Show summary Hide summary
During a lunch break at the Manhattan civil fraud trial, courthouse staff wheeled in a large McDonald’s order — a small, human detail that punctuated an otherwise technical legal proceeding. The moment drew attention because it highlights a familiar personal preference tied to the former president at the center of a high-stakes case that could reshape parts of his business empire.
Photos captured several suited aides carrying at least six brown paper bags into the Centre Street courthouse as the non-jury trial paused for lunch. It was not disclosed who placed the order, but the delivery echoed longstanding reports about the former president’s menu choices.
Over the years, Donald Trump’s fast-food preferences have become part of his public persona. Reporters and visitors have often noted his fondness for a specific combination: a Big Mac, Filet-O-Fish, french fries and a milkshake. Staff at the White House and guests on state visits were occasionally treated to similar fare, and in 2019 the White House served fast food to the Clemson Tigers football team during their visit.
Crying tiger Thai steak goes viral: quick grilled recipe with fiery chili dip
Philadelphia drive-thru theft: register ripped from McDonald’s, suspect flees with cash
Legal backdrop: why the moment matters
The lunch delivery occurred as the trial continues in a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who alleges that Trump and the Trump Organization inflated asset values by billions when seeking financing and insurance. Judge Arthur Engoron is presiding over the civil case, which carries a reported potential judgment in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Earlier rulings in the case found that Trump and his company had overstated property values on financial statements, a finding that underpins the broader claims in the attorney general’s suit. An appeals court recently declined the former president’s request to delay the civil proceedings, allowing the trial to move forward.
Courtroom developments and evidence
At opening statements, defense attorney Christopher Kise disputed accusations of false entries and said the defense would challenge the credibility of key witnesses. Prosecutors have signaled they will rely in part on testimony from former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, whom they describe as having firsthand knowledge of efforts to adjust asset figures.
The prosecution played deposition clips in which Cohen described repeated instructions to rework valuations, covering the period from roughly 2011 through 2015. Defense attorneys countered that the attorney general’s investigation only began after her election in 2018 and have cast parts of the inquiry as politically motivated.
Prosecutors plan to call Donald Bender, an accountant from Mazars USA LLP, to testify about financial records dating back to 2011. Some of those records fall outside the civil statute of limitations, and the attorney general’s team has said it will connect Bender’s testimony to transactions or documents within the actionable time frame.
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Location | Centre Street courthouse, Manhattan |
| Incident | Large McDonald’s delivery carried into court during lunch break |
| Case | Civil fraud suit by New York AG alleging asset inflation |
| Judge | Arthur Engoron |
| Next witness | Donald Bender (Mazars USA LLP) |
Why this detail drew attention beyond its novelty is twofold: it underscores the informal moments that surface during tightly scheduled legal proceedings, and it reminded observers of a well-known personal habit tied to the defendant — an image element that can shape public perception even in a non-jury trial.
- Short-term: Expect testimony from accounting and valuation experts to dominate the coming days.
- Watch for: How the prosecution ties older records to conduct within the statute of limitations.
- Potential impact: A ruling against the defendant could bring significant financial penalties and reshape how the Trump Organization reports asset values.
Outside the courtroom, the former president criticized the proceedings as politically motivated and faulted both the attorney general and the judge as biased. Inside, attorneys from both sides are laying out sharply different narratives about valuation practices and intent.
Prosecutors are set to continue presenting evidence in the coming sessions, beginning with the expected testimony from Bender. For observers, small moments like the lunchtime delivery serve as a reminder that high-profile trials blend legal technicalities with everyday, human details that can influence public attention.
Tequila myths busted: 6 popular beliefs that aren’t true
Miami Hurricanes game weekend expands into three-day tailgate and cafecito crawl
