Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Report: Manhattan D.A. May Soon File Criminal Charges Against Trump Organization

Report: Manhattan D.A. May Soon File Criminal Charges Against Trump Organization

The war on all things Trump by prosecutors.

The New York Times reports the Manhattan district attorney’s office told former President Donald Trump’s lawyer it might file criminal charges against the Trump Organization as early as next week.

The charges stem from supposed benefits the company gave a top executive:

The prosecutors had been building a case for months against the executive, Allen H. Weisselberg, as part of an effort to pressure him to cooperate with a broader inquiry into Mr. Trump’s business dealings. But it was not previously known that the Trump Organization also might face charges.

If the case moves ahead, the district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., could announce charges as soon as next week, the people said. Mr. Vance’s prosecutors have been conducting the investigation along with lawyers from the office of the New York State attorney general, Letitia James.

Any indictment would be the first to emerge from the long-running investigation and would raise the startling prospect of a former president having to defend the company he founded, and has run for decades, against accusations of criminal behavior.

The investigation began three years ago. I find it odd the district attorney started it when Trump served as president. I mean, Trump did not pop out of nowhere in 2016. He has been a staple in Hollywood, culture, and politics for as long as I can remember.

Anyway, investigators have concentrated on “whether the Trump Organization manipulated the value of its properties to obtain favorable loans and tax benefits, people with knowledge of the matter have said.”

The office also wants to know what the company told insurance companies about different assets and if any of the employees had a role in paying off women during Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

I found this interesting, which makes me believe even more this is just a show and witch hunt:

“In my more than 50 years of practice, never before have I seen a district attorney’s office target a company over employee compensation or fringe benefits,” said Ronald P. Fischetti, a personal lawyer for Mr. Trump. “It’s ridiculous and outrageous.”

Several lawyers who specialize in tax rules have told The New York Times that it would be highly unusual to indict a company just for failing to pay taxes on fringe benefits. None of them could cite any recent example, noting that many companies provide their employees with benefits like company cars.

We do not know yet if the office will file any charges against Trump. They may want to target Weisselberg to get to Trump since he is a direct link:

Mr. Weisselberg’s intimate knowledge of the Trump Organization — he has worked at the company for decades and was one of the top executives when Mr. Trump was in the White House — would make his cooperation an enormous asset to investigators looking at all aspects of the company. Because of that, he has been a central focus of scrutiny in the district attorney’s investigation, with particular attention paid to the benefits that he and his family received.

In general, those types of benefits are taxable, although there are some exceptions, and the rules can be murky.

Mr. Trump depends heavily on Mr. Weisselberg, who has continued to work at the Trump Organization while under investigation. In his book “Think Like a Billionaire,” Mr. Trump credited Mr. Weisselberg for doing “whatever was necessary to protect the bottom line.”

An indictment alone could end the Trump Organization.

The indictment would give the Trump Organization a scarlet letter, scaring off banks and potential business partners. It could cause current business partners to flee.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

They make this sound like it would be the death of the Trump organization,, but I doubt it’s more than wishful thinking on their part. People who have made a lot of money over many years with Mr. Trump aren’t going to suddenly head for the hills because the local DA filed an indictment.

    mark311 in reply to vinnymeyer. | June 26, 2021 at 4:01 pm

    It’s more to do with the bank loans that company has, banks aren’t allowed to lend to indicted companies is my understanding. Given the high level of debt alongside what would be an immediate recall on all debt could be a serious issue for the company.

      n.n in reply to mark311. | June 26, 2021 at 4:52 pm

      So, the criminal charges are a means to carry out blackmail, hoping that they may discover a baby that can be aborted, cannibalized, or sequestered for sociopolitical progress per chance redistributive and retributive change. 16 trimesters and still in progress. Nice (no diversitist prejudice intended).

      randian in reply to mark311. | June 27, 2021 at 12:15 am

      Generally, secured loans like mortgages and bonds can’t be called because the payor is under indictment. Only if the payor stops paying can they be called. I think this threat is overstated.

Daniel Goldman is a poor choice for opinion on the effect of an indictment.

Brave Sir Robbin | June 26, 2021 at 3:00 pm

Sure, all those pillars of strength in the New York business community and the Republican party will stand up for Trump.

Now back to my unicorn sandwich on rye.

    Why would they? Trump screwed over just about anyone he came across. He was notorious for that, alongside the Trump university fraud and the Trump foundation fraud I suspect most consider it good riddance if Trumps business fell over.

      Of course, you are not motivated to say this by any animus, as if this prosecution is strictly business, and not selective.

        Doesn’t change the facts, an indictment would require evidence. It’s not a trivial thing to happen and given Trump organisations fraudulent history totally in charachter

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 28, 2021 at 2:50 am

          an indictment would require evidence.

