Trump Organization found guilty on all counts of criminal tax fraud

M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
Hot off the press.

>>>A Manhattan jury has found two Trump Organization companies guilty on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records connected to a 15-year scheme to defraud tax authorities by failing to report and pay taxes on compensation for top executives.

The Trump Corp. and Trump Payroll Corp. were found guilty on all charges they faced.

Donald Trump and his family were not charged in this case, but the former president was mentioned repeatedly during the trial by prosecutors about his connection to the benefits doled out to certain executives, including company-funded apartments, car leases and personal expenses.

The Trump Organization could face a maximum of $1.61 million in fines when sentenced in mid-January. The company is not at risk of being dismantled because there is no mechanism under New York law that would dissolve the company. However, a felony conviction could impact its ability to do business or obtain loans or contracts.<<<


 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
So, they pay that fine and all is well?
Hoping that those banks who lent them money will call the loans due right now.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
This should at least help out on the civil lawsuit to put a bigger dent in the drumph purse.....right?
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
This should at least help out on the civil lawsuit to put a bigger dent in the drumph purse.....right?
Possibly, but the potential $1.6 million in damages in the criminal tax case is small potatoes compared to the $250 million in damages the AG listed in the civil fraud case.

The civil fraud case is far from a slam dunk, however:

>>>Her case against Mr. Trump also could be difficult to prove. Property valuations are often subjective, and the financial statements include a disclaimer stating that they have not been audited. If there were a trial, his lawyers would most likely emphasize that Deutsche Bank and Mr. Trump’s other lenders were hardly victims; all his loans are either current or were paid off, some before they were due.<<<

 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
On a somewhat related topic, about a month ago Trump filed a lawsuit in a Florida state court asking the judge to block the NY civil fraud case. The case was then transferred to a federal court in Florida based on diversity jurisdiction, and it landed in front of a federal judge (Donald Middlebrooks) who had just sanctioned Trump's lawyers in a different case.


Alina Habba was one of the lawyers sanctioned in the prior Florida lawsuit :

>>>“I reserve jurisdiction to adjudicate issues pertaining to sanctions,” he [judge Donald Middlebrooks] concluded, ominously. And indeed, the dozens of defendants named in this turkey of a lawsuit have taken him to heart. . . . Here, Trump’s lawyers Alina Habba and Peter Ticktin filed a patently ridiculous complaint alleging that the Clinton campaign conspired with the FBI to gin up a fake investigation against his campaign’s contacts with Russians seeking to interfere in the 2016 election.<<< (emphasis added)


Habba is also representing Trump in the NY civil fraud case. She just got her *ss handed to her by the judge in that case:

>>>"I ruled on all these issues. It seems to me the facts are the same. The law is the same. Parties are the same," Engoron told Alina Habba, Trump's lawyer. "You can't keep making the same argument after you've already lost."<<< (emphasis added)

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-rebuffed-by-judge-new-york-fraud-lawsuit-trial-date-set-2022-11-22/

(sarcasm alert) one might notice a pattern developing.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
If this much fraud took place in those Trump corporations taxes over the past 15 years, I wonder what else will be found in his personal tax returns.

Now we're beginning to see why Trump was so desperate to hide his tax returns. While he was president, he was actively defrauding the federal government, as well as the New York state government.
 
Eppie

Eppie

Audioholic Samurai
Don't get your hopes up. This is going to appeals court next and the argument may be a sound one based on some old legislation.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Ninja
I sent wish list off to Santa, in it I'm hoping for Trump in a orange jump suit, I know, I'm asking for a lot !
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
Don't get your hopes up. This is going to appeals court next and the argument may be a sound one based on some old legislation.
What argument and old legislation are you referring to? I'm assuming you have something specific in mind?

I'm not saying you're "wrong" but I don't know off hand what you're referring to.
 
Eppie

Eppie

Audioholic Samurai
What argument and old legislation are you referring to? I'm assuming you have something specific in mind?

