Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (3 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SteveSBrickNJ

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Jan 7, 2022
    Messages
    1,253
    Reaction score
    589
    Age
    62
    Location
    New Jersey
    Online
    Former President D. Trump has been indicted by a New York Grand Jury. There will be much to talk about on this topic because this is just the first step in a lengthy process.
    Possibly it is worthy of its own thread here rather than posting about Trump's indictment in already existing threads? :unsure:
    *
    This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
    *
     
    I am reading that most if not all of his assets are already leveraged. He only owns a few floors of Trump Tower in NY, for instance, and there is a mortgage on that. He can’t use real estate for collateral on the bond because it’s all encumbered in some way. I am beginning to believe he isn’t even a billionaire at all.

    I also read that his airplane is actually the cheap way out - it’s so old it’s only worth around $20M. Nobody wants a plane like that - a new smaller jet would be worth 4-5x that. (going from memory, so feel free to correct my memory on this).

    He isn't. He never was a true billionaire. He purported himself as one to further his "brand" and leverage off that.

    And yes real estate is never used as bond collateral, but I've never written a 100mm bond, so there may be some carrier willing...after all, if they don't ever have to pay obligee and foreclose on collateral, the premium paid (most likely 30% or more for Trump) is pure revenue. So it's enticing to say the least. Lol.
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    The federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’sprosecution on charges of retaining classified documents appears to be entertaining his most brazen defenses that could ultimately result in ensuring the acquittal of the former president.

    The issue revolves around an order from the US district judge Aileen Cannon on Monday asking Trump and prosecutors in the office of the special counsel Jack Smith to draft jury instructions for two scenarios that gave extraordinary credit to Trump’s defense theories.

    The two jury instruction scenarios, as conceived by Cannon, were so beneficial to Trump and so potentially incorrect on the law of the Espionage Act that it would bring into serious doubt whether it made sense for prosecutors to take the case to trial.


    In her two-page order, Cannon asked for both parties to draft jury instructions supposing it was true that Trump had the power under the Presidential Records Act to turn any White House document – classified or not – into personal records: records he was authorized to retain.

    The authorization issue is key to the case because Trump was indicted for unlawfully retaining national security materials under the Espionage Act. If Trump could show that he was somehow authorized to keep the documents at Mar-a-Lago, it would preclude his prosecution.

    The first scenario envisioned that it was up to the jury to decide whether prosecutors could show beyond a reasonable doubt whether Trump had designated each classified document he took to Mar-a-Lago as a personal document.

    The second scenario envisioned that Trump had the “sole authority” to turn a document he came across as president into a personal record that he could keep, and the very fact that he took them with him to Mar-a-Lago meant it was a personal record.

    Prosecutors could find a way to work with the first scenario, in large part because showing that the classified documents seized at Mar-a-Lago were not personal records would not be difficult.

    Classified documents have long been considered materials which belong to the US government, meaning it necessarily could not be a personal record, and personal documents are defined as “purely private” papers which “do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out” of presidential duties.


    But the second scenario, which would not allow prosecutors to contest whether a seized document was personal, could be fatal to the case because Trump would surely argue all the classified documents at Mar-a-Lago were personal by virtue of them being taken to Mar-a-Lago at the end of his term.

    If that jury instruction was taken to trial, legal experts suggested, Trump should file for what is known as a Rule 29 directed motion for acquittal and Cannon could hold as a matter of law that a reasonable jury would never convict Trump of violating the Espionage Act.…….

     
    As Donald Trump faces dwindling options to pay off a massive fine imposed as a result of losing a fraud case in New York, financial experts say filing for bankruptcy would provide one clear way out of his financial jam.


    But Trump is not considering that approach, partially out of concern that it could damage his campaign to recapture the White House from President Biden in November, according to four people close to the former president, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive discussions about Trump’s finances.

    Even though bankruptcy could alleviate his immediate cash crunch, it also carries risks for a candidate who has marketed himself as a winning businessman — and whose greatest appeal to voters, some advisers say, is his financial success.


    A bankruptcy filing by Trump personally or by one of his companies could delay for months or years the requirement that he pay the judgment of nearly half a billion dollars, which with interest is growing by more than $100,000 a day.

    A federal judge would be charged with the time-consuming task of determining how and when each of his creditors, including the state, would be paid. In the meantime, Trump could focus on his campaign and not the debt……

    “He’d rather have Letitia James show up with the sheriff at 40 Wall and make a huge stink about it than say he’s bankrupt,” one of the people close to Trump said. “He thinks about what is going to play politically well for him. Bankruptcy doesn’t play well for him, but having her try to take his properties might.”…..

     
    You know, i was thinking i would be so happy the day Trump went to prison, but i'm starting to think i might be even happier just by him losing everything he owns.
     
    Why not both?

    Sure i can hope for both, but lets be honest, him losing all of his property would hurt him more than going to prison.

    Both would be great, but if i had to choose one, i'd prefer him losing all of his property. That would hurt him more, and all i care about is what hurts Trump.
     
