students to -- You mean that's why they said such great things about the school? Yeah. I don't think so. I think they really meant it was very good. Until they found out they could get their money back. And then they said, Oh, wow, you got money back? Let's get our money back. Do you think Bill Clinton was a great president? He had moments. He had some moments. But overall, he was hurt very badly by Monica Lewinsky and all of the scandal. I think it hurt his presidency very much. But do you think he was a great president? Well, I think it's inappropriate for here, because we're not talking about politics now. We're talking about something else. So I don't think that's a question that pertains to this. But I would say that he was hurt by the scandal. But do you think he was a great president? Just for the record, I would object to this line of questioning as completely irrelevant, and the kind of examination that should be subject to a protective order. I would let it continue. The Magistrate has indicated to me that only instructions based on privilege can be made, a ruling with which I disagree, but will abide by at the moment. So you can continue your examination, but it's subject to my continuing objection. Thank you. Do you believe Bill Clinton was a great president? I think he was hurt very badly by the scandals, his escapades. I think it hurt him very badly. I think that, you know, I have no feeling one way or the other, but I think he was hurt very badly by the scandals. So aside from the scandals, do you think he was a great president? I can't say aside. It's part of his legacy. I mean, the scandals were devastating. He was impeached. He was impeached. He was brought before Congress. I mean, he was impeached. And that was -- very few people -- very few presidents that were impeached. So that hurt him very much. The scandals were a big part of his legacy, unfortunately, for him. (Exhibit 519 was marked for identification.) We are off the video record. The time is 9:58 a.m. (A recess was taken from 9:58 a.m. to 10:13 a.m.) We are back on the video record, and the time is 10:13 a.m. Welcome back, Mr. Trump. Thank you. Mr. Trump, you have Exhibit 519 in front of you. Does it appear to be a true and correct copy of a Trump blog -- Yes. -- that you posted on December 2nd, 2008? Seems to be. It's a long time ago. Shall I read it? Shall I read the whole thing? I'm going to direct your attention to the fourth paragraph, but you're welcome to read whatever you want. The fourth paragraph you wrote of Hillary Clinton: "Hillary is smart, tough and a very nice person and so is her husband." And then you wrote, "Bill Clinton was a great president." Did you believe that sentiment when you wrote it in this blog? When was this done? December 2nd, 2008. It was a long time ago. I mean, at the time -- I mean, I was fine with it at the time. I think in retrospect, looking back, it was not a great presidency because of his scandals. That was 2008. I say that's a long time ago. So you posted it, but you believed it then, but you don't believe it now? Or you didn't believe it then and you still don't believe it? I might have said it. I don't think it was a very important statement made then. I wasn't in politics. It didn't matter to me. If I was to think about it with all that he went through, I would probably not call him a great president anymore because of all of the scandal and the turmoil that he had. It was a very tumultuous period of time, and then he was impeached. I mean, I would probably say that it's not something I gave very much thought to then because I wasn't in politics. But if you were asking me the question now, too much turmoil. But all that turmoil and the impeachment and the scandal, that all predated your posting of this blog, though? But you're saying you just didn't think about it that much? It's something I wouldn't have thought about. I've been thinking about a lot of things over the last couple of years when I was deciding to do this. How about Hillary Clinton, do you think she would make a great vice president? Is there a reference to that in here, Jason? I'm just -- you can put that aside. It doesn't matter. Again, I have my continuing objection to this line of questioning. And you're required to answer at this juncture. Do you believe that Hillary Clinton would make a great vice president, Mr. Trump? No. Did you believe she would make a great vice president back in 2008? I don't know. Did I say that here? Not in here, no. I'm just asking you, did you believe that back in 2008? No, I didn't think I said that. No, I don't think she would be a good vice president. Do you believe she would make a great president? Did I say that in here? No, not in here. In here, we're talking about Exhibit 519? Correct. Do I think she would make a great president? Yes. No. No, I don't. Back in the year 2008, did you think she would be a great president? I don't think I said anything. I don't say it here. Let's see, if we go back many, many years ago, do I think she would have? Probably not. I don't think she's got the gravitas. Jason, I'm marking this transcript confidential again. We're going to have to, I guess -- I don't want those answers to -- I guess we're going to have to work out a designation process. We actually have a designation process, and I don't think that fits within it, but -- But you know what, I'll -- We can discuss that later. Correct. For the time being, you are designating this as confidential, and we will treat it accordingly. Whatever the court order requires, we will comply with it in terms of the designation process. Let's mark this as Exhibit 520, please. (Exhibit 520 was marked for identification.) I did note that maybe one or two of the exhibits were marked "confidential for counsel only" also. Most of them have been de-designated, although the financial ones probably were not. That was the only one that -- Those were the ones that were -- Yeah. Mr. Trump, does Exhibit 520 appear to be a true and