trump organization and all trump s as clients, saying that the firm now has quote, a non wave-able conflict of interest with the trump organization. that conflict of interest has arisen in the investigation being conducted by the new york state attorney general. the mazars letter says that that investigation along with the firms own investigation means that the statements of financial condition for donald j trump, for the last ten years, quote, should no longer be relied upon and you should inform any recipients thereof who are currently relying upon one or more of those documents, that those documents should not be relied upon. the letter specifies that the donald trump personal tax return that needs to be filed tomorrow was missing necessary information as of last week. the letter says quote, we
and probably donald s three older children. there s two separate cases, the civil case from the attorney general latitia james and the mazars letter where they dumped the trump organization pertains directly to that. but you are saying you believe this also has criminal implications? oh, absolutely. but the attorney general s case, while a civil matter, very clearly is aimed at trying to flush out how donald cheated banks, ensurers, investors and of course this is in the context of donald and don jr. and ivanka saying, we shouldn t have to testify before you. there s no reason for you to testify. in fact, they actually asserted that the statement by mazars makes the criminal and civil investigations moot. which is utter complete nonsense. i do think when accounting firm says that ten years worth of numbers can t be trusted, and
that conflict of interest has arisen in the investigation being conducted by the new york state attorney general. the mazars letter says that that investigation along with the firms own investigation means that the statements of financial condition for donald j trump, for the last ten years, quote, should no longer be relied upon and you should inform any recipients thereof who are currently relying upon one or more of those documents, that those documents should not be relied upon. the letter specifies that the donald trump personal tax return that needs to be filed tomorrow was missing necessary information as of last week. the letter says quote, we believe the only information left to complete those returns is the information regarding
a.g. letitia james, mazars, trump s accounting firm, has officially cut ties with its long-time client and warned that ten years worth of his financial statements cannot be trusted. it s the latest chapter in a legal saga that our next guest has chronicled since 2016, back when trump s audacious claims about his worth were still taken by some at face value. let s talk about this with new york times investigative reporter susanne craig. thanks for joining us. we appreciate it. as always, good to talk to you. i got to say, let s talk first about mazars, and i want to read a little bit from mazars letter where they don t necessarily mince words, saying this. we write to advise that the statements of financial condition for donald j. trump for the years ending june 30, 2011, through june 30, 2020, should no longer be relied upon, and you should inform any recipients thereof who are currently relying upon one or more of those documents that those documents should not be relied upon.
here. the president responding saying this is a continuation of the greatest witch hunt in history. what happens? well, what happened and what is going to happen is that first the judge called it preposterous that the president could think that his mazars letter that was docketed and made public as a result of the civil investigation being led by attorney general leticia james that that was a clean slate and rendered her vision is somehow moot. the former president and his lawyers, their arguments before the court were rejected wholesale yesterday. the judge said he believed that there was evidence of possible financial copious evidence, he called it, of possible financial fraud that s already been uncovered here. so when you look at the age-page ruling and the legal arguments that have been presented, it s going to make it pretty difficult for the president,