Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
55,000
Location
Albuquerque, NM
I expect that Trump and his family will have myriad legal issues going forward. Here is a place to keep them all in one place.

Legal Pressure on Trump Increases With Judge’s Order in Fraud Inquiry

The order, answering a demand for documents by New York’s attorney general, rejected a bid to shield the records with attorney-client privilege.



Former President Donald J. Trump’s Seven Springs family estate in Westchester County, N.Y., is one focus of an investigation by New York’s attorney general. Credit...Tony Cenicola/The New York Times
By Ed Shanahan and William K. Rashbaum
  • Published Jan. 29, 2021Updated Jan. 30, 2021, 9:03 a.m. ET
A New York judge on Friday increased pressure on former President Donald J. Trump’s family business and several associates, ordering them to give state investigators documents in a civil inquiry into whether the company misstated assets to get bank loans and tax benefits.

It was the second blow that the judge, Arthur F. Engoron of State Supreme Court in Manhattan, had dealt to Mr. Trump’s company in recent weeks.

In December, he ordered the company, the Trump Organization, to produce records that its lawyers had tried to shield, including some related to a Westchester County, N.Y., property that is among those being scrutinized by the New York State attorney general, Letitia James.

On Friday, Justice Engoron went further, saying that even more documents, as well as communications with a law firm hired by the Trump Organization, had to be handed over to Ms. James’s office. In doing so, he rejected the lawyers’ claim that the documents at issue were covered by attorney-client privilege.

Ms. James’s investigation began in March 2019, after Michael D. Cohen, the former president’s onetime lawyer, told Congress that Mr. Trump had inflated his assets in financial statements to secure bank loans and had understated them elsewhere to reduce his tax bill.

NEW YORK TODAY: Compelling daily stories, transit news and a glimpse at the lighter side of life in the city.
Investigators in Ms. James’s office have focused their attention on an array of transactions, including a financial restructuring of the Trump International Hotel & Tower in Chicago in 2010 that resulted in the Fortress Credit Corporation forgiving debt worth more than $100 million.

Ms. James’s office has said in court documents that the Trump Organization — Mr. Trump’s main business vehicle — had thwarted efforts to determine how that money was reflected in its tax filings, and whether it was declared as income, as the law typically requires.

An analysis of Mr. Trump’s financial records by The New York Times found that he had avoided federal income tax on almost all of the forgiven debt.

Ms. James’s office is also examining whether the Trump Organization used inflated appraisals when it received large tax breaks after promising to conserve land where its development efforts faltered, including at its Seven Springs estate in Westchester County.

Accusing the Trump Organization of trying to stall the inquiry, lawyers with Ms. James’s office sought a judge’s order in August compelling the company to turn over documents related to the Seven Springs estate and other properties, and requiring the former president’s son Eric Trump, a company vice president, to testify in the inquiry. (Eventually, he did.)

In December, Justice Engoron ordered the Trump Organization to turn over to Ms. James’s office an engineer’s documents related to a conservation easement at the Seven Springs property.

Ms. James’s office is examining whether the easement is legitimate and whether an improper valuation of the estate allowed the Trump Organization to take a $21 million tax deduction it was not entitled to.

Lawyers for the company had tried to keep the engineer’s documents from investigators by claiming the materials were privileged because lawyers for the Trump Organizationrelied on them in valuing the property. Justice Engoron rejected that argument.

In the order issued on Friday, Justice Engoron again found that the Trump Organization lawyers had invoked attorney-client privilege for documents to which it did not apply.

The Wall Street Journal. Prosecutors involved in the inquiry, the only known active criminal investigation of Mr. Trump, have subpoenaed records related to the Westchester property, according to people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Vance’s investigation has largely been stalled since last fall, when Mr. Trump sued to block a subpoena for his tax returns and other records, sending the bitter dispute to the U.S. Supreme Court for a second time. A ruling is expected soon.

Danny Hakim contributed reporting.
 
Michael D. Cohen, the former president’s onetime lawyer, told Congress that Mr. Trump had inflated his assets in financial statements to secure bank loans and had understated them elsewhere to reduce his tax bill.

