Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

WP: NY AG sues Trump family over “persistent illegal conduct” at Trump Foundation

No Excuses

By No Excuses
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

TheGreatBuzz

TheGreatBuzz

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Agree that Trump and his organization should not be getting special treatment (better or worse) because of politics.  I don't think they necessarily are in this matter.  The government has the burden to prove their claims beyond a reasonable doubt.  If the Trump organization committed crimes, and the government can prove it, then they should bring the case and punish them, just like they should in all cases.  

 

I think the only impact politics has is that Trump's entry into politics garnered him a whole lot of attention.  Well, if you are committing crimes, maybe don't draw so much attention.  Turns out criminals are often dummies.  

 

Honest question, no snark intended.  Can you explain why they are choosing to do this as a criminal manner then?  From what I understand, this is not normal.  Things like this would normally be done civilly, not criminally.  I think that is a big part of why this seems like special treatment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PleaseBlitz

PleaseBlitz

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

Honest question, no snark intended.  Can you explain why they are choosing to do this as a criminal manner then?  From what I understand, this is not normal.  Things like this would normally be done civilly, not criminally.  I think that is a big part of why this seems like special treatment. 

 

That is a great question.  The way this works is the law defines bad conduct into two categories, crimes and torts.  Torts are basically civil wrongs.  All of them have a list of elements that distinguish them.  If the conduct that the Trump org engaged in satisfies all of the elements of a crime, then it will be handled as a crime.  If the conduct only satisfies the elements of a tort, then they'll be handled as civil matters.

 

MOST of the time businesses engage in torts, which is why they are prosecuted as civil matters.  MOST business also listen to their legal counsel and don't run their business like a mafia-like organization. 

 

Crimes are also MUCH harder to prosecute, so if they are bringing criminal charges, I suspect they've got the goods.  

Edited by PleaseBlitz
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheGreatBuzz

TheGreatBuzz

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

That is a great question.  The way this works is the law defines bad conduct into two categories, crimes and torts.  Torts are basically civil wrongs.  All of them have a list of elements that distinguish them.  If the conduct that the Trump org engaged in satisfies all of the elements of a crime, then it will be handled as a crime.  If the conduct only satisfies the elements of a tort, then they'll be handled as civil matters.

 

MOST of the time businesses engage in torts, which is why they are prosecuted as civil matters.  MOST business also listen to their legal counsel and don't run their business like a mafia-like organization. 

 

Crimes are also MUCH harder to prosecute, so if they are bringing criminal charges, I suspect they've got the goods.  


Thanks.  Can you give a Barney-level example of crimes vs torts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PleaseBlitz

PleaseBlitz

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TheGreatBuzz said:


Thanks.  Can you give a Barney-level example of crimes vs torts?

 

Crimes:  worse conduct, much harder to prosecute, worse punishment including prison.

Torts:  bad but not terrible conduct, easier to prosecute, punishment is usually just fines.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TradeTheBeal!

TradeTheBeal!

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, No Excuses said:

These charges will get him a solid 6 months of probation and a fine. No ones flipping or going to jail over some unpaid taxes on “employee bonuses”.

 

5 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Yea, don't think this is a big deal.  

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterMP

PeterMP

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

Seems like the prosecution was sand bagging leading up to this? Those seem much more serious than some minor charges.

 

Prosecution is almost certainly over charging.  They almost always do with things like this.

 

I'm betting some fines, 6 months in a country club prison, and nothing else comes of this.

 

(I really have no knowledge here, but Martha Steward did 5 months for insider trading.  This doesn't seem worse.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fresh8686

Fresh8686

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I still don't think this is a big deal, insofar as it won't end up with Trump in stripes.  Who gives a **** what happens to Allen Weisselberg?

 

 

He only matters if he flips and the question is, are all these charges going to carry enough jail time for a 70 something year old to flip on Trump?

 

He will be the corroboration substituting in for the lack of Trump emails.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
China

China

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

 

Prosecution is almost certainly over charging.  They almost always do with things like this.

 

I'm betting some fines, 6 months in a country club prison, and nothing else comes of this.