    He isn't. He never was a true billionaire. He purported himself as one to further his "brand" and leverage off that.
    Yep, Pete Rozelle knew what he was worth back in the 80's. it's one of the reasons he was never considered
    a potential owner of an NFL franchise. Trump still holds a grudge against the NFL to this day.
     
    Like I said previously, New York judges are not here to play around with Trump and entertain all of his side show antics. The rest of the judges around the country at both the state and federal level need to take note. New York for the win! :0056::0056::0056:

    ==================
    Four-time indicted former president Donald Trump suffered arguably his worst loss(es) in any criminal matter this week when, in his New York trial for alleged falsification of business records, Judge Juan M. Merchan ruled against him in virtually all of his motions to exclude evidence. By contrast, the judge largely granted Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s motions to exclude evidence for trial that Trump believed might be exculpatory. That does not bode well for Trump’s chances to avoid conviction when the case goes to trial, likely in a few weeks.

    Trump, for example, moved to exclude testimony of former fixer Michael Cohen on the grounds Cohen is “a liar.” The court rebuked this desperate move: “This Court has been unable to locate any treatise, statute, or holding from courts in this jurisdiction, or others, that support Defendant’s rationale that a prosecution witness should be kept off the witness stand because his credibility has been previously called into question.” Trump’s lawyers can cross-examine Cohen at trial.

    Trump also tried to keep back evidence of his intent to influence the 2016 election (a material part of Bragg’s case) and his intent to defraud. Having already ruled on these issues, Merchan scolded Trump’s counsel: “Rearguing this Court’s prior rulings in this manner is procedurally and professionally inappropriate and a waste of this Court’s valuable resources.” These motions were denied.

    Trump also wanted to exclude evidence regarding a meeting in which Cohen, Trump and David Pecker (onetime head of American Media Inc.) discussed the “catch and kill” scheme to keep evidence of Trump’s sexual transgressions from voters. Since this evidence is directly germane to the issue of Trump’s intent to defraud, this motion also failed.

    Merchan rebuffed Trump’s attempt to block the testimony of two people with damaging stories to tell about him. While excluding any of the lurid details of Trump’s interaction with them, Merchan nevertheless found: “The steps taken to secure the stories of [Dino] Sajudin and [Karen] McDougal complete the narrative of the agreement ... stemming the flow of negative information that could circulate about Defendant before it reaches the public eye.” He continued, “Locating and purchasing the information from [Stormy] Daniels not only completes the narrative of events that precipitated the falsification of business records but is also probative of the Defendant’s intent.” Evidence of Daniels’s polygraph test was excluded (although there is no indication Bragg intended to use it).

    .......
    ================
     
    He isn't. He never was a true billionaire. He purported himself as one to further his "brand" and leverage off that.

    And yes real estate is never used as bond collateral, but I've never written a 100mm bond, so there may be some carrier willing...after all, if they don't ever have to pay obligee and foreclose on collateral, the premium paid (most likely 30% or more for Trump) is pure revenue. So it's enticing to say the least. Lol.

    I'm still not clear on why he wouldn't be under investigation for perjury

    Didn't he just testify under oath that he was a gajillionaire, who could pay any size fine with the change in his sofa cushions?

    Now he's selling ugly sneakers and holding bake sales to try to raise money
     
    Yep, it's why he got involved with the USFL back in the day.

    The excellent 30 for 30 on USFL puts at least some on the blame of the league's demise on Trump's shoulders

    The league was gaining traction playing in the spring and it was Trump's idea to play in the fall head to head with NFL

    Not saying it would have survived or thrived if they stayed in the spring but probably would have lasted longer than it did
     
    The excellent 30 for 30 on USFL puts at least some on the blame of the league's demise on Trump's shoulders

    The league was gaining traction playing in the spring and it was Trump's idea to play in the fall head to head with NFL

    Not saying it would have survived or thrived if they stayed in the spring but probably would have lasted longer than it did
    Indeed.
     


    from the article:

    Engoron also ordered the Trump Organization to supply detailed information to the monitor about its efforts to obtain bonds to cover judgments.

    “The Trump Organization shall inform the monitor, in advance, of any efforts to secure surety bonds, including any financial disclosures requested or required, any information provided in response to such requests, any representations made by Trump Organization in connection with securing such bonds any personal guarantees made by any of the defendants, and any obligations of the Trump Organization required by the surety,” the judge ordered.


    In other words, we watching your application documents closely - lets see how those numbers match up to what you testified to in court.
     
    The excellent 30 for 30 on USFL puts at least some on the blame of the league's demise on Trump's shoulders

    The league was gaining traction playing in the spring and it was Trump's idea to play in the fall head to head with NFL

    Not saying it would have survived or thrived if they stayed in the spring but probably would have lasted longer than it did
    When Trump signed Doug Flutie he demanded the other owners to help pay his salary. He hasn't changed a bit.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom