Criminal Investigation into Trump’s Finances

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.

Both these links you provided say two sets of books liar
 
Hello T. A. Gardner,
The indictment charges that two sets of books were kept.
MANY articles have told the story.

When I go back to the original sources those articles use, I find them mostly circular (eg., citing each other), often using themselves as a source (ProPublica did this a lot citing earlier articles they did in later ones), and no mention of "two sets of books." Instead, they say there were discrepancies in filings of loan and tax forms with various entities where things like occupancy rates vary considerably. That doesn't amount to "two sets of books."

The appeal to popularity--"MANY articles have told the story"--is meaningless.
 
Both these links you provided say two sets of books liar

Are you really that stupid? I just posted one of the articles I cited in its entirety and nowhere in it does it claim "two sets of books." I could do likewise for the other but it's the same. There is no claim of "two sets of books."
 
Are you really that stupid? I just posted one of the articles I cited in its entirety and nowhere in it does it claim "two sets of books." I could do likewise for the other but it's the same. There is no claim of "two sets of books."

Dear fucking idiot liar



Trump is indicted for two sets of books


What now?



Fuck you very much
 
When I go back to the original sources those articles use, I find them mostly circular (eg., citing each other), often using themselves as a source (ProPublica did this a lot citing earlier articles they did in later ones), and no mention of "two sets of books." Instead, they say there were discrepancies in filings of loan and tax forms with various entities where things like occupancy rates vary considerably. That doesn't amount to "two sets of books."

The appeal to popularity--"MANY articles have told the story"--is meaningless.

The bolded is Trump to a T. "Many people are saying...."
 
You are lucky I didn't move it and "update" your OP to something more entertaining. A news story from 2019 is not a current event.
 
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.

Post 35 of yours in which you quote my post 31



Fucking liar
 
Dear fucking idiot liar



Trump is indicted for two sets of books


What now?



Fuck you very much

You obviously have a severe reading comprehension problem. It was Trump.org, a corporation formed to run his properties that was indicted, not Trump himself. Second, this occurred over a month ago and has gone nowhere since. This was also about the indictment of that organization's CFO, Allen Weisselberg.

So, you don't even have your basic facts straight on what's going on here.
 
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.

BTW


both of these links mention two sets of books
 
You obviously have a severe reading comprehension problem. It was Trump.org, a corporation formed to run his properties that was indicted, not Trump himself. Second, this occurred over a month ago and has gone nowhere since. This was also about the indictment of that organization's CFO, Allen Weisselberg.

So, you don't even have your basic facts straight on what's going on here.



And what again is the name of this company TRUMP OWNS
 
Why am I banned from posting on a thread I’m not banned from?

I answered on that thread, Desh. You have no interest in checking if you are in APP and have demonstrated that you will not follow the rules in that area. You haven't been able to post in APP area for well over a year. It is only once that it seemed to be an issue.
 
Two sets of books:

"These payments were not booked in the Trump Corporation's general ledger as employee compensation, but were instead labelled and deducted as 'rent expense' in the general ledger.

The Trump Organization maintained internal spreadsheets that tracked the amounts paid for Weisselberg's rent, utility and garage expenses."

Page 5 of 25:

Indictment of Public Record: The People of New York vs The Trump Corporation And Allen Wesselberg, Defendants

This is what all those articles are reporting on.
 
Hello Damocles,

You are lucky I didn't move it and "update" your OP to something more entertaining. A news story from 2019 is not a current event.

Thanks. I think you made the right call. The OP did begin with some evidence dating back to 2019, but also included this, from this year:

"Update-5: On July 1, [2021] prosecutors indicted the Trump Organization and the chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg with running a tax fraud scheme for over fifteen years. The indictment charges Weisselberg, the Trump Organization, and the Trump Payroll Co. with compensating Weisselberg and other Trump Organization executives with off-the-books funds that were unreported or misreported to federal, state, and local tax authorities."

This is a currently open and ongoing investigation.
 
Hello T. A. Gardner,

You obviously have a severe reading comprehension problem. It was Trump.org, a corporation formed to run his properties that was indicted, not Trump himself. Second, this occurred over a month ago and has gone nowhere since. This was also about the indictment of that organization's CFO, Allen Weisselberg.

So, you don't even have your basic facts straight on what's going on here.

'Gone nowhere?'

Do you maintain that the investigation has been concluded, the charges dropped? Gone stale? Shelved? Nothing happening?

There are several open investigations looking at Trump and his multi-layered tax avoidance schemes.
 
Hello Damocles,



Thanks. I think you made the right call. The OP did begin with some evidence dating back to 2019, but also included this, from this year:

"Update-5: On July 1, [2021] prosecutors indicted the Trump Organization and the chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg with running a tax fraud scheme for over fifteen years. The indictment charges Weisselberg, the Trump Organization, and the Trump Payroll Co. with compensating Weisselberg and other Trump Organization executives with off-the-books funds that were unreported or misreported to federal, state, and local tax authorities."

This is a currently open and ongoing investigation.

Hence the move to the other political forum. Basically, not really "current event" but not wasted time either. Folks will still see and respond. I try not to be unjust. Sometimes I fail, because I am human.
 
That would be one route. Another would be that occupancy changed and the numbers reflect that, as the documents were prepared on different dates with the data available at the time they were prepared.

What occupancy?

The documents are related to payments to Allen Weisselberg (and other employees). One document sent to the government says Weisselberg got paid X. Another document kept internally says he got paid X plus payments in the form of 2 cars, an apartment, tuition for schools, etc. There is no different dates here since the tax year doesn't change. At the end of the year you report the amount paid to the employee during that year. Failing to report the actual payments to an employee is a crime.
 
Back
Top