I'm not saying you're "wrong" but I don't know off hand what you're referring to.
I caught a brief interview on TV with the Trump Corp'n attorney. He said that they would naturally appeal and referred to a piece of legislation as an example of what they would base the appeal on. Unfortunately I don't have a transcript as this was just a news bite on a Detroit TV channel. Not enough detail to know which specific piece of legislation that he was referring to.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I caught a brief interview on TV with the Trump Corp'n attorney. He said that they would naturally appeal and referred to a piece of legislation as an example of what they would base the appeal on. Unfortunately I don't have a transcript as this was just a news bite on a Detroit TV channel. Not enough detail to know which specific piece of legislation that he was referring to.
Hopefully it's the same general legal quality that has pervaded things drumph for a while now....
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
I caught a brief interview on TV with the Trump Corp'n attorney. He said that they would naturally appeal and referred to a piece of legislation as an example of what they would base the appeal on. Unfortunately I don't have a transcript as this was just a news bite on a Detroit TV channel. Not enough detail to know which specific piece of legislation that he was referring to.
I've seen a few reports that Trump's lawyers are planning to appeal the meaning of "in behalf of."

>>>The Trump Organization’s appeal of its tax fraud conviction will partly focus on whether the actions of the chief financial officer were made “in behalf of” the company, according to one of the defense lawyers.

Speaking to reporters after the conviction, lawyer Alan Futerfas for the Trump Payroll Corp. said the meaning of “in behalf of” is a “novel and really interesting issue” that will surely be among the arguments on appeal, CNN reports. . . .

To prove their case under New York state law, prosecutors had to show that CFO Allen Weisselberg was a “high managerial agent” who acted within the scope of his employment and “in behalf of” the company, according to CNN.<<<


Basically, Trumps lawyers would need to convince an appeals court that the trial judge made an error in the jury instructions. My initial impression is that this is not a trivial issue. Having said that, it's typically difficult to win these types of arguments.

Futerfas has apparently represented numerous mafia types including mafia hitman Gregory "Grim Reaper" Scarpe.

>>>Futerfas has represented clients in a number of high-profile organized crime cases, including New York Mafia clients connected to the Colombo, Gambino, and Genovese families. He represented Mafia hitman Gregory Scarpa.<<<


When it comes to mob lawyers, a good rule of thumb is to take everything they say with a few grains of salt.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I've seen a few reports that Trump's lawyers are planning to appeal the meaning of "in behalf of."

>>>The Trump Organization’s appeal of its tax fraud conviction will partly focus on whether the actions of the chief financial officer were made “in behalf of” the company, according to one of the defense lawyers.

Speaking to reporters after the conviction, lawyer Alan Futerfas for the Trump Payroll Corp. said the meaning of “in behalf of” is a “novel and really interesting issue” that will surely be among the arguments on appeal, CNN reports. . . .

To prove their case under New York state law, prosecutors had to show that CFO Allen Weisselberg was a “high managerial agent” who acted within the scope of his employment and “in behalf of” the company, according to CNN.<<<


Basically, Trumps lawyers would need to convince an appeals court that the trial judge made an error in the jury instructions. My initial impression is that this is not a trivial issue. Having said that, it's typically difficult to win these types of arguments.

Futerfas has apparently represented numerous mafia types including mafia hitman Gregory "Grim Reaper" Scarpe.

>>>Futerfas has represented clients in a number of high-profile organized crime cases, including New York Mafia clients connected to the Colombo, Gambino, and Genovese families. He represented Mafia hitman Gregory Scarpa.<<<


When it comes to mob lawyers, a good rule of thumb is to take everything they say with a few grains of salt.
Was Futerfas one of Cohn's recommendations?
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
I can't see Trump going to jail for one second. It seems like most of this is politically motivated. It should NOT be because Trump is a fraud and should have been locked up decades ago. But, when he stepped into politics he ruffled more than a few feathers. I expect the end goal is to charge and convict Trump of a felony so that he can't run for reelection. Except, that likely won't hold up in court.

I think that Democrats are chasing their tails on this one. The people that vote for Trump already know he's a crook, or are convinced that he isn't a crook despite all evidence. Maybe some votes would be swayed by a felony conviction. Even if they put him in jail for a year. But, most would not. They have no issue with him having sex with a porn star while his wife is at home pregnant. That's all perfectly Christian to a certain group.