I am sure that occurred but so what; that sort of thing is very nearly the norm in the millionnaire/corporate world.
 
I am sure that occurred but so what; that sort of thing is very nearly the norm in the millionnaire/corporate world.
But it is a crime and Trump has enemies in NY. Leona Helmsley and Marthat Stewart both did jail time for their crimes. Martha did time for insider trading and Leona for:

On August 30, Helmsley was convicted of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States,[25] three counts of tax evasion,[26] three counts of filing false personal tax returns,[27] sixteen counts of assisting in the filing of false corporate and partnership tax returns,[27] and ten counts of mail fraud.[28][29] She was, however, acquitted of extortion—a charge that could potentially have sent her to prison for the rest of her life. Helmsley was instead sentenced to sixteen years in prison, which was eventually reduced when all but eight of the convictions were dropped.
She later had her sentenced reduced.
 
I'll be happy to read less about Trump the next four years, so I probably won't be following him as closely going forward. Nevertheless...

The top two defense lawyers for Trump's impeachment trial have parted ways with him, just over a week before the trial starts, citing differences of opinion on the direction of the case.

--

My expectation was that the lawyers wanted to do something orthodox and sensible, and Trump wants to do something unorthodox. My hope is that is backfires on him enough to convince 17 or more Republicans to vote to convict him. Which should be a foregone conclusion given what happened on January 6th, but it remains to be seen if enough Republicans believe in the Constitution for that to happen.

I am sure that occurred but so what; that sort of thing is very nearly the norm in the millionnaire/corporate world.

If you let anyone who does that walk off scot-free, without even trying to prosecute them for it, you're essentially giving a green light to corruption. And the more corruption you have, the less trust people have not only in their government, but in their fellow citizens at large.

There definitely are loopholes, and we as a society should work to close those, but if you can prove someone did it and they don't have any loopholes to hide behind, you should prosecute them.
 
I'll be happy to read less about Trump the next four years, so I probably won't be following him as closely going forward. Nevertheless...

The top two defense lawyers for Trump's impeachment trial have parted ways with him, just over a week before the trial starts, citing differences of opinion on the direction of the case.

--

My expectation was that the lawyers wanted to do something orthodox and sensible, and Trump wants to do something unorthodox. My hope is that is backfires on him enough to convince 17 or more Republicans to vote to convict him. Which should be a foregone conclusion given what happened on January 6th, but it remains to be seen if enough Republicans believe in the Constitution for that to happen.



If you let anyone who does that walk off scot-free, without even trying to prosecute them for it, you're essentially giving a green light to corruption. And the more corruption you have, the less trust people have not only in their government, but in their fellow citizens at large.

There definitely are loopholes, and we as a society should work to close those, but if you can prove someone did it and they don't have any loopholes to hide behind, you should prosecute them.

Allegedly the defense team wanted to pursue the 'unconstitutional to impeach a former president' angle. He wanted to instead continue the 'election was stolen' angle.

5 lawyers have now quit, it sounds like there is nobody left.
There's got to be some quack lawyer like Guiliani out there willing to pursue a losing case, despite not likely to get paid....
 
Aren't there some GOP House members who are attorneys? :lol: How about Sydney Powell? I bet she is looking for work.
 
I don't see that putting different values on the same assets is in itself either corruption or a crime.

In fact as there are a number of quite legitimate different ways of assigning values to real estate;
historic cost, estimated current market value, from profits being made; that sort of thing is inevitable.

The banks could maintain the values were so out of line that it meant that loans obtained on them
were fraudulent, but the banks are expected to employ their own experts to check against customers
putting up inflated values so they have shot themselve in the foot by not undertaking due diligence.

If the values put to the tax man were unreasonable, then the tax revenue service could well win the argument
for a recaclulation and recovery of back tax; but in my mind to secure a criminal conviction, they would have
to prove intent to evade by Donald Trump who need only argue that his accountants must have got it wrong.

There is also the identity of the party here, it may well be demonstrable that one of the Donald Trump companies
was acting illegally, but proving that Donald Trump himself knowingly directed it is a separate matter.

I would also argue that there is a higher problem, in that taxes are traditionally paid by profitable companies.
If it turns out that the entire Trump empire was unprofitable, then little taxes would be due.

To me, the most likely successful course of action would be to demonstrate that upon realising that certain
companies were going to go bankrupt he illegally transferred (embezzled) money from those companies
to his other companies before their collapse thereby profiting while the other investors faced an increased loss.

Now I am not saying that Donald Trump is innocent. I have stated in these threads that I regarded him
as a not untypical corporate fraudster, and that was one of the three reasons why I, if eligible
(I was not) would not have voted for him, but the case against him needs to be made very carefully.

Assuming his guilt is obvious is an unwise prosecuting tactic; for instance the impeachment case re
the Ukraine failed because, amongst other thing such as a bipartisan split, it was not entirely sound.
 
Last edited:
I'll be happy to read less about Trump the next four years, so I probably won't be following him as closely going forward.
I wouldn’t count all your eggs before they hatch. He may be out of the picture now, it’s anyone’s guess what could happen between now and 2024.
 
Scottish lawmakers push to investigate Trump golf course financing

LONDON — Lawmakers in Scotland are demanding that the government investigate former president Donald Trump and the Trump Organization to learn the source of the funds used to purchase a pair of golf courses.

WaPo said:
Led by Green Party legislators, the Scottish Parliament is scheduled to debate and vote Wednesday on a motion to press First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon to seek an “unexplained wealth order” from the courts, which would require the Trump Organization to reveal how the company financed the purchases of the Turnberry and Aberdeen golf resorts.

The motion is nonbinding, and to date Sturgeon and her Scottish National Party have not sought such an investigation, saying it is a matter best left to prosecutors, not politicians. An unexplained wealth order, if sought by Sturgeon and granted by the courts, would trigger an accounting investigation. It is not a criminal proceeding. But if the Trump Organization could not satisfy the courts that the money was clean, the Scottish government could, theoretically, seek to confiscate the properties.

The mechanism was designed to keep money launderers, mafia types and international criminals from making large investments in Scotland with dirty money. The motion is expected to inspire spirited debate, but observers say it is unlikely to win a majority. Scottish politicians initially courted Trump and his investments. Even his critics admit he restored the Turnberry seaside golf links to their former glory.

Still, the parliamentary maneuvers are another sign that private citizen Trump is beginning a new chapter in life. Supporters of the bill say they were energized by Trump’s impeachment shortly before he left office on a charge of inciting the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol by a mob of his supporters.

Patrick Harvie, the Green Party lawmaker in the Scottish Parliament who called for the vote to pressure the government to pursue an unexplained wealth order, said the people of Scotland have a right to know where the money came from to purchase the golf resorts. “It’s a very modest step,” Harvie told The Washington Post. Show the source of the money, he said, and if the books are clean, the matter is dropped. But the lawmaker signaled that for some, it is no mere accounting audit.

“It’s a toxic brand… owned by a disgraced former president, who courted supremacists, who incited violence,” Harvie said. He said Trump’s ownership of Scottish golf courses soils Scotland’s reputation. “Why does Scotland want this as a tourist offering?” he said. Nick Flynn, legal director of the online campaign organization Avaaz, which supports the call to investigate the funding of the golf courses, said Scotland certainly would want to know the source of the money if, say, Russian President Putin purchased a resort.” It’s in the public interest to clear this up,” he said.

The Trump Organization did not provide a response to The Washington Post.

In a statement to the Scotsman newspaper, Eric Trump, executive vice president of his father’s company, said: “At a critical time when politicians should be focused on saving lives and reopening businesses in Scotland, they are focused on advancing their personal agendas.”

The Trump Organization’s own financial filings depict the two Scottish golf courses as massive sinkholes of money, which have now cost Trump more than $280 million without ever turning a profit. Trump bought these properties during a spending spree that preceded his run for office, in which he shifted tactics from earlier phases of his career. Before, Trump boasted he was “the King of Debt” and relied heavily on borrowed money to limit his own financial risk — a common tactic in the real estate business.