          Really? In front of a Manhattan grand jury?! You seriously think that would require even one shred of evidence?! And you expect to be taken seriously?!

          Tell me, does the term “ham sandwich” mean anything to you?

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 28, 2021 at 4:26 am

          Yeah an out of date quote from what the 80’s from a man who would himself end up in prison doesn’t tell me very much. As far as I can tell it’s really a way of being dismissive without addressing the merits of the case. That we can’t do until the evidence becomes public so I’ll reserve judgement on the merits. The basic fact remains that it’s not exactly out of charachter for Trump org to act like a fraudster.

        It’s not out of character for the SDNY to be acting like a banana republic either.

      The process is the punishment. Prosecutors who do this should be fired, disbarred, and if feasible prosecuted in turn.

        mark311 in reply to McGehee. | June 27, 2021 at 2:21 am

        For investigating and prosecuting a crime. Yeah that makes sense /s

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 28, 2021 at 2:58 am

          For maliciously prosecuting a non-crime. Unfortunately it can’t be done. They’ve got very broad immunity. And only the governor can fire them.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 28, 2021 at 4:27 am

          Oh right so you are picking which crimes count now. That’s great.

          Dimsdale in reply to mark311. | June 28, 2021 at 9:50 am

          The SDNY is picking out which “crimes” they think count, and doing so politically rather than judiciously. Seriously, if fair, they would have to prosecute/indict every other business in NYC or elsewhere, but they are being “selective.”

          Nice.

      gonzotx in reply to mark311. | June 26, 2021 at 6:20 pm

      Why are you here Mark, no one, and I mean no one, is even remotely aligned with your thinking…
      You are simply an angry anti Trump brainless thing…

        mark311 in reply to gonzotx. | June 27, 2021 at 2:25 am

        Well originally it was to try and get an alternative view on political and legal subjects, but in part it’s to have robust debates about issues.

        Yeah really brainless when the majority of counter points revolve around ad hominem attacks.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Brave Sir Robbin. | June 27, 2021 at 2:15 am

    Or, on wry…

Brave Sir Robbin | June 26, 2021 at 3:08 pm

I predicted the will criminally prosecute Trump and his family. This is yet another abuse of prosecutorial power. Show me the man and I will show you the crime. And yet, Hunter Biden and the Big Guy walk around free.

At some point this blatant double standard must stop. If not, conservative DAs need to get into the game. I wonder how much wire fraud goes on at Amazon? I wonder how many laws Hunter Biden has broken in Florida or Texas? Where does George Soros have a residence? Where does he do business? And the Clinton’s, that’s a happy hunting ground for a prosecutor if I ever saw one.

Their rules. Let’s play ball!

Sound like Dems are “sore winners”.

I wonder how they would have liked it if Republican prosecutors had indicted the Clinton Foundation for their questionable dealings.

Politics are becoming a “blood sport” and the Dems seem happy to up the ante.

I predict a political war with nuclear options triggered if they try to destroy the Trump Organization.

God help America.

    mark311 in reply to Ben Kent. | June 26, 2021 at 4:06 pm

    The Clinton foundation was investigated by the DoJ under Trump’s admin. You have to have evidence to indict someone so ya know didn’t pan out as it happens.

      alaskabob in reply to mark311. | June 26, 2021 at 6:28 pm

      You really do not know the legal system that well Mark711. Remember the classic phrase that a ham sandwich can be indicted?

        mark311 in reply to alaskabob. | June 27, 2021 at 2:42 am

        And yet couldn’t indict the Clinton organisation doesn’t that support the position that the Clinton foundation isn’t criminal. If your point is that it’s a low bar for Trump’s organisation I’m not clear it is given the nature of the crimes. Fraud tends to be a complex crime requiring lots of data and analysis. Again though Trump’s been involved in other frauds too so I’m not really clear claiming it’s a low bar is an indication of it being without merit.

          Capitan Haya in reply to mark311. | June 27, 2021 at 7:53 am

          “Fraud” is a term of art. It gets thrown around rhetorically, but in a litigated setting would require “intent to deceive.” Good luck proving that a CEO who (1) didn’t review a single tax return, (2) hired an internal tax department, and (3) hired external lawyers/ CPAs to navigate the complex tax laws – had an intent to deceive.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 27, 2021 at 3:26 pm

          @capitan haya

          Im aware of that thanks, although not relevant to the charges being publicly discussed. I’d opine that the fringe benefits is an opening salvo with respect to other issues. It may we’ll be an attempt to push the CFO to turn but early days yet.

