Trump on Trial

We've danced around this issue for over four years, but it's starting to get real.

How many crimes will Trump be charged with?

1. Election interference in Georgia.  Carries a 20-year sentence.  Fulton County DA Fani Willis has hired a successful racketeering prosecutor, and the case seems like a slam-dunk since Trump was caught on tape not once, but TWICE trying to overturn the election results in GA.
   
2. Imperiling Congress.  Eric Swalwell sued Trump for inciting a riot that imperiled his safety.  Experts say the case is strong, using the precedent of the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act.  Another Rep Bennie Thompson filed a similar suit last week, and potentially all 535 members of Congress could do the same (or at least the 271 Democrats).  If the suits weren't consolidated this could potentially drain huge resources from the ex-president's legal team.
   
3. Tax evasion, bank fraud and insurance fraud.  Though so-far tight lipped, we know Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance has gotten Trump's records from Deutschebank, and in that million-plus page datadump are known to be numerous financial crimes. Many of these carry long incarceration penalties used against Mafia bosses.
   
4. More tax evasion, bank fraud and insurance fraud. New York AG Letitia James is investigating two properties under her jurisdiction that appear to have been improperly reported.
   
5. Obstruction of the Russia probe.  Under new AG Merrick Garland, the ten instances of obstruction of justice detailed in the Mueller probe could be (probably will be?) reopened as criminal prosecutions.
   
6. Hooker hush money.  Cyrus Vance's investigation of illegal campaign expenditures used to silence Stephanie Clifford and Karen McDougal continues.
   
7. Incitement to riot.  DCAG Karl Racine is looking into charging Trump with illegal speech for the January 6 rally-riot.  Up to 6 months in prison for this misdemeanor.
   
8. Illegal use of inauguration funds.  Racine's office is also still probing illegal expenditures, profiteering and possible illegal foreign donations to Trump's inauguration in 2017.
   
9. Defamation lawsuits. Trump still faces two lawsuits for defamation of character from E. Jean Carroll and Summer Zervos.
   
10. Inheritance lawsuit.  Trump's niece Mary Trump still has an active lawsuit over his mishandling of her father's estate.
    
11. Possible lawsuits from charged rioters.  Though none have been filed yet, it's been speculated that rioters charged in the January 6 insurrection could sue Trump for his encouragement in their crimes.
    
12. Corrupt pardons. There is a provision in the law to claw back pardons given corruptly.  It could be invoked in several of Trump's pardons, 85% of which were to benefit himself and his legal problems.
    

Apparently there’s an obscure provision in Florida state law that allows the governor to decide if Florida residents have to be surrendered to indictments from other states. It’s automatic in all other states, naturally — but Florida being the hotbed of escaped criminals (drug smugglers and Nazis) that it is -- apparently led someone, sometime in the past to create an exception for Florida.

No wonder Trump moved his official residence there.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-tax-fraud-extradition-desantis-florida_n_609da26ae4b099ba7534c341

This guy disagrees.

Florida can't use the Constitution to shield Trump. DeSantis can still try.

That seems pretty definitive.

The 10th Amendment wrote:

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

The Constitution expressly reserves that right for the federal:

Quote :

The Extradition Clause of Article IV provides that “a person charged in any state with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall on demand of the executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.” The provision contemplates no discretion on the part of the state receiving the request, but speaks instead of a mandate to return the prisoner.

It made for an interesting news story, but Rachel got it 100% wrong.

This is pretty amusing. Don't know that it will come to pass, of course, but it does sound kind of plausible.

Michael Cohen Reveals When And How Trump Will Flip On His Own Family To Avoid Jail

He made that statement on Joy Reid's show, causing her jaw to drop. But he's 100% correct -- Trump will throw EVERYONE under the bus.

You know what though? It was all done at his direction and for his benefit, so the headline "To Avoid Jail" should read "To TRY TO Avoid Jail." It won't work.

Grand jury launched today in Trump’s legal case. They wouldn’t do that if indictments weren’t forthcoming.

Meanwhile, the headline breaking news over on Fox is that some local city councilman in LA wants to put a homeless encampment on the beach.

Tuesday night on Chris Hayes's show he had a guest on who said the indictments of Trump are groundbreaking. "Of course, never before have we elected a criminal to the White House."

Chris corrected him. "Oh, I think the case could be made that we have."

Last night, to follow up on his comment, he played footage of Ford's address to the nation "putting our long national nightmare behind us" and issuing a full pardon to Richard M. Nixon. Chris rightly pointed out this was the beginning of Chief Executive blanket immunity.

He then went on to characterize Dick Cheney's use of torture in Guantanamo and in overseas "black" rendition sites as blatantly illegal, with zero accountability. I was surprised, this is not a view often voiced on cable news, even though I wholeheartedly agree with it.

Made me start to dream, maybe one day in the future, Trump will be in jail for financial crimes and some progressive politician, maybe President Harris or Speaker Ocasio-Cortez, will decide to bring International War Crimes Tribunal charges -- which have no statute of limitation -- against the former Vice President.

We've discussed this dilemma before:

on February 13, 2021 NoCoPilot wrote:

Andrew Goldman made a point on Rachel's show last night, if Trump was sentenced to jail how would the Secret Service detail still protect him (from other inmates)?  Would they have to occupy adjoining cells?

However now it's getting close enough that the mainstream press is bringing it up.

I have a solution: Guantanamo.

MSNBC is reporting that Weiselberg’s #2, the CFO of the Trump Organization, was deposed last month by the FBI, and given immunity in exchange for his testimony. Speculation is that such a high guy in the organization would not be given immunity unless he offered up somebody bigger.

Meanwhile, over on Fox News, Tuckums is sampling cicada brownie on the air.

First charges to be filed tomorrow. Let the shitshorm begin!

Claire McCaskill just appeared on Deadline: Whitehouse with Nicolle Wallace, and said with the indictments of the Trump Organization tomorrow his business is done. He will no longer be able to get loans, he will no longer be able to sell overpriced condos based on “his brand,” he will most likely be bankrupted.

She said “He’ll be selling pillows” at the end of this.

Trump is not expected to be indicted tomorrow.

Allen Weisselberg is.

Therefore... Cy Vance apparently hopes Weisselberg will help build the case against Trump and make it watertight.  Will he flip?  Will he be willing to spend the rest of his life in jail for Trump?  Is he willing to sacrifice his sons, who are also implicated, to save Trump?  Just how much of a snake IS he, anyway?

Trump learned from Roy Cohn never to put anything in writing, never to leave a paper trail, always maintain plausible deniability.

Weisselberg may be necessary to nail the Orange Rodeo Clown to specific charges.

In addition to the 15 felony charges against Weisselberg and the Trump Organization filed today, the indictments mention an “Unindicted Co-conspirator #1” who was not named. However, the crimes this person supposedly committed are identical to what the NYT described in September as Ivanka Trump, DJT’s daughter, having done. So, she’s probably UCC and therefore likely to be indicted sooner rather than later.

Hoo Boy.

Mary Trump says it is more likely that DJT’s children will flip on him than Allen Weisselberg flipping. Allen’s an old man, he’s been with the TO since Fred Trump ran it, and he has very little to lose spending the remaining years of his life in jail.

The devil spawn? Not so much. They are young enough to still care about staying out of jail, and according to Mary, the whole family is very “transactional.” There is no love, only self-interest.

This will be interesting.

Weisselberg may pull an Epstein, too.

Found on Facebook, but that doesn't automatically make it wrong.

