Is The Tide Turning on Trump ?

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Why the tide may be turning on Trump

Opinion
by Frida Ghitis
November 18, 2021

What's that we hear?
* Is it the sound of prominent conservatives and Trump allies openly rebuking former President Donald Trump?
* Are these the early murmurs of a conservative backlash against Trump?
* And, is it possible a political lane is opening for another Republican presidential candidate in 2024?

It's too soon to know, of course, and there's plenty of evidence that those who stand up against the vindictive Trump will end up crushed by either his bullying ways or by his loyal followers, with little support from the rest of the GOP. And yet, it is noteworthy that in the past few days we have heard from two major figures in the conservative camp telling Trump that he should stop whining about the election he lost and let the Republican Party focus on real issues, instead of his self-serving fantasies.

BUT The statements from Rupert Murdoch -- who controls a media empire that includes, among other properties, the shamelessly pro-Trump Fox News -- and from former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie -- an adviser who worked with the former president and helped him prepare for the presidential debates during the 2020 election -- may serve as a test for Republicans who understand just how harmful Trump's dominance of the GOP is, and how it could ultimately sink the party.

It was startling when Murdoch, addressing his company at the annual shareholder meeting on Wednesday, said that the United States faces a number of major political decisions that conservatives will fail to shape unless Trump moves on. "The current American political debate is profound," he said, citing education, welfare and economic opportunity. "It is crucial that conservatives play an active, forceful role in that debate," he added, "but that will not happen if President Trump stays focused on the past."

Murdoch is not alone in arguing that Trump is a threat to conservatives. Christie, who has just published a new book that looks very much like his unofficial entry into the 2024 presidential race, is making the same case, only more forcefully.

Consider the title of Christie's book -- which effectively labels Trump a threat to the GOP: "Republican Rescue: Saving the Party from Truth Deniers, Conspiracy Theorists, and the Dangerous Policies of Joe Biden." Notice that Trump fits two of the three reasons the party needs saving (by Christie, presumably).

Murdoch and Christie are not the first Republicans who have stood up to the former president -- but their rebukes of Trump are markedly different. Trump's early critics, like Senators Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham and others, melted into passionate defenders once their criticisms proved perilous to their own standing. Their reversals bring to mind a quote often attributed to Groucho Marx: "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...well, I have others."​

Christie says many in the GOP are frightened of Trump, whose "conduct is meant to instill fear."
Conservative Republicans who refuse to fall in line, such as Rep. Liz Cheney, are being hounded out of a party that is increasingly remade into the former president's raging, iconoclastic and intolerant brand.​

Sure, it's possible Murdoch and Christie's words may also fail to change the course of the GOP, but their criticism is different. They both helped Trump throughout his presidency, and it's significant that they are the ones now speaking out against him. Their plea that he stop complaining about the last election, however, will only fall on deaf ears, since Trump is simply incapable of admitting he lost. But Murdoch and Christie are sending an important message to other members of the party -- and the rest of the country -- that to continue supporting Trump is a dangerous folly.

Coincidentally or not, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, Ronna McDaniel, finally acknowledged Biden's win on Thursday, more than a year after the 2020 vote. "Painfully," she said, "Joe Biden won the election and it's very painful to watch. He's the President. We know that."​

Murdoch and Christie undoubtedly have their own personal motives for speaking out against Trump in this moment, and there's plenty of evidence to warrant accusations of hypocrisy. Murdoch, whose Fox News -- home of Tucker Carlson, a purveyor of harmful lies and propaganda about everything from the Covid vaccine to American democracy -- is still serving Trump's goals. But Fox News now faces billion-dollar defamation lawsuits brought by two voting technology companies that allege the network spread false claims of election fraud.​
Murdoch might be driven by a fear of liability and the potential damage additional lawsuits could inflict on his bottom line if Fox News continues to follow Trump down a rabbit hole of conspiracy theories and baseless claims. There is, also the possibility that he cares about the future of conservative politics, and genuinely fears the GOP might get trampled if Trump doesn't let up.​

Christie, for his part, is trying to promote his book and his prospects of occupying the White House.​

Still, it is remarkable that they have done the calculus and decided they can benefit from speaking out against the former president, even after other Republicans have been badly hurt by doing the same thing.

I think their calculation makes sense.

With President Joe Biden's ratings sinking, the conventional wisdom seems to be that Democrats are doomed. But it is Republicans who may be doomed if they continue to stick with the former president.

There's no doubt the Biden administration is terrible at messaging. The economy is booming and yet consumers are feeling pessimistic. Meanwhile, Biden is making important legislative progress, and the inflationary pressures that are creating the false impression that the economy is failing could be resolved in time to boost Democrats' fortunes.

Even if Democrats are still in the doldrums in 2024, it's hard to imagine that voters will be yearning for another four years of Trumpian chaos. Biden may look uninspiring now, but the former president, who had the most consistently poor approval ratings of any president in the modern era, remains highly unpopular and controversial.

Do Republicans want a candidate embroiled in endless -- and serious -- legal troubles? According to the New York Times, prosecutors are likely to impanel a grand jury in Georgia in the criminal investigation of the former president's attempt to overturn the 2020 election (In September, he suggested he was being unfairly targeted, saying, "Even the Fulton County DA, district attorney, is after me.") Meanwhile, prosecutors in New York have convened a second grand jury to hear evidence about Trump Organization's business practices, according to the Washington Post. (The first grand jury, which convened this spring, charged two Trump companies and an executive with tax evasion. Trump, who was not charged, blasted the indictment and called the investigation a "political witch hunt.")

A Pew poll conducted in September found that two-thirds of Republicans want Trump to remain a major force in the party, but only 44% want him to run again. One-third of Republicans and 92% of Democrats don't want him to be a major national political figure going forward. That's not the arithmetic of victory.

There's the potential for a post-Trump Republican Party to gain ground. It still seems like a long shot at this point, but if his critics are successful in persuading the GOP to move in a different direction, there's a chance American democracy can return some semblance of normality, where political leaders debate what policies are best for the country, without fear of upsetting the tender, explosive feelings of a very bad loser.

Opinion: Why the tide may be turning on Trump (msn.com)

Opinion: Why the tide may be turning on Trump - CNN1
.
 

xxxbishopxxx

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
let's have this conversion in 2024 when the primaries are in full swing. People rebuked Trump the last time when he announced and look where we are now.
 

MCP

International
International Member

New Legal Filing Reveals Startling Details of Possible Fraud by Trump Organization

The filing, submitted by New York Attorney General Letitia James, comes several years after a ProPublica investigation revealed conflicting financial details the Trump Organization filed for its downtown Manhattan skyscraper at 40 Wall Street.

20220121-40-Wall-2x3.jpg



A new legal filing by New York’s attorney general this week accused former President Donald Trump’s company of misleading lenders about the financial health of its landmark downtown Manhattan skyscraper, 40 Wall Street, while seeking to renew the building’s mortgage.

Though the Trump Organization called 40 Wall Street “one of the great success stories post 2008,” lender Capital One found the company’s estimates of the building’s worth so unbelievable that the bank declined to refinance the tower’s loan in 2015, the filing alleges.

“Capital One harbored great skepticism regarding the Trump Organization’s valuations,” says the filing, which was submitted by Attorney General Letitia James in response to Trump’s efforts to block her from questioning him and his children as part of an ongoing investigation by her office.

The new accusations offer startling details about possible financial fraud involving 40 Wall Street — one of the subjects of a 2019 ProPublica story that highlighted conflicting financial documents the Trump Organization had filed for the building.

ProPublica’s story documented how income, expense and occupancy numbers cited in the eventual refinance for 40 Wall Street and another Manhattan building sometimes didn’t match those the company had filed with city tax authorities. A lower valuation for the city would produce a lower tax bill, while a higher valuation for lenders would make it easier to get a new mortgage.

One expert said it appeared like the Trump Organization was keeping “two sets of books.”

“It feels like a set of books for the tax guy and a set for the lender,” said Kevin Riordan, a financing expert and real estate professor at Montclair State University, at the time.

In her filing, James asserts that Trump Organization employees, including Trump’s children, took part in a pattern of deception in which they misled lenders, insurers and the Internal Revenue Service by vastly overstating values for 40 Wall Street and a host of other Trump properties, including golf courses in Scotland, Los Angeles and Westchester and his buildings on Fifth and Park avenues.

The Trump Organization on Thursday lashed out at James, a Democrat, via a statement emailed by a spokesperson, saying, “The only one misleading the public is Letitia James.

“She defrauded New Yorkers by basing her entire candidacy on a promise to get Trump at all costs without having seen a shred of evidence and in violation of every conceivable ethical rule,” the organization’s statement said. It asserted that James “has no case” and that the “allegations are baseless and will be vigorously defended.”

Alan Futerfas, a lawyer for Trump’s children Donald Jr. and Ivanka Trump, also criticized James, accusing her of making “repeated threats to target the Trump family” and ignoring legal protections for “the very people she is investigating.”

James is seeking to compel testimony and obtain documents from Trump, Donald Jr. and Ivanka, who she said have not cooperated with her investigation.

The filing says that property valuations formed the heart of statements of financial condition that the Trump Organization used to demonstrate its net worth. The statements, which James said contained inaccuracies, were compiled by an outside accounting agency from a data spreadsheet and backup material provided by the Trump Organization.

Trump’s personal guarantees to some banks and insurers required him to certify that his financial statements were correct, according to James’ filing. The documents say her office has evidence Trump was “personally involved in reviewing and approving” the statements.

If the company or its employees are found to have deliberately provided misleading valuations, they could face civil or criminal penalties. The company is under investigation by both James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

With its classic Gothic Revival style and signature green spire, 40 Wall Street gave Trump a presence in the most famous financial district in the world. His company doesn’t own it, but rather purchased in 1995 the right to act as the landlord for its office and retail space. Finding tenants for that space, however, particularly in the building’s narrow tower, proved a challenge, especially after 9/11, when occupancy sagged and the entire financial district struggled, the ProPublica investigation found.

James’ filing says that as early as 2009, Capital One, which held the mortgage on the property, “raised substantial concerns about cash flow” at 40 Wall Street, prompting in-person meetings with Trump, longtime Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg and others. Donald Trump Jr. was also involved in the discussions, the filing says.

The conversations led to a loan modification in 2010, with bank personnel harboring doubts about the Trump Organization’s representations of the building’s financial standing. During those discussions, the Trump Organization provided the bank with profit numbers for 2010 of $12.3 million, which bank personnel described as “very optimistic.”

More startling were the differences between valuations that appeared on Trump’s statements of financial condition and those prepared by appraisers for Capital One. The Trump Organization set the value of the building at $601.8 million in 2010, while the appraisals for Capital One done by Cushman & Wakefield set it at just less than one-third of that, $200 million.

Weisselberg shared one of the company’s higher valuations for the building with the bank in early 2015, boasting of “considerable capital investment” and “a much improved cash flow.” He wanted Capital One to restructure its loan and waive a principal payment of $5 million due in November.

But Capital One declined to refinance the mortgage, referencing its own internal estimate that the building was only worth $257 million a few months before.

That year, 40 Wall Street’s $160 million mortgage was a thorn in Trump’s side, representing his then-largest single debt as he launched his campaign for the presidency.

After Capital One’s rejection, the Trump Organization turned to Ladder Capital Finance, where Weisselberg’s son Jack was a director. Ladder commissioned its own appraisal. Though Ladder used the same Cushman & Wakefield team that had estimated the building was worth $220 million in 2012, the team this time more than doubled the value to $540 million, legal filings said. Ladder approved the refinance.

James’ filing said that evidence her office obtained suggests the 2015 Cushman valuation “appears to have used demonstrably incorrect facts and aggressive assumptions” to arrive at the higher estimate, which the document said “did not reflect a good faith assessment of value.”

On Thursday, Cushman & Wakefield defended its practices, saying it took “great issue with mischaracterizations concerning the work performed and believe they are not supported by the evidence.

“The referenced Cushman & Wakefield appraisals were undertaken and completed in good faith based upon the material information made available,” the company said in a statement emailed by a spokesperson. “We stand behind the appraisers and the referenced appraisals which reflect fair valuations based upon the underlying facts and market dynamics.”

In 2015, the Trump Organization’s statement of financial condition listed the value of the building as $735.4 million.

Ladder Capital and Capital One did not immediately respond to requests for comment Thursday. Allen Weisselberg and Jack Weisselberg could not immediately be reached.

ProPublica’s 2019 story found several instances of the Trump Organization reporting much lower expenses to its lender, Ladder Capital, than to city tax authorities — including 40 Wall Street’s insurance costs and ground lease. Jack Weisselberg declined to comment at the time on Ladder’s loans or his relationship with the Trump Organization. Executives with Ladder also declined to be quoted for the story then.

In 2019, former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen testified before Congress that the Trump Organization inflated valuations at times to appear more profitable and deflated them to achieve a lower real estate tax bill.
 

COINTELPRO

Transnational Member
Registered

New Legal Filing Reveals Startling Details of Possible Fraud by Trump Organization

The filing, submitted by New York Attorney General Letitia James, comes several years after a ProPublica investigation revealed conflicting financial details the Trump Organization filed for its downtown Manhattan skyscraper at 40 Wall Street.

20220121-40-Wall-2x3.jpg

Somebody that is populist like President Trump, that has not cornered one of us in their pickup truck and shot somebody to death, we need to avoid. Being from New York, she should have avoided running for Attorney General. I am not running for Attorney General in Delaware, to avoid the remote chance of picking up some case related to Biden.

Some of the black women are getting caught up in these schemes that will harm us. Another one is voting rights, having ballot boxes all over in a black mayor city. They convict black politicians regularly to create this climate of mistrust. Announcing that another black women is going to be selected for this high ranking position is just baiting into some mess in the future, than will be dealing with some real Tulsa, OK; except it won't be some white women falsely claiming rape.

I suspect Eric Holder avoided going after Wall Street bankers with the 2008 crash for this reason, yet this lesson was not passed on.

After MLK, whites would never make a move against somebody populist, they will behind the scenes set that fool up with other groups to take them out. Now if you are low level, yeah they will bust on you in a second.
 
Last edited:

COINTELPRO

Transnational Member
Registered
We need to recognize these populist whites that look very different to somebody like a MLK, Mandela, or Rosa Parks who are fighting for human rights and dignity.

1. 'Founded' a country or territory through war, displacing the inferior indigenous people to greatly benefits whites and protected their rights to engage in slavery. Washington, Jefferson...
2. Repelled non white immigrant invasion of the country
3. Stopped the 'abuse' of government assistance to non whites which hardworking whites were forced to support through higher taxes- President Reagan
4. Helped perpetrate the economic subjugation of non whites through slavery or unequal rights of non whites.

3000.jpeg

5. Opposed mask or vaccine mandates
6. Stood firm against election fraud that was being perpetrated by non whites.
7. Opposed the unfair government enforcement of law against them imposed by a bi-racial President through the use of force.

1397532347000-nevada-grazing.jpg


8. Tough on crime against non whites leading to mass incarceration.
9. Let say a predominately black or Hispanic workforce demands a $1 raise per hour, the white management cracks down by firing workers or engaging in other illegal practices. This would be populist and the CEO would be a hero similar to Rosa Parks.
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Trump’s Inner Circle Freaks
That His Tax Firm ‘Screwed’ Him


“If he gets away from this, there’s no God and no reason to live,”
said Barbara Res, a former construction executive at the Trump Organization.


Jose Pagliery
Political Investigations Reporter

Asawin Suebsaeng
Senior Political Reporter

Feb. 16, 2022


Predictably, Donald Trump wants you to think his longtime accounting firm’s decision to ditch the Trump Organization last week is no big deal. In fact, he would like you to not think about it at all.

But that hasn’t stopped members of his inner sanctum from wondering if the highly publicized investigations in New York could actually be what ultimately torches the ex-president’s sprawling family business.

Which is why after accounting firm Mazars USA dropped the Trump Organization, three people close to former President Trump told The Daily Beast they have each urged Trump—or others in his family and brain trust—to take this possibly ruinous development seriously.

