1 “I Don’t Settle Cases” It wasn’t the first time that Trump publicly boasted that he never settles a case. For decades that was his fixed mantra each time he was hit with a fresh lawsuit. However, this time when he boasted that “I don’t settle cases” he spoke to a massive national audience. He made the boast during a Republican presidential primary debate in 2016. Trump made the public boast at the debate not so much to showcase his alleged legal acumen but as yet another ploy to cast himself with an alleged shield of invincibility. He was in his estimation the presidential candidate who couldn’t be defeated. Like so much else about Trump, his claim that he never settled a lawsuit was a blatant falsehood. For more than a half century starting in 1973, Trump was repeatedly dragged into a court somewhere. By the time he won the presidency in 2016 the tally of lawsuits against him in federal and state courts stood at over four thousand. He was sued for gouging casino patrons and employees, dubious real estate dealing, defamation, and over one hundred business tax disputes. He was also accused of often of sexual harassment and assault. Out of the thousands of cases, though, he was held civilly liable in only one. He did settle in several of the cases, but one wouldn’t know it. He admitted no wrongdoing. This was the first of his warehouse of ploys to maintain the aura of one who never loses. Another was to write and say nothing publicly about a settlement. ***** A textbook example of this was during the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump publicly ripped the federal judge, Gonzalo P. Curiel, in the lawsuit against him for his phony Trump University scam. The scam bilked unsuspecting students out of tens of thousands of dollars. They were hoodwinked by the promise of being placed in lucrative jobs on completion of the Trump University courses. He didn’t just hurl his usual cutting invectives at the judge of being biased and unfair. He reminded one and all that the judge was of Mexican heritage. This was a loud dog whistle to use the fear and hysteria over immigration that Trump had done much to whip up to taint the case. He quietly settled the case for twenty-five million dollars. But true to form he admitted no guilt and once more depicted himself as the victim. Another ploy was to drag cases out into infinity. In civil suits, time was on his side. Memories dim, events and news move on, and the cases remain dormant and on hold during the long lag time. Here were examples of how time was a Trump ally. He settled a case for three quarters of a million dollars in 1988. The case was brought against him by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission for violating antitrust laws over stock trades he made in 1986. In 2015, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network slapped a ten-million-dollar civil penalty on the Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort for violating the Bank Secrecy Act from 2010 to 2012. In the four cases in which Trump settled or agreed to a penalty for lawbreaking it took anywhere from two to six years for a final resolution of the cases against him. Trump has also been a master at countersuing-and then accusing the Trump accuser of defamation. He’d ask for an exorbitant sum in damages. Countersuits never go anywhere but they weren’t designed too. They created the counter narrative that Trump was being unfairly victimized. In a housing discrimination case against him in the 1970s, Trump employed this strategy to perfection. He counter sued the government for defamation. Then he quietly settled. He employed his stock ploy. That was admit nothing. In this instance, he bragged that he made the settlement “without admitting guilt.” ***** A carefully honed legal counter-attack strategy was to never put anything in writing about these cases. He understood early on that putting anything in writing provides a public record that could be cited and in the worst case be damaging. Trump’s one-time legal fixer and later legal turncoat, Michael Cohen, confirmed that Trump as a matter of course did use a computer or write emails. Cohen testified that Trump conducted much of their business dealings in “code” particularly when it came to shading the truth or outright lying about his business dealings or when he was under investigation for his dubious political dealings. Trump reportedly angrily reprimanded his onetime White House counsel Don McGahan for having the temerity to take notes. He took the notes in a meeting in a meeting on the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller of Trump’s alleged involvement in Russian tampering in the 2016 presidential election. The exchange between Trump and McGahan on his note taking was nothing short of surreal. He asked, “Why do you take notes? Lawyers don’t take notes. I never had a lawyer who took notes.” McGahan said he took notes because he was a “real lawyer” and it created a record. Trump was having none of that, “I’ve had a lot of great lawyers, like Roy Cohn. He did not take notes.” Trump’s penchant for not putting anything on paper could have turned out to be a double-edged sword in the Justice Department’s criminal case against him for allegedly pilfering classified government documents after he left the White House in 2021. In this instance, he did slightly violate his no written record of anything policy. He wrote some things down concerning the documents. The FBI seized those handwritten notes. They ultimately could have been a damaging liability in court. If that happened it would have been further evidence why Trump made it his long standing practice of never putting pen to paper. In the half century plus of the voluminous suits against Trump and countersuits by him, he had worked to near perfection a well-spring of tactics to deny, duck, dodge, deflect, distract, and assail. The goal never changed. That was stay out of legal harms way. Then top it off by doing a victory lap and declare victory. Trump would put each of those ploys on abundant display to the world in the criminal cases against
1
“I Don’t Settle Cases”
It wasn’t the first time that Trump publicly boasted that he never settles a case. For decades that was his fixed mantra each time he was hit with a fresh lawsuit. However, this time when he boasted that “I don’t settle cases” he spoke to a massive national audience.