"As someone who has written for decades about corporate crime, I was reading the Trump O/Weisselberg indictment going, 'Yah, ok..hmm..yah..ok..Wait..HOLY SHIT!' The Trump Org is in deep, deep trouble. And not because of the criminal charges. Because of its bank loan covenants.../1
..in fact, if even the smallest bit of this case is true, I think the Trump Org could be dead. It's complicated, but it primarily pertains to the 12th count of the indictment.
Taking this a step at a time: Like most real estate companies, the Trump Org is horribly illiquid.../2
...this means it cannot readily convert its assets into cash as needed. Worse, because of the incredible incompetence and business idiocy of Trump, cash on hand (and access rapid loans through what is known as the commercial paper market) is small. So, the company survives.../3
...on loans against assets. Trump originally depended on bank loans, then jumped into high-yield (junk) bond market, which is why so many of his businesses went bankrupt: Junk bonds gave him lots of cash to spend, but he was too stupid to apply an analysis beyond 'I'm great'.../4
.to figure out how he was going to generate enough cash to pay interest on bonds. He couldn't. With his dad, he tried laundering money through Trump Castle to get past a requirement with his bank loans brought on by his junk debt, but got caught. Everything crashed down.../5
...so, the bottom line: Trump knows how to borrow money, he doesn't know how to manage it. Then came The Apprentice, which gave him lots of cash. Of course, he spent it all, then used assets he purchased as security to borrow from banks on apparent assumption that 'I'm great...'/6
...would fix any cash flow problems. He now has huge amounts of debt against assets that are plummeting in value because of January 6 and his toxic brand name. He *needed* the presidency to survive financially. I have always believed, that is why he is so desperate to keep it.../7
....because if he was president, he could hit up the Russians, Saudis, etc to bail him out. Now, with him toxic and a threat to the country, those nations know that any secret payments they make to him run a huge risk of being discovered.
Which brings us to today's charges.../8
...all bank loans with a business come with 'lending covenants.' These are basically a series of requirements, some of which include 'you'll behave' in minor character. But *the most important part* of any loan covenant is the 'books and records' portion. It is included in.../9
...every covenant for a bank loan to a business. The terms are simple: You maintain truthful books and records, you attest to us that they are truthful, and we are allowed to review them at any time. There is no 'You can lie *just a little bit* on your books and records'.../10
...it's all or nothing, like pregnancy: You either are or you aren't. The books and records either are truthful or they aren't. Which brings us to count 12, which I think you can now understand the significance of. /11
...Forget Weisselberg. That is every every corporate defendant, every entity that could have a loan covenant in its name. Every Trump Org bank lender in the world, right now, is looking at this indictment, looking at their covenants, and calling the Trump Org demanding.../12
...they turn over every relevant book and record pertaining to these issues. If they refuse...BOOM. Loans pulled. If they do and the banks don't like what they see...BOOM. Loans pulled. If the loans come due (which 100s of millions do next year) no way they get refinanced..../13
...there may be something I am missing here, but I do not see how the Trump Org survives this without some sort of corrupt deal overseas. But even that seems far-fetched. Instead, it may be the biggest real estate corp bankruptcy in history..../14

......and given that those of us who covered his business for decades - back when he was a democrat/reform party/whoever would have him - and always knew he was a crook, all I can say is, what the hell took so long?"
- Kurt Eichenwald @kurteichenwald

In an apparent(?) attempt to distract from his legal peril, Trump sued Facebook, YouTube and Twitter for banning him, claiming his First Amendment rights were violated.

Keith Olbermann wrote:

This is the dumbest thing Trump has ever done. It’s wonderful.

I remind you from personal experience that when you sue somebody you have to give a multi-day deposition on anything relevant to the topic…in this case, like your role inspiring the 1/6 Coup.

Trump lost his Appeals Court case today, regarding turning over all documentation pertaining to the January 6 insurrection.  His original case, in the New York courts, resulted in an EXCORIATING judgment against him.  Today's appeal was no more kind to him.

He has 14 days to appeal to SCOTUS.  They could take the case, or they could decline.  Both courts laid out EXTENSIVE reasons why his claim has no merit.  Declining to hear the case automatically affirms the two lower court decisions.

If SCOTUS decides to take the case, they'll need to provide a legal reason for doing so.  There are none.

So it would expose the court ONCE AGAIN as naked partisans with no regard for the law.  That has its own repercussions down the line.

Or they could put it on the docket for a year or two down the road.  That would probably delay the production, without exposing the SC to ridicule.  They could decide to rule on it immediately, as an emergency, and hand Trump a victory.  That would definitely hamper the Jan 6 commission, but again damages the Court irrevocably.

John Roberts has not been shy about steering the Court to nakedly partisan unpopular rulings when it suits his activist philosophy, his desire to undo Thurgood Marshall's legacy. But siding with and thus protecting Trump? That has fewer upsides in history.

It'll be interesting to see how this thing goes.

His other problems haven't gone away.

New York attorney general seeks Trump’s deposition as part of civil fraud investigation

Quote :

New York Attorney General Letitia James is seeking a deposition from former president Donald Trump early next year as part of her investigation into potential fraud inside the Trump Organization, according to people familiar with the matter.

James has requested to take his testimony on Jan. 7 at her New York office as part of a civil investigation into whether Trump’s company committed financial fraud in the valuations of properties to different entities, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the inquiry is ongoing.