accurate copy of a Trump blog that you posted on March 13th, 2008? Yes. Now, if you look at the end of the second paragraph, you wrote, "I know Hillary, and I think she would make a great president or vice president." You do know Hillary Clinton, correct? Yes. And you knew her back in 2008? Yeah. Pretty much. So did you believe this sentiment when you expressed it in March of 2008? Well, I didn't think too much about it. Where are you asking me to read? If you look at the end of the second paragraph, there's a parenthetical at the end of it. And it says, "I know Hillary, and I think she would make a great president or vice president." Yeah, at the time I might have. I didn't give it a lot of thought, because I was in business. And as a businessman, I think it was something I never really gave much thought to. Now that I see what she's done and how she's handled herself and how she's handled her e-mails and all of the problems that she's got, I would say she wouldn't make a very good vice president or president. So but back then you thought she would? Well, back then -- how long ago was that? How many years ago? That's March of '08. That was a long time ago. Almost eight years ago. It's something I didn't give much thought to. But you did express it in this blog posting? It's just something I wouldn't have thought about. I mean, I expressed it. But where is it? The last sentence of the first paragraph -- or second paragraph. After -- when I looked at the history of the Clintons, I think that they've really let the country down. So you think they've let the country down since March of 2008? Well, since I've really started to watch and study politics as opposed to just thinking about business and not thinking about politics. Now, you've said of Jeb Bush previously that he is exactly the kind of political leader this country needs now, and we very much need in the future. He's bright, tough and principled. Was that an honest sentiment when you expressed that about Jeb Bush? No, I didn't know him very well when I said that. I mean, I hardly knew him at all. Now I know him well, and I think he would be a disaster as president, frankly. So did you not believe it when you said it before? Or you just simply didn't have a basis and you -- I didn't have much of a basis. But I said it to be nice, and it didn't matter, but I said it to be nice and to be respectful. But I didn't really know him. Now that I've gotten to know him, I think he would be not very good at all. Of George Pataki, you said he was the most underrated guy in American politics. Is that a sentiment that you said to be nice, but not because you necessarily believed that? He had a period of time when he was doing a good job, but I think he ended badly. And then when I got to know him -- because I didn't know him very well -- when I got to know him, I'm not a fan. So when you said he was the most underrated guy in American politics, did you believe it sincerely or was that -- No, I think I would have believed it at the time. But I'm not a fan, you know, as I got to know him. I didn't know him very well. But as I got to know him and I got to see him when I became political and involved politically, as opposed to not knowing people in business, I would say that no, he's not -- I don't think he would be very good. So you didn't have a basis for what you said, but once you educated yourself more -- But now I've gotten to know people a lot better. I've gotten to know the political system a lot better. I've gotten to know the ins and outs of politics, and I've gotten to know the history of politics a lot better. And I think he would not have -- I do not think he was very good. Rick Perry, you've said that he was a very effective governor? Where is that? Where did you say that about Rick Perry? Where is it again? Can you find it? Yeah. Hold on a second. Well, I thought he was a nice guy. I thought Rick Perry was a very nice guy. But, you know, obviously he didn't do too well when he ran for president. And you get to know people better under pressure. Under pressure they're not so good. So you formed a different opinion of him later? Yeah, as I got to know him. Also for the record, Jason, the reference to Jeb Bush, who -- there was apparently a document, but not shown to the witness, I don't know where you were reading from. But just I want the record to be clear there was nothing in front of him on that. I just need to find the exhibit number. It's okay. It doesn't matter. Who cares? Mr. Trump, I have the transcript and the video of this appearance on this. Let's start with the transcript. And if you want to actually see it and hear it -- Of what? Of your appearance on This Week. When? With John Carl, from I guess December 5th. Of last year? Yeah. Okay, I can see the transcript. Hold on one second. Sorry, I apologize. These pages are not Bates numbered. I want to get to the right point. But you're welcome to look through whatever you want. Okay. This was previously marked as Exhibit 489 to your deposition. Again, if you want to look at any other portion, Mr. Trump, that is absolutely your right and entitlement. (Exhibit 489 was identified.) I have opened this up to the fifth page, and it's near the bottom of the page, where it begins, you said of Jeb Bush, and there's a quote. When is this? How long ago is this? This is a month and a half ago. And if you go to the next page for your response. This is him asking me the question? Yeah, him asking you the question about your past praise for -- It's already been out there. What page are you on? The fifth page, now to the sixth. Okay. After he talks about the America We Deserve, the book? Yeah. Your response, Mr. Trump, was it's -- your response to the questions about your praise for these folks that you no longer have praise for is, "It's a very simple answer to that. I was a businessman all my life. I've made a tremendous fortune. I had to deal with politicians and I would contribute to them and I would deal with them and