But starting about 2006, Trump spent more than $400 million of his own money on real estate, including the two Scottish courses and 12 other properties, all bought without any public sign of a loan.


Donald Trump gestures to the media on the 17th fairway on the first day of the Women's British Open golf championship on the Turnberry golf course in Turnberry, Scotland, on July 30, 2015. (Scott Heppell/AP)
Trump and his family have said the money was all Trump’s own. Trump, they said, had made so much cash from other projects that he did not require any loans or outside investors. “He had incredible cash flow and built incredible wealth,” Eric Trump told The Washington Post in 2018. “He didn’t need to think about borrowing for every transaction. We invested in ourselves.” Trump bought the land for the Aberdeen course in 2006 for $12.6 million. Since then, he has loaned the golf course an additional $58.6 million to fund the construction of the course and a small hotel. His investment in Turnberry is even larger: He spent $68 million to buy the famed course in 2014 and has loaned it another $150 million since then.

Neither course has ever turned a profit under Trump’s leadership, according to filings with the British government. But, as of late 2019, there were encouraging signs: Revenue was increasing at Trump’s clubs. Then came covid-19, which ravaged the tourist business and triggered government-mandated shutdowns at both clubs. Turnberry is still in the midst of a second long-term shutdown, which began in January. The impact on the clubs’ revenue was devastating: Revenue fell by more than 60 percent, as the two clubs took in $28 million less than they had in 2019.

Then, on Jan. 6, Trump addressed a crowd of supporters in Washington and whipped them up with baseless claims that the 2020 election had been stolen from him. A mob of his followers then stormed the U.S. Capitol. Five people died, including a police officer. Afterward, the most important institution in the British golf world, the R&A, which derives its name from the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews, said it would not award Turnberry the British Open golf tournament “for the foreseeable future.”

That ended Trump’s hopes that the Open would return to Turnberry, a prize he wanted so badly that — according to the New York Times — Trump asked his ambassador to Britain to press for it. A spokesman for the union that represents Turnberry’s workers said the resort’s business should improve when lockdowns are lifted — as British tourists look to vacation without crossing borders. But, the spokesman said, the effect of Trump’s bitter last days in office could linger.

“We thought it was a tainted brand anyway,” the spokesman said, but this might have made it worse. “What people are going to decide to book vacations at Trump properties after what’s happened? I don’t know.”
 
Scottish lawmakers push to investigate Trump golf course financing

LONDON — Lawmakers in Scotland are demanding that the government investigate former president Donald Trump and the Trump Organization to learn the source of the funds used to purchase a pair of golf courses.
These unexplained wealth orders have been used successfully twice, most famously for the wife of the former chairman of the International Bank of Azerbaijan who is doing porridge for fraud, embezzlement, and missappropriation of public funds. She spent £16.3 million at Harrods. She fought it for years, I would be amazed if they pin it on trump, this is a green MSP who does not have a whole lot of power.
 
House impeachment manager asks Trump to testify for his Senate trial, a request he may decline

Feb. 4, 2021 at 11:28 a.m. MST
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the lead House impeachment manager, asked former president Donald Trump on Thursday to provide testimony under oath “either before or during” his Senate trial scheduled next week. In a letter, Raskin asked for testimony about Trump’s conduct Jan. 6 when a pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol in a deadly assault.

During his first major foreign policy speech, President Biden on Thursday will announce an end to U.S. support for offensive operations in Yemen and a freeze on troop redeployments from Germany, an aide said. The announcements are part of an address at the State Department that aides say will signal a desire to strengthen alliances and reengage with multinational institutions.

Here’s what to know:
  • Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said on the House floor Thursday that Democrats are planning to “crucify me in the public square for words that I said a few years ago.” She spoke in advance of a planned vote to expel her from her committees in response to comments questioning the veracity of school shootings, encouraging political violence and promoting anti-Semitic falsehoods.
  • A Senate committee is holding a hearing on the nomination of Marty Walsh as labor secretary. Another committee advanced the nomination of Linda Thomas-Greenfield as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. And a third committee plans votes on Marcia Fudge as secretary of housing and urban development and Cecilia Rouse as chair of the Council of Economic Advisers.
  • Biden addressed a virtual National Prayer Breakfast in a videotaped message in which he talked about the value of faith in dark times. The living former presidents, with the exception of Trump, also participated.
  • House Republicans voted 145 to 61 to reject a call for the resignation of Rep. Liz Cheney (Wyo.) from her leadership position for voting Jan. 13 to impeach Trump.
  • Got a burning politics question, or just something you’re curious about? Today at noon, the Fix team chats with readers about the big stories in politics.
11:28 a.m.