          Trump’s organisation is pretty small, it’s really only a small group. The intent part is hard sure but linking it to Trump wouldn’t be too difficult.

          Milhouse in reply to mark311. | June 28, 2021 at 3:02 am

          And yet couldn’t indict the Clinton organisation

          Not couldn’t. Wouldn’t. The relevant US Attorney could certainly have got an indictment if he wanted one. A conviction would be harder, but an indictment? Easy. The problem was a matter of not wanting to. No Trump loyalists there.

          mark311 in reply to mark311. | June 28, 2021 at 4:29 am

          @milhouse

          That might be fair I don’t know, which authority did it come under?

      Ben Kent in reply to mark311. | June 26, 2021 at 6:43 pm

      Mark, 30,000 deleted emails would have gotten you or me in hot water. Don’t pretend for a minute that she did not get special treatment.

        mark311 in reply to Ben Kent. | June 27, 2021 at 5:18 am

        Yeah in the negative sense, Comey flip flopping on announcements immediately prior to an election is hardly special treatment.

    ThePrimordialOrderedPair in reply to Ben Kent. | June 26, 2021 at 6:04 pm

    I wonder how they would have liked it if Republican prosecutors had indicted the Clinton Foundation for their questionable dealings.

    The difference is that the Clinton Foundation is a criminal organization. It is not a productive company that does business and builds things. It’s a slush fund for handling political payoffs that violates pretty much every law it comes into contact with.

By 2030, the government will be checking door cam footage to catch Trump jaywalking.

Primary indictment will be of a ham sandwich. Trump seen holding the ham sandwich will be indicted as a co-conspirator.

The Coup of 2020 continues. The Left is now too far gone ala the Milgram experiment…. it goes on to destruction… as to whom…. hold your cards close.

Going through the NY court system has to be a slam dunk even if it’s bogus charges. We are living in post Constitution era, laws are what they say it is, not what’s written. And it’s still just a TDS.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Skip. | June 26, 2021 at 4:33 pm

    This one more thing in a large racketeering operation. It was a huge mistake to not crush this over Thugvon, and then Mike Brown . . . . .> There has been plenty of warning. Such conduct only continues to become worse.

    henrybowman in reply to Skip. | June 26, 2021 at 6:06 pm

    I don’t understand your first sentence, unless I assume you mean a slam dunk for the prosecutors, not the defendant.

    Keep in mind that Letty Jones is the very same harridan who believes that the proper resolution to the problem of the NRA’s executives illegally raping the organization of the membership’s dues money isn’t to convict and replace the current crop of executives, but to destroy the organization entirely, completing the rape or the members.

“the Trump Organization manipulated the value of its properties to obtain favorable loans and tax benefits,”
For every loan I’ve taken that was secured by property, the lender had said property appraised, and like wise, when that property was taxed, the taxing authority did not take my word for it, they had the property assessed

These “investigations” are also meant to warn future non insider types from rocking the Political boat.

DJT has been a billionaire for decades and is watched like a hawk. Politicians like the Clintons,Obama and Bidens have never had a real job, and they are all multi millionaires. And no one cares.

This why the likes of McConnell are useless – and in fact, dangerous.

Only warriors need apply.

If they hate him this much, he’s still a threat.

Still nothing about any other politician’s corrupt grift.

It’s only tyrants who criminalize their opposition.

    CapeBuffalo in reply to maxmillion. | June 27, 2021 at 3:57 am

    Amen Max!! On a smaller note, keep an eye on little Nicaragüa where Daniel Ortega and wife Chamuca have arrested five candidates who are running against him . Maybe the Dems are going to file charges against Ron deSantis next for outlawing CRT.

Alinsky’s rules: Use them. Use them *hard*

In large organizations that pay salaries, bonuses, and fringe benefits, each decision goes through the legal department, who has to bless the payment before it is issued. It goes without saying that the same process took place here, and if the DA is preparing to issue charges on “failing to pay taxes on fringe benefits” for a Trump executive, I would suggest the best response is to take every employee of the DA’s office and quietly collect records on every ‘fringe benefit’ that they have received without being taxed.

Then on the day the DA releases their charges, release the PUBLIC records of the same thing each and every employee of the DA office has received.

Sauce for the goose… or in this case, the turkey.

    mark311 in reply to georgfelis. | June 27, 2021 at 5:16 am

    Go for it, holding public officials to account is fine. That doesn’t detract from the allegation for criminal from Trump organisation though does it

Last night proved he still Is a threat, Ohio rally review
https://tinyurl.com/6xdwuk2y

A mere understatement of tax does not prove fraud.

Where is the evidence of fraudulent intent?

All this misery. All this corruption. All this violence. All William Barr and Jeff Sessions’ faults.

ALL of it.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend