Having looked through everything (and yeesh there’s a lot) I was surprised there was no mention of Pam Bondi.
She was the Florida Attorney General who received $25,000 from the Trump Foundation for her re-election campaign, who then for totally unrelated reasons in no way connected to that donation dropped the case against Trump University.
It might be they don’t want to open that particular can of worms yet, or it might be this somehow wasn’t as bad as it looked first glance because it has been at least a year since I first read about it.
The penalty for the $25,000 not-a-bribe was meted out in 2016 by the IRS, in the form of a $2,500 fine. I’m not missing any zeroes.
Christ.
That's a lower rate than the lowest possible tax rate on wages.
Is there jail time associated with the crimes charged here? I assume that the President could skate out of it but he has no way to protect Ivanka and Eric who are also named.
Could the NYAG get Trump to resign and go to jail in exchange for letting Ivanka off the hook? Would Trump go for it?
This is purely civil. May have evidence of tax fraud, which is criminal in theory but like everything else isn't really for the rich.
If he funneled money to himself through the charity, would the NY AG then start looking at his personal finances and then be able to bring charges against things they find? Or will this be limited to improprieties of the charity?
Just to be clear, this is civil right? Because it certainly seems like it should be a criminal case
yes, it's civil. the office bringing the charges forward is only authorized to lodge civil complaints. they've referred the evidence to the relevant offices (particularly the FEC and IRS) to investigate them as criminal offenses, but it's up to those departments to conduct their own investigations.
+2
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
No matter how ironclad this case ends up being, I am skeptical that it will have any material effect on Trump. The fines will be minimal, we'll be in full constitutional crisis as he continues to think the president is above the law.
That being said, I still think this will be important. In any of his other ongoing scandals, Trump has always distanced himself from the blast zone by saying he had nothing to do with the decision. In many of these we know this is false as he's provided contradictory statements, but that we have written receipts for this undermines that narrative a lot. One of the reasons this will be important, I predict, is this case will uncover enough evidence that any financial decision connected to Trump is something he personally oversaw, no matter how large or small.
Not only will that renew calls for closer scrutiny of his finances, the evidence will likely connect some of the dots in other ongoing investigations. Depending on the timeline of this case, this might be the fuel that gets his tax returns released to the public.
if they're found guilty of everything, what's the worst that could happen to the accused in this case?
The democrats get the equivelant of a neutron bomb in 2020.
Because seriously, this is up there with video of you smoking crack and cross dressing in terms of things that will fuck up your political career.
Ehhh.
Trump will say he was smart for using charity laws to save money. The system is broken, he’s the only one who can fix it, MAGA 2 Electric Boogaloo, etc.
The only people this matters to are political junkies. Don’t count on Trump committing crimes to affect public opinion. The only thing this story will affect is whether the Trump family can run charities and whether they owe a fine.
+24
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
if they're found guilty of everything, what's the worst that could happen to the accused in this case?
The democrats get the equivelant of a neutron bomb in 2020.
Because seriously, this is up there with video of you smoking crack and cross dressing in terms of things that will fuck up your political career.
Nope.
The GOP has repeatedly shown they don't care when an (R) commits a crime, both the people at GOP HQ and the voters.
So far we've gotten justifications for sexual assault, physical assault, fraud, pedophilia, and naziism.
I highly doubt this will do anything. He could get caught on video saying "I DON'T CARE ABOUT AMERICAN JOBS, REALLY, THIS COUNTRY IS STUPID" and his followers would be like "YEAH, WHAT DO WE GET OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE WORKING, REALLY?"
Listen, the republican base is a lost cause, but there are enough independants who are going to be appalled at this cartoonish corruption that it can hurt trump badly. Because holy shit; you set up a fake charity to act as a piggy bank this is something that should be the plot of a shitty made for tv movie.
Like this is super free as an attack add and whoever is the nominee in 2020 would be an idiot to not use this to clobber trump like a newfie clubs a baby seal.
Listen, the republican base is a lost cause, but there are enough independants who are going to be appalled at this cartoonish corruption that it can hurt trump badly. Because holy shit; you set up a fake charity to act as a piggy bank this is something that should be the plot of a shitty made for tv movie.
Like this is super free as an attack add and whoever is the nominee in 2020 would be an idiot to not use this to clobber trump like a newfie clubs a baby seal.
Independent voters are a myth. This has been studied - people who call themselves "independent" are actually partisans who are embarrassed to openly acknowledge their affiliation.
Nevermind Trump in 2020, use it to clobber R's this year in November. Bang that drum, pound that gong, spread the word far and wide to not only convince moderates but rally the liberals to show up en masse.