Impeachment managers call Trump to testify for his trial
By Karoun Demirjian

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) (Salwan Georges/The Washington Post)
Lead House impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) officially requested that former president Donald Trump testify under oath about his involvement in the events that led to the Capitol riot on Jan. 6.

The letter, which Raskin sent to Trump’s lawyers Thursday, comes two days after the president’s legal team filed papers with the Senate disputing many of the factual allegations in the House managers’ case. It invites Trump to testify either before or during his actual impeachment trial, which is set to begin in the Senate on Tuesday, Feb. 9 -- with the recommendation he do so between Monday, Feb. 8 and Thursday Feb. 11.

"If you decline this invitation, we reserve any and all rights, including the right to establish at trial that your refusal to testify supports a strong adverse inference regarding your actions (and inaction) on January 6, 2021,” Raskin warned in his letter, asking for a response by Friday at 5 p.m.

The House managers do not have independent authority to subpoena Trump if he denies the request.

In the letter, Raskin pointed out that former presidents Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton had both testified to Congress while in office, “so there is no doubt that you can testify in these proceedings.” Raskin also pointed out that since Trump is no longer in office, and since the Supreme Court has already ruled that the president is not immune to legal proceedings for decisions he made during his tenure in office, he has no excuse to decline.

“We therefore anticipate your availability to testify,” Raskin wrote.

Representatives for Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment
 
Georgia Prosecutors Open Criminal Inquiry Into Trump’s Efforts to Subvert Election
State officials are being instructed to preserve documents related to “attempts to influence” the Georgia election, just weeks after former President Donald J. Trump asked an elections official to “find” votes.

  • Feb. 10, 2021Updated 6:00 p.m. ET
ATLANTA — Prosecutors in Georgia have started a criminal investigation into former President Donald J. Trump’s attempts to overturn Georgia’s election results, including a phone call he made to Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which Mr. Trump pressured him to “find” enough votes to help him reverse his loss.

On Wednesday, Fani T. Willis, the recently elected Democratic prosecutor in Fulton County, sent a letter to numerous officials in state government, including Mr. Raffensperger, requesting that they preserve documents related to “an investigation into attempts to influence” the state’s 2020 presidential election.

While the letter does not mention Mr. Trump by name, it is related to his efforts to change the outcome of Georgia’s election, according to a state official with knowledge of the matter. A copy of the letter was obtained by The New York Times. Of particular note in Ms. Willis’s letter was the wider scope of the investigation. Potential violations of state law include “the solicitation of election fraud, the making of false statements to state and local governmental bodies, conspiracy, racketeering, violation of oath of office and any involvement in violence or threats related to the election’s administration,” the letter states.

The state official said that, in addition to the call to Mr. Raffensperger, Ms. Willis’s inquiry would encompass Mr. Trump’s outreach to other Georgia officials in an attempt to reverse his loss. These include a call to a top elections investigator in which Mr. Trump asked the official to “find the fraud”; a call in which Mr. Trump urged Gov. Brian Kemp to call a special session of the legislature to review the election results; and a conversation with the attorney general of Georgia, Chris Carr, in which Mr. Trump warned him not to interfere in a Texas lawsuit seeking to overturn the results in Georgia and other states.

The investigation will also look into the events surrounding the abrupt resignation in January of Atlanta’s federal prosecutor, Byung J. Pak, after Mr. Trump complained to Justice Department officials that Mr. Pak was not pursuing his claims of election fraud, the official said. In the letter, Ms. Willis said that her office would request subpoenas “as necessary” when the next Fulton County grand jury convenes in March. In addition to Mr. Raffensperger, the letter was sent to Mr. Kemp, Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan and Mr. Carr, all of whom are Republicans.

