Criminal Investigation into Trump’s Finances

Hello T. A. Gardner,

How many times does this make Trump's finances being looked into and nothing found...? Remember that definition of insanity? This is looking like a textbook case these days.

How do you know that nothing has been found?

It's an ongoing investigation.

They are not going to simply blab everything they have uncovered to the press.

That might be a good way to compromise a case.

What investigators are in the habit of giving intricate details of open cases to the press?
 
A prosecutor's job is not to present evidence to the press.

A prosecutor's job is to present evidence to a jury.
 
Cohen was as inside as you can get.. He was the lawyer that told every single school Trump ever went to that Trump would sue them to death if they released an iota of Trump's grades and disciplines. Trump was really proud of his educational achievements, He was the guy that handled the payoffs to the women he was sleeping with. I wonder if he was in charge of providing abortions since Trump did not use protection?
You cannot dismiss Cohen's importance in court cases. he knows where the bodies are buried.
 
Hello T. A. Gardner,



How do you know that nothing has been found?

It's an ongoing investigation.

They are not going to simply blab everything they have uncovered to the press.

That might be a good way to compromise a case.

What investigators are in the habit of giving intricate details of open cases to the press?

Because if something chargeable were found he'd already be indicted. I have no illusions about how hard various groups want to get Trump. The "fishing expeditions" to do so abound. If they really had something, Trump would be charged in a nanosecond with it.
 
When were his finances looked at?

Yep by the state of New York and the IRS perpetually, among others. If they had something on him I know he'd be charged in nanosecond, so it's pretty obvious that to date they don't have anything on him not for want of trying.
 
Yep by the state of New York and the IRS perpetually, among others. If they had something on him I know he'd be charged in nanosecond, so it's pretty obvious that to date they don't have anything on him not for want of trying.

Go get the proof


That was a trump lie to avoid giving the people his taxes idiot
 
Go get the proof
That was a trump lie to avoid giving the people his taxes idiot

Trump has faced a decade-long tax audit — here’s how long IRS audits usually take and which taxpayers are most likely to get audited
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/p...s-how-long-irs-audits-usually-take-2020-10-01

We now know that Trump really was telling the truth when he claimed, beginning in the 2016 presidential campaign, that he was being audited by the Internal Revenue Service (though such an audit would not prevent him from releasing his returns—that part he really did make up).
https://slate.com/business/2020/09/trumps-taxes-audit-loss-irs.html

Trump’s decade-old audit illustrates why the IRS targets the working poor as much as the rich
https://www.salon.com/2020/10/10/tr...the-working-poor-as-much-as-the-rich_partner/

Slate and Salon are about as anti-Trump as a magazine can get and they admit he was being audited.

Now it's your turn. Show us solid evidence he was keeping two sets of books.

He kept two sets of books
 
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bu...inancial-fraud-lenders-propublica-2019-11?amp


New documents show Trump kept 2 sets of books for his biggest property in Manhattan, pointing to potential financial fraud

Sonam Sheth and Tom Porter Nov 27, 2019, 10:33 AM

The article you link to:

https://www.propublica.org/article/...-tower-tax-records-reveal-new-inconsistencies
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tower-financial-fraud-lenders-propublica-2019-11

Says no such thing. There is no mention within it of Trump keeping two sets of books. They only say that in various tax and financial filings during the year(s) they have documents for there were "discrepancies" in the stated occupancy rate of Trump Tower. That isn't "two sets of books," regardless of what the persons writing those articles might think.
 
The article you link to:

https://www.propublica.org/article/...-tower-tax-records-reveal-new-inconsistencies
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tower-financial-fraud-lenders-propublica-2019-11

Says no such thing. There is no mention within it of Trump keeping two sets of books. They only say that in various tax and financial filings during the year(s) they have documents for there were "discrepancies" in the stated occupancy rate of Trump Tower. That isn't "two sets of books," regardless of what the persons writing those articles might think.

Click the link in my post folks


It says this

New documents show Trump kept 2 sets of books for his biggest property in Manhattan, pointing to potential financial fraud

Sonam Sheth and Tom Porter Nov 27, 2019, 10:33 AM




This poster is outright fucking lying
 
Hello T. A. Gardner

Because if something chargeable were found he'd already be indicted. I have no illusions about how hard various groups want to get Trump. The "fishing expeditions" to do so abound. If they really had something, Trump would be charged in a nanosecond with it.

Why do you believe that? Could it be that there are other possibilities besides this assumption? What could those possibilities be?

It is not best practice for a DA to always immediately charge a suspect with a crime as soon as evidence of it is first uncovered. That could compromise further investigation. If investigators believe there is more to be uncovered it is often in their interest to keep a lid on whatever they have discovered to date.

One method which is frequently used is to charge people lower in the echelon of an organization in order to get them to talk about what they know. Serious charges and the threat of doing time often leads to more information about those higher up in an organization. Let us also realize that these things take time. Someone may not fully grasp everything they are facing until they have time to think about it. They may try to divulge just enough to get them off the bigger hook, while still holding back good actionable information.

Trump Org. and top aide charged with 15-year scheme to defraud U.S. of taxes

"Prosecutors described a conspiracy to compensate executives "off the books" to avoid paying taxes.

The Trump Organization and its chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, were charged Thursday in what prosecutors said was a sweeping, 15-year scheme to compensate top executives of former President Donald Trump's company “off the books” and help them avoid paying taxes.

The Trump Organization pleaded not guilty to charges that included tax fraud and falsifying business records. Weisselberg, 73, pleaded not guilty to grand larceny and tax fraud charges, among others, after prosecutors accused him of personally avoiding taxes on $1.7 million of his income."

Nobody really thinks for a second that Weisselberg isn't guilty of more than he is being charged with. He's already looking at doing hard time. Investigators are undoubtedly uncovering more as time passes. They could approach Weisselberg with an offer he'd have a hard time refusing: "Either you cooperate fully, or you're looking at the rest of your life in prison." That could lead to Weisselberg talking. But, of course, it's not like it would be just one discussion. Investigators need time to check out the things Weisselberg may have told them. They need to verify if it is true, and if there is more to it. It could be a situation of checking out the spilled beans, and then finding that there are more beans in the bowl. They might have to have another discussion with him. Remind him of what he is facing. Up the ante.

I'm sure they are quite adept at what they do.

And I would be surprised if they would make whatever they may have learned already a public circus as soon as they learn it.
 
The article you link to:

https://www.propublica.org/article/...-tower-tax-records-reveal-new-inconsistencies
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tower-financial-fraud-lenders-propublica-2019-11

Says no such thing. There is no mention within it of Trump keeping two sets of books. They only say that in various tax and financial filings during the year(s) they have documents for there were "discrepancies" in the stated occupancy rate of Trump Tower. That isn't "two sets of books," regardless of what the persons writing those articles might think.

You are lying about my post
 
Back
Top