Hey guys just a reminder this is a thread to talk about the NYAG Foundation case, not a general thread to talk about future elections or how some voters are stupid.
Hey guys just a reminder this is a thread to talk about the NYAG Foundation case, not a general thread to talk about future elections or how some voters are stupid.
I frankly don't envy you for what you're going to have to deal with starting around this winter
if they're found guilty of everything, what's the worst that could happen to the accused in this case?
The democrats get the equivelant of a neutron bomb in 2020.
Because seriously, this is up there with video of you smoking crack and cross dressing in terms of things that will fuck up your political career.
Ehhh.
Trump will say he was smart for using charity laws to save money. The system is broken, he’s the only one who can fix it, MAGA 2 Electric Boogaloo, etc.
The only people this matters to are political junkies. Don’t count on Trump committing crimes to affect public opinion. The only thing this story will affect is whether the Trump family can run charities and whether they owe a fine.
This is overstated. Trump's corruption is a hugely vulnerable angle for attacks on him, as is his general unfitness for the job. Trump getting actually convicted in court of something would be a huge political scandal all on it's own for the novelty if nothing else and also really help cement the idea that he's a shady guy in the public consciousness.
It's not gonna cause Republican voters to like, stop being terrible people on every level but it'll help at the margins.
if they're found guilty of everything, what's the worst that could happen to the accused in this case?
The democrats get the equivelant of a neutron bomb in 2020.
Because seriously, this is up there with video of you smoking crack and cross dressing in terms of things that will fuck up your political career.
Ehhh.
Trump will say he was smart for using charity laws to save money. The system is broken, he’s the only one who can fix it, MAGA 2 Electric Boogaloo, etc.
The only people this matters to are political junkies. Don’t count on Trump committing crimes to affect public opinion. The only thing this story will affect is whether the Trump family can run charities and whether they owe a fine.
This is overstated. Trump's corruption is a hugely vulnerable angle for attacks on him, as is his general unfitness for the job. Trump getting actually convicted in court of something would be a huge political scandal all on it's own for the novelty if nothing else and also really help cement the idea that he's a shady guy in the public consciousness.
It's not gonna cause Republican voters to like, stop being terrible people on every level but it'll help at the margins.
Fahrenholdt has Trump signing tax returns for his foundation that were false four separate times. Those are each felonies.
I really want something to come from this. Because this shit is egregious, blatant and repeated.
But as the story mentions, it's a big IF that this gets prosecuted, regardless of the message it sends.
Can a lawyer in the house explain what the statute of limitations are, and when the clock on that would start? At the very least, I'd want this to be filed Jan 21st, 2021(or 2025, but that thought risks a nosebleed).
Fahrenholdt has Trump signing tax returns for his foundation that were false four separate times. Those are each felonies.
I really want something to come from this. Because this shit is egregious, blatant and repeated.
But as the story mentions, it's a big IF that this gets prosecuted, regardless of the message it sends.
Can a lawyer in the house explain what the statute of limitations are, and when the clock on that would start? At the very least, I'd want this to be filed Jan 21st, 2021(or 2025, but that thought risks a nosebleed).
I think a lawyer could make a solid argument that if Trump can't be prosecuted while President, the statute of limitations can't expire either.
Fahrenholdt has Trump signing tax returns for his foundation that were false four separate times. Those are each felonies.
I really want something to come from this. Because this shit is egregious, blatant and repeated.
But as the story mentions, it's a big IF that this gets prosecuted, regardless of the message it sends.
Can a lawyer in the house explain what the statute of limitations are, and when the clock on that would start? At the very least, I'd want this to be filed Jan 21st, 2021(or 2025, but that thought risks a nosebleed).
I think a lawyer could make a solid argument that if Trump can't be prosecuted while President, the statute of limitations can't expire either.
We can hope.
But this shit needs to be codified into law with the next administration. I can accept that noone thought someone this corrupt could be elected, or the Legislature would be so feckless to allow it to go unchecked. But the next time this happens (and I thing that's a dead set certainty in the next half century if not earlier), it will be the fault of the lawmakers.
Fahrenholdt has Trump signing tax returns for his foundation that were false four separate times. Those are each felonies.
I really want something to come from this. Because this shit is egregious, blatant and repeated.
But as the story mentions, it's a big IF that this gets prosecuted, regardless of the message it sends.
Can a lawyer in the house explain what the statute of limitations are, and when the clock on that would start? At the very least, I'd want this to be filed Jan 21st, 2021(or 2025, but that thought risks a nosebleed).
I think a lawyer could make a solid argument that if Trump can't be prosecuted while President, the statute of limitations can't expire either.