“I’ll be honest with you: I have said for years that this whole thing is one big fishing expedition,” one of the sources said. “I’ve expected it to just fizzle at some point, or to turn up ticky tacky shit that can score prosecutors big headlines. The Mazars news was the first time I started thinking, ‘Hey, this might be serious.’ Could Donald Trump [and his business] be screwed? I don’t know, but I’m not as confident as I once was in saying, ‘No.’”


The question now facing the Trump Organization—which is already in hot water after being indicted in Manhattan for criminal tax fraud last summer—is whether the pillars propping up his business empire will now crumble.

The massive bank loans that fund his real estate development projects are the foundation of his empire. Banks that approved lending Trump money for his golf courses and skyscrapers relied on his personal guarantees and “statements of financial condition”—guarantees that are now shaky at best.


None of these sources who spoke to Trump believed he was taking this as seriously as he should. Two of them said the former president told them that his business empire has been doing “great,” no matter what prosecutors are trying to do to it.

But notably, all three predicted that this latest Mazars development would likely strengthen Trump’s resolve to run again for the presidency in 2024.

“Right now, all the voters care about is stopping the decline of the United States and President Trump is the one person who they know who can do it,” claimed John McLaughlin, who served as one of Trump’s top pollsters in 2016 and 2020. “Voters could care less who his accountant might be. As long as Joe Biden fails, President Trump grows stronger.”

After a day of remaining silent on the topic, the ex-president released a lengthy statement Tuesday night insisting that, among many other things, “We have a great company with fantastic assets that are unique, extremely valuable and, in many cases, far more valuable than what was listed in our Financial Statements.”

However, Mazar’s decision on Feb. 9 to disavow every financial condition statement Trump made from 2011 until 2020 does more than cast a shadow of doubt on his riches and his future.

That’s because lending agreements often include provisions that immediately cancel a deal—causing the loan to default—if the underlying documents prove false. According to a widely cited analysis by journalists at Bloomberg, the Trump Organization has had at least $590 million of debt coming due between 2021 and 2025. It’s unclear if Trump’s loan deals included a “material change in condition” clause, but if they did, as most do, the fallout could spell financial ruin.

Steven J. Solomon, an attorney in Miami who leads the bankruptcy practice at the national law firm GrayRobinson, warned about the gravity of the situation for the Trump Organization.

“It’s incredibly significant. And frankly, I’ve never heard of a situation where an accounting firm is going back retroactively 10 years,” he told The Daily Beast. “This would be a trigger point. If your lender doesn’t have confidence in you because it can’t rely on the information, you can’t be friends anymore.”

In theory, Solomon said, the lenders could move to seize whatever collateral Trump put on the table. That could include whatever assets Trump put at risk to borrow what Bloomberg calculated to be $100 million for Trump Tower in Manhattan or another $125 million for the Trump Doral golf resort.

But the banks that lent millions to Trump will be hesitant to suddenly call their loans back for fear that it could start a financial landslide that ultimately dooms their precious borrower, and reduces the chance that the money will be paid back, several bankruptcy lawyers told The Daily Beast.

The political fallout of banks demanding their loans back could also factor into their decision. While liberals and good-government groups may call on Trump’s lenders to do just that, the backlash would likely fall more on the banks than it would Trump. The former president’s supporters are unlikely to think any less of Trump if his successful businessman persona suddenly evaporated. Instead, Trump would likely just incorporate the episode into his already perfected politics of aggrievement.

Still, that doesn’t mean banks calling back the loans wouldn’t sting.

According to government disclosure forms Trump signed during his last week in office a year ago, Trump is on the hook for more than $130 million to Deutsche Bank that’s due starting in 2023. His lifeline there is seemingly gone now that his long-time banker, Rosemary Vrablic, abruptly resigned amid allegations of shady deals with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Meanwhile, those disclosure forms show that Trump owes another $110 million to the real estate investment trust Ladder Capital Finance that’s due starting this year—although Trump continues to have a family friend at the firm widely believed to be his loyal ally in the form of director Jack Weisselberg, son of the Trump Organization’s indicted chief financial officer.

But even if these big lenders don’t want to call back their loans, government-regulated banks will still be under pressure to independently investigate Trump’s real financial health, out of fear that they’ll run afoul of responsible banking laws.