He made the boast during a Republican presidential primary debate in 2016.  Trump made the public boast at the debate not so much to showcase his alleged legal acumen but as yet another ploy to cast himself with an alleged shield of invincibility. He was in his estimation the presidential candidate who couldn’t be defeated.
Like so much else about Trump, his claim that he never settled a lawsuit was a blatant falsehood. For more than a half century starting in 1973, Trump was repeatedly dragged into a court somewhere. By the time he won the presidency in 2016 the tally of lawsuits against him in federal and state courts stood at over four thousand.
He was sued for gouging casino patrons and employees, dubious real estate dealing, defamation, and over one hundred business tax disputes. He was also accused of often of sexual harassment and assault. Out of the thousands of cases, though, he was held civilly liable in only one.
Â
He did settle in several of the cases, but one wouldn’t know it. He admitted no wrongdoing. This was the first of his warehouse of ploys to maintain the aura of one who never loses. Another was to write and say nothing publicly about a settlement. Â
*****
A textbook example of this was during the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump publicly ripped the federal judge, Gonzalo P. Curiel, in the lawsuit against him for his phony Trump University scam. The scam bilked unsuspecting students out of tens of thousands of dollars. They were hoodwinked by the promise of being placed in lucrative jobs on completion of the Trump University courses.
Â
He didn’t just hurl his usual cutting invectives at the judge of being biased and unfair. He reminded one and all that the judge was of Mexican heritage. This was a loud dog whistle to use the fear and hysteria over immigration that Trump had done much to whip up to taint the case. He quietly settled the case for twenty-five million dollars. But true to form he admitted no guilt and once more depicted himself as the victim.
Â
Another ploy was to drag cases out into infinity. In civil suits, time was on his side. Memories dim, events and news move on, and the cases remain dormant and on hold during the long lag time.
Here were examples of how time was a Trump ally. He settled a case for three quarters of a million dollars in 1988. The case was brought against
him by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission for violating antitrust laws over stock trades he made in 1986.
Â
In 2015, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network slapped a ten-million-dollar civil penalty on the Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort for violating the Bank Secrecy Act from 2010 to 2012.  In the four cases in which Trump settled or agreed to a penalty for lawbreaking it took anywhere from two to six years for a final resolution of the cases against him.
Trump has also been a master at countersuing-and then accusing the Trump accuser of defamation. He’d ask for an exorbitant sum in damages.   Countersuits never go anywhere but they weren’t designed too. They created the counter narrative that Trump was being unfairly victimized.
In a housing discrimination case against him in the 1970s, Trump employed this strategy to perfection. He counter sued the government for defamation. Then he quietly settled. He employed his stock ploy. That was admit nothing. In this instance, he bragged that he made the settlement “without admitting guilt.”
*****
A carefully honed legal counter-attack strategy was to never put anything in writing about these cases. He understood early on that putting anything in writing provides a public record that could be cited and in the worst case be damaging. Trump’s one-time legal fixer and later legal turncoat, Michael Cohen, confirmed that Trump as a matter of course did use a computer or write emails.
Â
Cohen testified that Trump conducted much of their business dealings in “code” particularly when it came to shading the truth or outright lying about his business dealings or when he was under investigation for his dubious political dealings.
Trump reportedly angrily reprimanded his onetime White House counsel Don McGahan for having the temerity to take notes. He took the notes in a meeting in a meeting on the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller of Trump’s alleged involvement in Russian tampering in the 2016 presidential election.
The exchange between Trump and McGahan on his note taking was nothing short of surreal. He asked, “Why do you take notes? Lawyers don’t take notes. I never had a lawyer who took notes.”
McGahan said he took notes because he was a “real lawyer” and it created a record. Trump was having none of that, “I’ve had a lot of great lawyers, like Roy Cohn. He did not take notes.”
Trump’s penchant for not putting anything on paper could have turned out to be a double-edged sword in the Justice Department’s criminal case against him for allegedly pilfering classified government documents after he left the White House in 2021. In this instance, he did slightly violate his no written record of anything policy. He wrote some things down concerning the documents. The FBI seized those handwritten notes.
Â
They ultimately could have been a damaging liability in court. If that happened it would have been further evidence why Trump made it his long standing practice of never putting pen to paper.
In the half century plus of the voluminous suits against Trump and countersuits by him, he had worked to near perfection a well-spring of tactics to deny, duck, dodge, deflect, distract, and assail. The goal never changed. That was stay out of legal harms way. Then top it off by doing a victory lap and declare victory. Trump would put each of those ploys on abundant display to the world in the criminal cases againstÂ