One of the DOJ theories that came up, when Rudy was talking that shit, was that he could be indicted to stop the clock, but not prosecuted until he left.
Or perhaps prosecutors could just secretly request an extension until he's out. I definitely did not know that was a thing.
Donald Trump getting the cuffs slapped on him after the transition (or during it, let's face it, there's not going to be anything to transition) would be a scene to toast too (also a guaranteed Pulitzer for whoever got it on film).
The NY attorney general’s lawsuit labeling the Trump Foundation a “shell corporation” heads to a hearing this morning, and the free press will not be bullied or intimidated out of reporting every detail.
Stay tuned for the live feed.
Adam Klasfield is a reporter for Courthouse News.
WaPo reporter David Fahrenthold will also be covering the hearing as well.
The NY attorney general’s lawsuit labeling the Trump Foundation a “shell corporation” heads to a hearing this morning, and the free press will not be bullied or intimidated out of reporting every detail.
Stay tuned for the live feed.
Adam Klasfield is a reporter for Courthouse News.
WaPo reporter David Fahrenthold will also be covering the hearing as well.
Futerfas [Trump lawyer] back up to respond: "This is what's troubling about the case. You've got the AG's office making claims about people engaging in waste, real waste."
He [Trump lawyer] says that's not what's happening here.
"My point is, I think it colors the picture here, and it's not a pretty picture," he says.
Scarpulla [Judge] stops his political bias soliloquy in its tracks.
"The color is whatever you put on it or the AG puts on it but it's not something that's really of interest to me," she [Judge] says.
Yeah, the Judge seems to be pretty awesome. Far better than the one in the Manafort trial, and not just because I like the way she seems to be heading, but because she sounds like an engaged adult, rather than a petulant child.
Futerfas [Trump lawyer] back up to respond: "This is what's troubling about the case. You've got the AG's office making claims about people engaging in waste, real waste."
He [Trump lawyer] says that's not what's happening here.
"My point is, I think it colors the picture here, and it's not a pretty picture," he says.
Scarpulla [Judge] stops his political bias soliloquy in its tracks.
"The color is whatever you put on it or the AG puts on it but it's not something that's really of interest to me," she [Judge] says.
Yeah, the Judge seems to be pretty awesome. Far better than the one in the Manafort trial, and not just because I like the way she seems to be heading, but because she sounds like an engaged adult, rather than a petulant child.
Just wait until the petulant child-in-chief finds out about this. I cannot forsee a possibility that doesn't have him tweeting, bitching at a rally and/or losing his cool at a questioning reporter.
I mean, I think that's a forgone conclusion. The only question will be IF he tries to interfere, and if so, whether that'll be an attempt at overt or covert (and leaked within a couple of days) interference.
I'm confused.
The Foundation lawyer is claiming that money actually went to various charities.
Wasn't it a thing during the Campaign that no one could seem to find evidence of actual charitable donations? Even the Veterans one that comes up in that hearing was an "after the fact" thing, where some amount was donated only after they were called out on it.
Futerfas [Trump lawyer] back up to respond: "This is what's troubling about the case. You've got the AG's office making claims about people engaging in waste, real waste."
He [Trump lawyer] says that's not what's happening here.
"My point is, I think it colors the picture here, and it's not a pretty picture," he says.
Scarpulla [Judge] stops his political bias soliloquy in its tracks.
"The color is whatever you put on it or the AG puts on it but it's not something that's really of interest to me," she [Judge] says.
Yeah, the Judge seems to be pretty awesome. Far better than the one in the Manafort trial, and not just because I like the way she seems to be heading, but because she sounds like an engaged adult, rather than a petulant child.
Just wait until the petulant child-in-chief finds out about this. I cannot forsee a possibility that doesn't have him tweeting, bitching at a rally and/or losing his cool at a questioning reporter.
I mean, I think that's a forgone conclusion. The only question will be IF he tries to interfere, and if so, whether that'll be an attempt at overt or covert (and leaked within a couple of days) interference.
I mean, the judge is a female. Trump is gonna go ballistic. He can't stand women or non-whites daring to come at him, even obliquely.
Posts
Christ.
That's a lower rate than the lowest possible tax rate on wages.
Tell that to Capone.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
yes, it's civil. the office bringing the charges forward is only authorized to lodge civil complaints. they've referred the evidence to the relevant offices (particularly the FEC and IRS) to investigate them as criminal offenses, but it's up to those departments to conduct their own investigations.
That being said, I still think this will be important. In any of his other ongoing scandals, Trump has always distanced himself from the blast zone by saying he had nothing to do with the decision. In many of these we know this is false as he's provided contradictory statements, but that we have written receipts for this undermines that narrative a lot. One of the reasons this will be important, I predict, is this case will uncover enough evidence that any financial decision connected to Trump is something he personally oversaw, no matter how large or small.