“This is going to be incredibly troubling and at the same time. You’re going to have bank regulators looking… at these loans and determining that there are these questions being raised about the solvency of the borrower,” Solomon said.

It’ll get even worse for the Trump Organization. Solomon called the manner of Mazars’ sudden exit “a dark cloud” that will easily scare off any other respected accounting firm from taking its place.

And that, in turn, invites unscrupulous characters from all over the globe to come swooping in to the rescue.

“This explodes the national security risk by a factor of 10, because now he's going to be desperate for new loans. Legitimate banks are not going to touch him. So it expands the universe of shady characters who could offer him loans in return for favors that might include disclosing U.S. national security secrets,” said Joseph Cirincione, a fellow at a think-tank, the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

Any influx of foreign cash is sure to reenergize the aggressive effort by Democrats in Congress who in 2017 sued, unsuccessfully, to nail him as president for violating rules about receiving gifts and benefits from foreigners. Their effort, which died in federal appellate court in 2020, showed how difficult it is to hold an American president accountable for running afoul of emoluments clauses of the U.S. Constitution.​

“Whether it is the Saudis, Russians, narcoterroristsanybody with access to hundreds of millions would be in the running for Donald Trump’s new loan officer,” Cirincione said. “That is why you don’t give security clearance to people who are financially compromised.”

And the American public wouldn’t know much about it unless Trump gets back in the White House.

But for all the financial trouble this spells for Trump’s family company, Mazars’ decision to turn on him might be the catalyst to bring down Trump himself for alleged crimes because any proven fraud puts further pressure on the already indicted CFO, Allen Weisselberg, who faces trial later this year.

Barbara A. Res, a former construction executive at the Trump Organization who wrote a tell-all book called Tower of Lies, noted that any bank loan officers would have dealt directly with Weisselberg all these years.

“Weisselberg is who’s in trouble now. He's probably the one that gave all the information to the accountants. They didn’t get it out of thin air. They worked with Weisselberg, He’s the guy. They didn’t check [real estate values] themselves. They’re not real estate people,” she said.

“I hope that they flip Weisselberg, because this is a big deal with him. He’s the one who’d go to jail for this, I would think,” she added.

Res, who now does speaking engagements about women in the construction industry, recalled the ways she saw Trump dupe business partners in the 1980s and 1990s. She told The Daily Beast that Trump never went as far as fabricating years of financial statements because “people didn’t let him do things like that. We controlled him. But he reached the point where no longer had anyone who’d say no to him.”

“If he gets away from this, there’s no God, and no reason to live,” she said.


New York Post Dragged for Narcing on Snoop Dogg’s Weed Smoking (thedailybeast.com)


.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Trump’s Inner Circle Freaks
That His Tax Firm ‘Screwed’ Him


NY attorney general fires back at Trump's defense of financial statements

1645058756142.png
Attorney General Letitia James
is conducting a probe into
whether the Trumps inflated
real estate values to obtain
bank loans, and reduced
values to lower tax bills.

By Karen Freifeld

(Reuters) - New York's attorney general on Wednesday pounced on former President Donald Trump's defense of company's financial statements, saying the five-page statement Trump issued a day earlier contradicted a court filing by his attorneys.

"It is not unusual for parties to a legal proceeding to disagree about the facts,"​
the attorney general's office wrote in a letter filed in New York state court. "But
it is truly rare for a party to publicly disagree with statements submitted by his
own attorneys in a signed pleading -- let alone one day after the pleading was
filed. Attorney General Letitia James is conducting a probe into whether the​
Trumps inflated real estate values to obtain bank loans, and reduced values to​
lower tax bills.​

Trump's attorneys repeatedly stated that he did not know enough to respond to allegations of inaccurate valuations. But the former president's five-page statement got into detail about possible discrepancies, implying that he had more knowledge than his lawyers said.

On Monday, the attorney general's office made public a Feb. 9 letter from Trump's longtime accountant, Mazars, which said the Trump Organization's financial statements for 2011 through 2020 should no longer be relied on and that it would no longer do work for the former president's New York-based real estate business.

On Tuesday, Trump issued a five-page statement disparaging the attorney general and other New York officials, calling the investigation a political and racist attack, claiming Mazars had essentially been forced to resign, and defending the financial statements.