“At this stage, we have no reason to believe that any Georgia official is a target of this investigation,” Ms. Willis wrote.

The investigation goes beyond Mr. Trump himself, and could touch on the conduct of his aides and allies. A spokesman for the district attorney’s office said that Mr. Duncan, the lieutenant governor, received one of the letters because he presides over the State Senate. In December, Rudolph W. Giuliani, one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, appeared before the Senate and advanced false claims that the election was stolen.

The Fulton County District Attorney’s Letter
The inquiry comes as Mr. Trump faces a second impeachment trial in Washington this week, for his role in stirring up the mob that attacked the Capitol on Jan 6. The violence that day followed weeks of false claims by the former president that election fraud deprived him of victory, including in Georgia, where he lost by about 12,000 votes. Mr. Trump’s hourlong call to Mr. Raffensperger on Jan. 2 is cited by the House in its article of impeachment.

Jason Miller, a senior adviser to Mr. Trump, said in a statement on Wednesday that “the timing here is not accidental given today’s impeachment trial. This is simply the Democrats’ latest attempt to score political points by continuing their witch hunt against President Trump, and everybody sees through it.”

The inquiry makes Georgia the second state after New York where Mr. Trump faces a criminal investigation. And it comes in a jurisdiction where potential jurors are unlikely to be hospitable to the former president; Fulton County, the state’s most populous county, encompasses most of Atlanta and overwhelmingly supported Joseph R. Biden Jr. in the November election.

In the Wednesday letter, Ms. Willis also argues that her office was the one agency in Georgia with jurisdiction that was not hobbled by a conflict of interest, because it was not a “witness to the conduct’’ that is being investigated. She notes that unnamed “subjects of the investigation” had made contact with the secretary of state, the attorney general and the U.S. attorney’s office in Atlanta.

Pak, the former U.S. attorney for the Atlanta area, that Mr. Trump was dissatisfied with his efforts to investigate the president’s claims of election fraud. Mr. Donoghue did so in a phone call shortly before Jan. 4, the day Mr. Pak resigned.

Ms. Willis has been weighing for several weeks whether to open an inquiry, after Mr. Trump’s Jan. 2 phone call to Mr. Raffensperger alarmed election experts who called it an extraordinary intervention into a state’s electoral process. For two months after Mr. Biden was declared the winner, Mr. Trump relentlessly attacked state officials in Georgia, including Mr. Raffensperger and Mr. Kemp, claiming they were not doing enough to uncover instances of voting fraud that might change the outcome.

Former prosecutors had previously said Mr. Trump’s calls might run afoul of at least three state laws. One is criminal solicitation to commit election fraud, which can be either a felony or a misdemeanor; as a felony, it is punishable by at least a year in prison. There is also a related conspiracy charge, which can be prosecuted either as a misdemeanor or a felony. A third law, a misdemeanor offense, bars “intentional interference” with another person’s “performance of election duties.”

In the Wednesday letter, Ms. Willis also argues that her office was the one agency in Georgia with jurisdiction that was not hobbled by a conflict of interest, because it was not a “witness to the conduct’’ that is being investigated. She notes that unnamed “subjects of the investigation” had made contact with the secretary of state, the attorney general and the U.S. attorney’s office in Atlanta.

The letter did not go into detail about the contact that was made. But Mr. Trump’s acting deputy attorney general, Richard Donoghue, relayed to Mr. Pak, the former U.S. attorney for the Atlanta area, that Mr. Trump was dissatisfied with his efforts to investigate the president’s claims of election fraud. Mr. Donoghue did so in a phone call shortly before Jan. 4, the day Mr. Pak resigned.

Ms. Willis’s office also suggested that the inquiry would look at the actions of others who might have sought to undermine the election results. Jeff DiSantis, a spokesman for Ms. Willis, noted Mr. Duncan’s role in presiding over the State Senate, saying that the Senate “may have evidence of efforts to interfere with the proper administration of the election.”