certainly I'm not going to say bad things about people because I needed their support to get projects done. I needed their support for lots of things, or I may have needed their support, put it another way. I mean, you're not going to say horrible things and then go in a year later and say, Listen, can I have your support for this project or this development or this business? So I say nice about almost everybody, and I contributed to people because I was a smart businessman. I built a tremendous company, and I did that based on relationships." Was your response there that I just read honest? Was it true? That's true. And you view people differently. When you're in business you view people -- you don't think about it. Whereas when you're in politics, you think about the qualities of a person, and the -- you really think much deeper about a politician. I could -- like a Jeb Bush as a governor of Florida and say, you know, because I don't think about it. So one of the reasons why you said these nice things about people like Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton was because you didn't think about it that much, and because you might need their help for something in the future? You want to always be friendly with politicians. If you're a businessman, I'm a businessman, you always -- you want to be as nice as you can to politicians whenever possible. Because you might need their assistance? Well, you don't want to have them go against you. You want to have -- I don't think about Jeb Bush one way or the other, frankly. But when I was in business, I had no problems with Jeb Bush. So if somebody would ask me, I would think -- now, when you're in politics, and you get to know them better, because you get to know these people better, and you see what you're dealing with, you can answer a question I think a lot more accurately. So you didn't want these people against you? No, you don't want them against you. And you would rather have them on your side? You would rather have them on your side, politicians. When you're in business, you would like to have the politicians on your side. And so you say nice things about them? You don't want to say bad about them, ideally you don't want to say badly. And you don't think about it as deeply either. I mean, when you asked me about different people, they're nice, they're very good, they could be very good. When you start thinking about people in a much deeper fashion, when it's updated and you've seen what they've done, you've seen where they've been, you can answer it I think much different politically than you would as a businessman. As a businessman, you're not thinking that much about it. You want them to like you, and that's pretty important for business. Mr. Trump, when we spoke last month, you mentioned that within your Trump organization, you generally delegate to other people the task of selecting and hiring people; is that true? Yeah. Largely. And you said that you didn't personally select most of the people that work within Trump organization; is that true? Generally speaking, yes. Can you think of anyone that you did personally select to work for you? Yeah. Mr. Garten, lawyer. He's your general counsel? Yeah. Lawrence Glick. What's his -- He's an attorney. Allen Weisselberg. He's your CFO? Right. Jason Greenblatt, an attorney. Matthew Calamary, a security person; security people. And others. These people you mentioned -- I could give you a list if you want. I could go through a whole list. These are people that I would say that I hired directly. And are they part of your inner circle? Yeah, I think so. And these people are, in your mind, special people? Well, they're good people. I mean, you asked me did I hire -- I have a lot of good people that I didn't hire directly. Most of the people I don't hire directly, and they're very good. Is there anyone that you personally hired that isn't close, you know, isn't part of your inner circle? I would have to look at a list. I have thousands of people that work for me. I mean, I would have to look at a list. Is it fair to say that it takes a pretty special person to be personally selected by you? I make mistakes, too. Can you think of any? Sure. I've hired people over the years where it didn't work out. You personally? Yeah. I've hired people where it doesn't work out. I mean, no matter who you are, no matter how good you are, you'll make mistakes like that. And I've had people that, you know, I hired that didn't work out. What would you say is your success versus failure rate when you personally selected? Well, I think it's good. But a lot of times a person comes in, and you hired the person, and for some reason it doesn't work out. Even personality conflicts. I mean, you have things that don't work. They don't get along with other people. You can't really predict what's going to happen. So generally speaking, when you personally select somebody to work for you, are you selecting them because there's something particularly good about that person? Yeah. I mean, everybody. I pick because I think they're going to be good, but it doesn't always work out that way. It doesn't always work out that way, but at least you think you've identified something particularly good about the person? Sure. Otherwise, you wouldn't hire them. And you have high standards? I think so. Now, Mr. Trump, if you will look back at Exhibit 516. That's that index of materials. And those materials include both PowerPoints and transcripts. Yes. You could have at any time requested those types of materials for you to review personally, right? I think I did review. You're talking about many years ago, but I saw -- a tremendous amount of material was shown to me over the years. And this is -- how many years ago is this? But I've seen a lot of the material. We went over -- but you said you didn't see enough materials to detect all of those representations the instructors were making to the students? I don't remember that question, actually. But, you know -- oh, I see, those representations. No, well, I told you about those representations. No, but I saw the material. But as you sit here, you can't identify any material that you actually saw before? It's so many years ago. It's really -- it's a lot of years ago. And you don't have any records of anything that you saw? No. No. Mr. Trump, are you familiar with the general phrase, "buy low and sell high"? Yes. What does that mean to you? Does that have any special meaning to you, or is it just pretty self-explanatory? Self-explanatory. You don't have any special way of buying low and selling high? Well, I think you have to work hard. You have to scour. You have to do the things that you have to do. You have to find the right people. I mean, some people go and they'll see, as an example, a house and they will just buy it. And I've always said look at 25 houses. The more you can look at the better. Figure out the market. And then you can buy low, and selling high is determined by the market and other things. But you can buy a lot lower when you look at a lot of things. That's always been very important for me to tell people. They buy the first thing that they see and then they found out that they made a mistake. So see as many -- even if it's 25 or 30 things, see as many as you can. Before you buy? Before you buy, yeah. Don't rush in? Don't rush. I mean, rush if you think you're making a great deal on something, but it would be good if you knew some comparables. So do your homework? Do your homework. (Exhibit 521 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, does Exhibit 521 appear to be a true and correct -- Yes. -- copy of a collection of ads for Trump University? Looks like it. We can go through as many as you want or as few as you want. I take your word. Okay. I'm just going to represent to you that these are ads for 2009 seminars, live events. You do not know who the instructors were for these individual events, correct? I may know the names, but I don't know the individual instructors. You didn't personally select these instructors, correct? No. That's correct? That is correct. And you don't personally know what they told the students at these events, correct? I think we have concepts and ideas, but no, I don't. Every instructor has a different method of teaching. And you don't know what they told the students before these events? No. Now, you could have called them in and said, Okay, present to me what you're going to present to the students? Well, but that's what I had Michael Sexton and the people -- that's what you have management for. So you use other people to do that? I do. You did not do that yourself? I did not. But you could have? The question is vague and ambiguous. Lack of foundation. Well, I could have; I guess I could have. But I think, you know, I have management. And again, I was getting good marks on what we saw. So, you know, I guess I could have. But the management seemed to me to be doing a very good job. Let's take a quick break. We are off the video record at 10:38 a.m. (A recess was taken from 10:38 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.) We are back on the video record. The time is 10:50 a.m. Mr. Trump, at any time during the period that Trump University was offering classes, did you ever ask anyone to provide you with information as to what percentage of students were requesting refunds? Not as to a percentage. I knew they were requesting refunds, and I told my accounting people if they wanted the refunds, and it was in the period of time for the refunds, to give it to them. And I paid millions. I don't know exactly what the numbers -- you would know. But I paid millions and millions of dollars in refunds. I mean, frankly, if I would have known that I was going to be in litigation, probably I wouldn't have done it, although it was the honorable thing to do. And you knew that in realtime you were paying millions of dollars in refunds? I was paying a lot in refunds. Yeah, I knew that. And I also understand why. I mean, you do it because people want to get their money back. It's one of those things. Like you said, it's the honorable thing to do? I did the honorable thing. (Exhibit 522 was marked for identification.) Mr. Trump, I will represent to you that Exhibit 522 is a printout of an e-mail chain that your representatives provided to us in discovery. And if you look at the bottom of the first page, it's an e-mail from James Harris to April Neumann. Okay. And there's a response to that e-mail from Michael Sexton. But at the second page -- if you turn it over. The second page, this is still James Harris' February 11th, 2009 e-mail. It says: We are in, and then all caps, senior citizen areas, exclamation point. Did you want to -- with Trump University, did you want to avoid getting senior citizens as prospective students? I don't know that I ever discussed it, actually. I mean, I would say no. But I wouldn't -- I wouldn't object to it. I don't think I've ever discussed it. I don't remember discussing it. So at least in your mind, was Trump University something that would not be marketed to senior citizens? Not in my mind. Not that I remember, certainly. Would it be marketed as something -- I know senior citizens go to schools, and they learn and everything is fine. No, I don't even know what it means. It says we're in a senior citizens area. Is that what you mean? Yes. I guess what I'm getting at is, did you envision Trump University as being designed to avoid enrolling senior citizens? No, I didn't. Was it -- did you think it was appropriate for senior citizens? I knew it would be fine. I mean, you know, it will keep them busy. They will have something to do, and maybe they will make some money, and, you know, I think it would be fine. I don't think it's anything I would have even thought about. Good luck. Thank you very much. The time is 10:53 a.m., and this concludes the deposition. We are off the video record. - - - (The videotaped deposition was concluded at 10:53 a.m.)