"Remember when the attorney general and or District Attorney say they think my financial statements may be high, I don't even include these branding numbers in them, which is far more than any discrepancy they may have," Trump wrote.

Instead of the "sham investigation" of his business, Trump said in another part of the five-page diatribe, law enforcement and the "fake news media" should look into former U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as well as "murderers, drug dealers and rapists."

In a court filing on Monday in response to the attorney general's allegations of misleading financial statements, Trump, through his attorneys, repeatedly denied he had knowledge or information to form a belief as to the claims.

The attorney general is seeking testimony from Trump and two of his adult children, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump, as part of her civil probe of the company's business practices.

Justice Arthur Engoron in New York state court in Manhattan will hear arguments on Thursday on whether subpoenas for the testimony should be enforced.

A separate but overlapping criminal case involving the company's business practices is being conducted by the Manhattan District Attorney, which the attorney general joined in May.

(Reporting by Karen Freifeld; Editing by Noeleen Walder and David Gregorio)


NY attorney general fires back at Trump's defense of financial statements (msn.com)

.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Michael Cohen says Donald Trump told him if one of his kids had to go to prison to 'make sure' it was Donald Jr., not Ivanka

Alia Shoaib
Jan 23, 2022


1645314616873.png
Michael Cohen, left, and Donald Trump with his children Donald Jr. and Ivanka. Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/Getty Images (L), Bill Tompkins/Getty Images (R)


  • Donald Trump's former lawyer said Trump told him that Donald Jr. should go to prison over Ivanka.
  • Cohen said the instruction came when Trump's children were on the verge of indictment in 2012.
  • Cohen was speaking to MSNBC about the Trump Organization and Capitol riot investigations.




Donald Trump's former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen said Trump told him in 2012 that if one of his kids had to go to prison over the family business to "make sure" it was Donald Jr., not Ivanka.

Speaking to MSNBC on Saturday, Cohen said Trump gave him the instruction when his children were on the verge of being indicted by the Manhattan district attorney's office in 2012.

"You may recall that there was the district attorney's case here for Trump SoHo where it was either Don or Ivanka was in very big trouble as a result of lying about the number of units that had been sold," Cohen told MSNBC's Alex Witt .

"And Donald said it to me – I mean I wouldn't say it if it wasn't said directly to me – he goes, 'If one or the other has to go to prison, make sure that it's Don because Don would be able to handle it.'"

Cohen spoke to MSNBC about the mounting pressure on the Trump family amid investigations into the Trump Organization's financial dealings and the January 6 riot.

New York Attorney General Letitia James has said her investigation into the Trump Organization has "uncovered significant evidence" of fraudulent and misleading asset valuations.

James has taken legal action to enforce the subpoenas issued to Donald Trump and his children Donald Jr. and Ivanka, who she says were "closely involved in the transactions in question."

Meanwhile, the January 6 committee investigating the insurrection has asked Ivanka Trump to voluntarily cooperate with their probe.

Cohen said he believes there is "not a chance" that the former president would offer to cooperate with the investigations to shield his daughter from legal troubles.

"Donald cares only about Donald, more than he would care about his children," Cohen told MSNBC.

Trump's former lawyer also said he believes the chances of the Trump children cooperating with either investigation are "slim to none."

This week, Trump said the "vicious" January 6 committee and New York attorney general are targeting his adult children as part of their investigations.

"It's a very unfair situation for my children. Very, very unfair," Trump told The Washington Examiner in an interview published Friday.

Cohen was formerly one of the most trusted members of Trump's inner circle and was jailed in 2019 for three years for lying to Congress and financial crimes relating to hush-money payoffs to two women who said they had affairs with Trump.

He has turned on his former boss, and in his 2020 memoir, "Disloyal," he alleged that Trump is a racist and a conman who has committed tax and financial crimes. A Trump spokesperson denied Cohen's claims and said he was attempting "to profit off of lies."

Cohen has been cooperating with prosecutors in several investigations into Donald Trump and the Trump Organization.


Cohen: Trump Said to 'Make Sure' Don Jr. Went to Prison Over Ivanka (businessinsider.com)

.
 
Top