Dec. 3 and Dec. 10, Mr. Giuliani — who spent weeks peddling Mr. Trump’s conspiracy theories about election fraud — aired a series of false and sometimes outlandish claims that angered state election officials and Mr. Kemp. In a recent interview, Gabriel Sterling, a top aide to Mr. Raffensperger, said that he was in a legislative hearing room on a different floor during one of Mr. Giuliani’s appearances, trying to set the record straight.

“I literally was refuting everything one story down,” he said.

The Georgia investigation comes as Mr. Trump is also facing an ongoing criminal fraud inquiry into his finances by the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., and a civil fraud inquiry by the New York attorney general, Letitia James. Separately, the attorney general in the District of Columbia, Karl Racine, has said Mr. Trump could face a misdemeanor charge there for his role in inciting the mob violence at the Capitol; his office said Wednesday that it was still examining potential charges for inciting the rioting on Jan. 6.

The Georgia inquiry will be a test for Fulton’s new district attorney, who took office last month.

“Just because they start an investigation doesn’t mean that D.A. Willis is going to take it to a grand jury,” said Joshua Morrison, a former senior assistant district attorney in Fulton County who once worked closely with Ms. Willis. He expected a lengthy inquiry, given the stakes. “Look at the impeachment trial,” he added. “With this, he’s facing prison time. They’re going to throw everything they have at the wall.”

If Mr. Trump were to be convicted of a state crime in New York or Georgia, a federal pardon would not be applicable. In Georgia, Mr. Trump cannot look to Mr. Kemp for a state pardon, and not just because the two have a fractured relationship. In Georgia, pardons are granted only by the state board of pardons and paroles.
 
Just after Trump was elected, I watched a brilliant Dutch documentary by Zembla, one of their better investigative teams. @Hrothbern might disagree with that.
In that doco, they detailed many of Trump's shady associates, including the remarkable Felix Sater. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Sater

They showed that Trump and his associates set up hundreds, possibly a couple of thousand companies in Amsterdam where it was a very easy process at the time.
The Bayrock Group LLC was just one of many "wheels within wheels".

There seemed to be many avenues for potential prosecutions coming out of those programs.
Has anyone seen other reputable investigations of his financial dealings they'd be willing to recommend?

Zembla's three 40-minute efforts are:
 
Just after Trump was elected, I watched a brilliant Dutch documentary by Zembla, one of their better investigative teams. @Hrothbern might disagree with that.
In that doco, they detailed many of Trump's shady associates, including the remarkable Felix Sater. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Sater

They showed that Trump and his associates set up hundreds, possibly a couple of thousand companies in Amsterdam where it was a very easy process at the time.
The Bayrock Group LLC was just one of many "wheels within wheels".

There seemed to be many avenues for potential prosecutions coming out of those programs.
Has anyone seen other reputable investigations of his financial dealings they'd be willing to recommend?

Zembla's three 40-minute efforts are:

I do not disagree with Zembla being good investigative background journalism.
They are there since the 90ies and it was set up in the tradition of showing more than just the surface news by the public broadcaster association the VARA, "de Vereninging van Arbeiders Radio Amateurs" (Association of Workers Radio Amateurs), founded just after WW1. A traditional Social-Democratic association that moved with time and is still the voice of Leftish.
The other Dutch broadcaster delivering good investigative background journalism is the VPRO, founded also just after WW1, and originally the pillar of free-minded radical Christians (Protestants not accepting the obedience structure of the establishment and aimed at emancipating in the full sense of that word).
Both broadcasters are gadflies in the Dutch (establishment) consensus society, and produce often well-documented inconvenient truths for governments, political parties and civil society entities and do report well on foreign countries with special attention for the big powers.
The investigative Dutch platform "Follow the Money" is another gadfly. I just checked whether they had someting on these Trump associated companies in Amsterdam. Nothing on that though the deliver continuous coverage on Trump and shady international business since 2011.
 
I watched a brilliant Dutch documentary by Zembla

Here about the doc of Zembla this evening on Dutch TV.
An echo of that Royal affair in the UK, that there is besides the Royal consent apparently on top also a Queen's consent... and also because of some PR bloopers of our King regarding following loyally the Covid restrictions we all face (and not fly with the royal airplane to that nice mansion somewhere in Greece while we are trapped in our smaller housings).