Not only will that renew calls for closer scrutiny of his finances, the evidence will likely connect some of the dots in other ongoing investigations. Depending on the timeline of this case, this might be the fuel that gets his tax returns released to the public.
The democrats get the equivelant of a neutron bomb in 2020.
Because seriously, this is up there with video of you smoking crack and cross dressing in terms of things that will fuck up your political career.
Ehhh.
Trump will say he was smart for using charity laws to save money. The system is broken, he’s the only one who can fix it, MAGA 2 Electric Boogaloo, etc.
The only people this matters to are political junkies. Don’t count on Trump committing crimes to affect public opinion. The only thing this story will affect is whether the Trump family can run charities and whether they owe a fine.
Nope.
The GOP has repeatedly shown they don't care when an (R) commits a crime, both the people at GOP HQ and the voters.
So far we've gotten justifications for sexual assault, physical assault, fraud, pedophilia, and naziism.
I highly doubt this will do anything. He could get caught on video saying "I DON'T CARE ABOUT AMERICAN JOBS, REALLY, THIS COUNTRY IS STUPID" and his followers would be like "YEAH, WHAT DO WE GET OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE WORKING, REALLY?"
Like this is super free as an attack add and whoever is the nominee in 2020 would be an idiot to not use this to clobber trump like a newfie clubs a baby seal.
Independent voters are a myth. This has been studied - people who call themselves "independent" are actually partisans who are embarrassed to openly acknowledge their affiliation.
I still can't believe he didn't get airlocked out of the party.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
I frankly don't envy you for what you're going to have to deal with starting around this winter
This is overstated. Trump's corruption is a hugely vulnerable angle for attacks on him, as is his general unfitness for the job. Trump getting actually convicted in court of something would be a huge political scandal all on it's own for the novelty if nothing else and also really help cement the idea that he's a shady guy in the public consciousness.
It's not gonna cause Republican voters to like, stop being terrible people on every level but it'll help at the margins.
End of tangent on future voters.
I bet if he could get a look at Trump’s regular taxes he’d be pulling felonies out like a magician pulling scarves out of a sleeve.
But as the story mentions, it's a big IF that this gets prosecuted, regardless of the message it sends.
Can a lawyer in the house explain what the statute of limitations are, and when the clock on that would start? At the very least, I'd want this to be filed Jan 21st, 2021(or 2025, but that thought risks a nosebleed).
Brown plebes
I think a lawyer could make a solid argument that if Trump can't be prosecuted while President, the statute of limitations can't expire either.
But this shit needs to be codified into law with the next administration. I can accept that noone thought someone this corrupt could be elected, or the Legislature would be so feckless to allow it to go unchecked. But the next time this happens (and I thing that's a dead set certainty in the next half century if not earlier), it will be the fault of the lawmakers.
One of the DOJ theories that came up, when Rudy was talking that shit, was that he could be indicted to stop the clock, but not prosecuted until he left.
Or perhaps prosecutors could just secretly request an extension until he's out. I definitely did not know that was a thing.
Donald Trump getting the cuffs slapped on him after the transition (or during it, let's face it, there's not going to be anything to transition) would be a scene to toast too (also a guaranteed Pulitzer for whoever got it on film).
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Oh you.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Well I guess someone has to take his children away now
Adam Klasfield is a reporter for Courthouse News.
WaPo reporter David Fahrenthold will also be covering the hearing as well.
Edit: Here's an unrolled version of Klasfield's thread.
I *like* the NY lawyer, and this thread.
Yeah, the Judge seems to be pretty awesome. Far better than the one in the Manafort trial, and not just because I like the way she seems to be heading, but because she sounds like an engaged adult, rather than a petulant child.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
Just wait until the petulant child-in-chief finds out about this. I cannot forsee a possibility that doesn't have him tweeting, bitching at a rally and/or losing his cool at a questioning reporter.
I mean, I think that's a forgone conclusion. The only question will be IF he tries to interfere, and if so, whether that'll be an attempt at overt or covert (and leaked within a couple of days) interference.
The Foundation lawyer is claiming that money actually went to various charities.
Wasn't it a thing during the Campaign that no one could seem to find evidence of actual charitable donations? Even the Veterans one that comes up in that hearing was an "after the fact" thing, where some amount was donated only after they were called out on it.
Or am I mis-remembering things?
I mean, the judge is a female. Trump is gonna go ballistic. He can't stand women or non-whites daring to come at him, even obliquely.
How is that not illegal?