Unreal.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Ninja
I can't see Trump going to jail for one second. It seems like most of this is politically motivated. It should NOT be because Trump is a fraud and should have been locked up decades ago. But, when he stepped into politics he ruffled more than a few feathers. I expect the end goal is to charge and convict Trump of a felony so that he can't run for reelection. Except, that likely won't hold up in court.
This thread is about two Trump companies found guilty on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud by a jury, as separate from two other DOJ criminal investigation now headed by the newly appointed special counsel Jack Smith. In these two cases (there are others state wise) Trump could face prison time of indicted and convicted.

Do you think all the investigations of Trump are just politically motivated?

I think that Democrats are chasing their tails on this one. The people that vote for Trump already know he's a crook, or are convinced that he isn't a crook despite all evidence. Maybe some votes would be swayed by a felony conviction. Even if they put him in jail for a year. But, most would not. They have no issue with him having sex with a porn star while his wife is at home pregnant. That's all perfectly Christian to a certain group.

Unreal.
So you say that "Law & Order Republican" is an oxymoron?
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
I can't see Trump going to jail for one second. It seems like most of this is politically motivated. It should NOT be because Trump is a fraud and should have been locked up decades ago. But, when he stepped into politics he ruffled more than a few feathers. I expect the end goal is to charge and convict Trump of a felony so that he can't run for reelection. Except, that likely won't hold up in court.
Trump was not indicted for anything in this case.
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
Do you think all the investigations of Trump are just politically motivated?
I think that Trump was considered a piece of mischief before he entered the political arena. His money let him get away with things that you or I could not. He might get scrutiny. He might have lawsuits against his businesses, but at the end of the day, he could pay some fines (super pricey) but would get away without jail time.

After entering the political arena, the scope of investigations completely changed. I don't think HE was prepared for how drastic those changes are. His ability to 'get away with it' really has gone sideways.

IMO, these are mostly politically motivated. I don't think they are WRONG though. They are more like... way overdue. This is the level that every single .001% millionaire and billionaire should be scrutinized with in this nation. Not because they are all doing something illegal, but because they really should be held to the same laws that the rest of us can't buy our way out of.

Lawsuits hit him and his companies before. They will continue. This isn't new. The politicians being so much more involved is what is new and when politicians are involved, things get ramped up.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Ninja
I think that Trump was considered a piece of mischief before he entered the political arena. His money let him get away with things that you or I could not. He might get scrutiny. He might have lawsuits against his businesses, but at the end of the day, he could pay some fines (super pricey) but would get away without jail time.

After entering the political arena, the scope of investigations completely changed. I don't think HE was prepared for how drastic those changes are. His ability to 'get away with it' really has gone sideways.

IMO, these are mostly politically motivated. I don't think they are WRONG though. They are more like... way overdue. This is the level that every single .001% millionaire and billionaire should be scrutinized with in this nation. Not because they are all doing something illegal, but because they really should be held to the same laws that the rest of us can't buy our way out of.

Lawsuits hit him and his companies before. They will continue. This isn't new. The politicians being so much more involved is what is new and when politicians are involved, things get ramped up.
Criminal investigations are not just like any another lawsuit, but the are other members on this forum by far very much more qualified than me to explain the differences. The two investigations now lead by special counsel Smith are very serious where one of them is a failed self-coup, and claiming they are "mostly politically motivated" is very far off the mark in my opinion.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
On a somewhat related topic, about a month ago Trump filed a lawsuit in a Florida state court asking the judge to block the NY civil fraud case. The case was then transferred to a federal court in Florida based on diversity jurisdiction, and it landed in front of a federal judge (Donald Middlebrooks) who had just sanctioned Trump's lawyers in a different case. . . . (sarcasm alert) one might notice a pattern developing.
Today's episode of "Trump's lawyers get their *sses handed to them in court" is brought to you courtesy of judge Middlebrooks:

>>>A federal judge has turned down an effort by former President Donald Trump to block aspects of New York Attorney General Tish James' drive to place the Trump business empire under court supervision due to what she claims is persistent fraud.

U.S. District Court Donald Middlebrooks coupled his ruling Wednesday with a stern warning to Trump and his lawyers that their legal tactics could result in sanctions from the court.

"This litigation has all the telltale signs of being both vexatious and frivolous," Middlebrooks wrote in a footnote to his eight-page order turning down Trump's attempt to get emergency relief to stop James from gaining access to details about a trust that controls some Trump businesses.<<<

 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top