An update of the 'Royal constructions'. Zembla is investigating the preferential treatment that the government uses when it comes to the royal family. She discovers how the family deals with important cultural heritage. She also reveals the details of a controversial subsidy scheme that will yield King Willem-Alexander 4.7 million euros. While the government states that it treats the king the same as any other citizen, Zembla shows that there has been preferential treatment for years. This broadcast was first broadcast in May 2020 and caused a lot of stirring. Have the government and the King been more open since then?
 
I don't see that putting different values on the same assets is in itself either corruption or a crime.

In fact as there are a number of quite legitimate different ways of assigning values to real estate;
historic cost, estimated current market value, from profits being made; that sort of thing is inevitable.

The banks could maintain the values were so out of line that it meant that loans obtained on them
were fraudulent, but the banks are expected to employ their own experts to check against customers
putting up inflated values so they have shot themselve in the foot by not undertaking due diligence.

If the values put to the tax man were unreasonable, then the tax revenue service could well win the argument
for a recaclulation and recovery of back tax; but in my mind to secure a criminal conviction, they would have
to prove intent to evade by Donald Trump who need only argue that his accountants must have got it wrong.

There is also the identity of the party here, it may well be demonstrable that one of the Donald Trump companies
was acting illegally, but proving that Donald Trump himself knowingly directed it is a separate matter.

I would also argue that there is a higher problem, in that taxes are traditionally paid by profitable companies.
If it turns out that the entire Trump empire was unprofitable, then little taxes would be due.

To me, the most likely successful course of action would be to demonstrate that upon realising that certain
companies were going to go bankrupt he illegally transferred (embezzled) money from those companies
to his other companies before their collapse thereby profiting while the other investors faced an increased loss.

Now I am not saying that Donald Trump is innocent. I have stated in these threads that I regarded him
as a not untypical corporate fraudster, and that was one of the three reasons why I, if eligible
(I was not) would not have voted for him, but the case against him needs to be made very carefully.

Assuming his guilt is obvious is an unwise prosecuting tactic; for instance the impeachment case re
the Ukraine failed because, amongst other thing such as a bipartisan split, it was not entirely sound.
This link provides a pretty good overview of Trumps NY State tax investigation scope. It explains the allegations made by the NYT and how/why they are likely fraudulent.

https://www.ais-cpa.com/tax-fraud-by-the-numbers-the-trump-timeline/
 
This link provides a pretty good overview of Trumps NY State tax investigation scope. It explains the allegations made by the NYT and how/why they are likely fraudulent.

https://www.ais-cpa.com/tax-fraud-by-the-numbers-the-trump-timeline/

Thank you.

I have read the article . It presents the evidence for fraud quite well.

But then I suspect the majority of the millionnaire/billionnaire class are doing much of that too.

I still think impeachment is the best way to go.
 
I don't know where to post this.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...chment-trial-republican-lawyers-b1801239.html

A group of Republican senators met privately with Donald Trump's legal team representing the former president in his impeachment trial to discuss "strategy" ahead of the defence argument on Friday.

Senators have sworn an oath to "do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws" during the impeachment trial.

Following Thursday's closing arguments from House impeachment managers acting as prosecutors in the trial, Trump attorney David Schoen told reporters that his meeting with Republicans concerned "procedure" for Friday's hearing.

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said the group discussed "legal strategy" and their thoughts on the trial. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham and Utah's Mike Lee also joined the meeting.

Asked by CNN's Manu Raju whether he believed it was appropriate to meet with jurors, Mr Schoen said: “I think that’s the practice of impeachment. There’s nothing about this thing that has any semblance of due process whatsoever.”
 
Just thinking out loud here, but I've been half-listening to the arguments in the impeachment trial this week, and there are a couple of details that, I would think, favor a conviction: An impeachment trial is not a criminal trial, and barring Donald from running for office in the future because he abused the office and failed to uphold his oath the first time is not a restriction on his freedom of speech. I'll probably (half-)listen to the defense today, and I'm curious whether they'll address either point.
 
Top Bottom