 

(I really have no knowledge here, but Martha Steward did 5 months for insider trading.  This doesn't seem worse.)

 

And if you look at Enron, they got much more.  24 years for Skilling and Lay faced up to 45 years, but died before sentencing. 

 

We'll see.

Edited by China
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mistertim

mistertim

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Fresh8686 said:

 

He only matters if he flips and the question is, are all these charges going to carry enough jail time for a 70 something year old to flip on Trump?

 

He will be the corroboration substituting in for the lack of Trump emails.

 

Yeah that's why I asked a bit earlier whether prosecutors would still push Weisselberg to cooperate. Maybe if it looks like he'll end up spending the rest of his life in prison it will be much more persuasive for him to flip on Trump.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dan T.

Dan T.

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Fresh8686 said:

Seems like the prosecution was sand bagging leading up to this? Those seem much more serious than some minor charges.

 

All the talk about how minor the charges were going to be came from defense attorneys.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mistertim

mistertim

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

15 felonies seems like a lot. But I’m not a lawyer and I have @PleaseBlitzon ignore so I’m totally in the dark. 

 

I can pass him a note in study hall if you want. *

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* I'll also write "Do you like AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy? Circle yes or no" at the bottom for an extra $2

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
justice98

justice98

Posted
Posted (edited)

Trump is gonna skate.  This Trump Foundation thing won't touch him.  I know they're banking on Weisellberg flipping, but Cohen flipped and we still got nuthin.

 

All you kept hearing were all these investigations in NY or other places, but I doubt anything actually sticks.

Edited by justice98
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
China

China

Posted
Posted

Trump Hasn’t Been Charged, But The Prosecution Of His Company Isn’t Good News For Him

 

Former president Donald Trump wasn’t charged in the indictments unsealed Thursday accusing his company and a longtime executive of financial crimes, but it doesn’t mean he’s off the hook.

 

The Trump Organization and its chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg were jointly charged with carrying out a tax fraud scheme dating back to March 2005, according to an indictment unsealed on Thursday afternoon. Weisselberg, who has worked for the Trump family since the 1970s, was also charged individually with grand larceny and with falsifying tax records related to $1.76 million in “indirect” compensation he allegedly received from the Trump organization which wasn’t properly reported and wasn’t taxed.

 

The indictment makes few references to Trump himself. Aside from acknowledging that he owns the Trump Organization, the former president is only mentioned in relation to payments made to cover private school tuition for Weisselberg’s family members, which were originally made via personal checks signed by Trump and later drawn from a trust in Trump’s name. In 2016, Weisselberg allegedly directed a staff member to remove references to himself from the tuition entries in Trump’s general ledger, for which he is charged with falsifying business records.

 

Trump’s personal legal exposure remains open-ended. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office made clear on Thursday that the investigation into Trump’s business dealings remains “active” and “ongoing.”; New York State Attorney General Letitia James, whose office is investigating the Trump Organization as well, put out a statement saying that the “investigation will continue, and we will follow the facts and the law wherever they may lead.” Trump’s own lawyer Ronald Fischetti told reporters that when prosecutors informed him that his client wouldn’t be charged in these first indictments, they also said the probe wasn’t over.

 

One big unknown is how much to read into the fact that the Trump Organization — a company that Trump has run for decades, with the exception of the last four years when he was president — was charged, but not Trump himself. It could mean prosecutors don’t have the evidence as of now to personally tie him to the criminal activity they alleged against Weisselberg and the company. It could also mean that they do have evidence against Trump, but are sitting on it as they explore other potential charges.

 

The indictment doesn't touch on other issues that the district attorney’s office and the New York state attorney general’s office have publicly acknowledged they were investigating, including whether Trump and his company had improperly inflated the value of assets, including various properties, to get loans and tax benefits.

 

The prosecution places a large dark cloud over his business interests, regardless of whether Trump personally is ever charged. Even if Weisselberg stands by his boss and refuses to take a deal and cooperate, a trial would likely reveal even more internal information about the Trump Organization’s finances and how it operates; Trump has fought in court for years to shield his personal financial records as well as documents related to his company and his family from Democrats in Congress probing his affairs.

 

Click on the link for more

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...