The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Carpet_pissr
Posts: 19980
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Columbia, SC

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Carpet_pissr »

I suspect being fired for that is the ‘least worst’ outcome for him. Or if you want to flip it, a minor setback compared to his reward, whatever that may be.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

Trump slips another hook. The people charged to protect us continuously fail us. And this hell blasted system rewards them for it.
When some two dozen New Yorkers filed into a Manhattan courthouse this week to finish out their grand jury service, the case against a man who would have been the world’s most prominent criminal defendant was no longer before them.

That man, Donald J. Trump, was facing potential criminal charges from the grand jury this year over his business practices. But in the weeks since the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, stopped presenting evidence to the jurors about Mr. Trump, new signs have emerged that the former president will not be indicted in Manhattan in the foreseeable future — if at all.

At least three of the witnesses once central to the case have either not heard from the district attorney’s office in months, or have not been asked to testify, according to people with knowledge of the matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

Evergreen. Trump slips another hook as the election watchdog against corruption deadlocks. But in light of the SCOTUS decision we're in the new Kafkaesque age where there is now no corruption.
The Federal Election Commission has decided not to take action against former President Donald Trump after commissioners deadlocked over whether his campaign broke the law by masking how it was spending cash during the 2020 campaign.

In a letter on Monday, the FEC notified the Campaign Legal Center of the outcome. The nonprofit group first brought the complaint against Trump in 2020, alleging his campaign was “laundering” hundreds of millions in spending from mandatory public disclosure by routing payments through companies that were tied to his former campaign manager, Brad Parscale.

The practice has long been considered against the law. But in recent years, the FEC, which is evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, has frequently deadlocked on major decisions such at this one.

That has effectively set a series of new precedents that have slowly whittled away at the law governing how money can be used in national politics. Still unclear is what sort of legal rationale was used to justify the decision.

Adav Noti, a former FEC attorney who is now the Campaign Legal Center's vice president and legal director, said the commission won't release its legal reasoning for several weeks. He said filing an appeal would hinge on more details.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Golden age of fraud.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:28 am Trump slips another hook. The people charged to protect us continuously fail us. And this hell blasted system rewards them for it.
When some two dozen New Yorkers filed into a Manhattan courthouse this week to finish out their grand jury service, the case against a man who would have been the world’s most prominent criminal defendant was no longer before them.

That man, Donald J. Trump, was facing potential criminal charges from the grand jury this year over his business practices. But in the weeks since the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, stopped presenting evidence to the jurors about Mr. Trump, new signs have emerged that the former president will not be indicted in Manhattan in the foreseeable future — if at all.

At least three of the witnesses once central to the case have either not heard from the district attorney’s office in months, or have not been asked to testify, according to people with knowledge of the matter.
Oh yeah, the FEC has been completely defanged for at least a decade, in part because it was designed in a naive era and is thus split between democrats and republicans, meaning that you need at least one GOP vote to do anything. Which given that the GOP has long since descended into madness, means the FEC does nothing.

Has BIden nominated any Republican commissioners for the FEC?
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 7:17 pm Golden age of fraud.
Not related to Trump but entirely radical along the same lines to enable endless fraud.

Edit: I honestly can't imagine the SCOTUS upholding this (if it makes it past en banc review). The ends of this line of thinking is chaos and violence.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 3:49 pm
LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 7:17 pm Golden age of fraud.
Not related to Trump but entirely radical along the same lines to enable endless fraud.

Edit: I honestly can't imagine the SCOTUS upholding this (if it makes it past en banc review). The ends of this line of thinking is chaos and violence.

Not that this decision isn't bad, but it's not true to say that it "dismantled the SEC's power to enforce securities laws". Basically depending in part on the statute being enforced, the SEC has long had the power (and choice) to sue people for securities law violations either in an Article 1 administrative court (internal executive administrative court) OR in federal court. Note that administrative court decisions are appealable first to the SEC Commissioner's then to federal court. This decision would essentially (as I understand it) destroy the SEC's power to sue in administrative court, which would essentially mean that the SEC would now have to file all of its enforcement actions in federal court.

Not great, but not the end of securities law enforcement. The main downside is that there are some technical securities provisions that administrative judges understand a lot better than most federal district court judges. But also this issue has been percolating for some time, and for at least the past few years the SEC has shied away from administrative actions anyway for fear that this decision was coming sooner or later.

edit: just to add that because this isn't the end of securities law enforcement the odds that SCOTUS upholds this are probably higher than you're thinking.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 4:16 pm
malchior wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 3:49 pm
LawBeefaroni wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 7:17 pm Golden age of fraud.
Not related to Trump but entirely radical along the same lines to enable endless fraud.

Edit: I honestly can't imagine the SCOTUS upholding this (if it makes it past en banc review). The ends of this line of thinking is chaos and violence.

Not that this decision isn't bad, but it's not true to say that it "dismantled the SEC's power to enforce securities laws".
Sure, in the most technical sense. Most SEC enforcement matters are handled out of court. As you said Article 1, then Commissioners, then Federal Court. The last of which is not scalable and has almost no bandwidth. Just to math this. There was 637 enforcement actions in 2021. 70-75% of them went to administrative courts. It gets more complicated too because follow on actions from previous criminal or civil convictions are handled in Article 1 courts. Those would also now need to go through the Federal Courts. So unless we are saying we can pass a law to turn all the Article 1 courts into "legal courts" then we have to face what it actually means. It very much actually dismantles the ability of the system to function which is what I think the person here is going after. It's certainly not a stretch to describe it this way.
Not great, but not the end of securities law enforcement. The main downside is that there are some technical securities provisions that administrative judges understand a lot better than most federal district court judges.
I disagree on the downside. IMO the main downside is the Federal Court bandwidth issue. There is just no way to get around that massive problem. The technical expertise is important for sure because if this viewpoint expands then the Courts have to take on all sorts of technical matters they have little expertise in. In any case, this is sure a radical way to force a dysfunctional Congress to face a reorganization of the court system.
But also this issue has been percolating for some time, and for at least the past few years the SEC has shied away from administrative actions anyway for fear that this decision was coming sooner or later.
Right but that is because we're seeing the end of a radicalization effort to dismantle the administrative state. We've been running SEC action this way for what? About a 100 years? In reality probably 85 years as the SEC built out administrative practice. However in that time the financial system has grown by several orders of magnitude.

edit: just to add that because this isn't the end of securities law enforcement the odds that SCOTUS upholds this are probably higher than you're thinking.
You might be right that they might go along with it on the pretense it doesn't "end" security law. I actually think they'd potentially go beyond and go after Chevron entirely. But that goes to my larger point. This is part of a radical project to dismantle the administrative state and it's potentially very disruptive. Even if it doesn't lead to chaos, we have no idea what this level of legal transformation will do to our nation.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

I mean, as an SEC attorney I can tell you that I don't expect it to change my work much at all, since like I said we've already been avoiding administrative actions in any contested (non-settled) context for this reason. I have to think that the vast majority of the admin actions at this point are settlements. I imagine more settlements get filed in district court (at least inside the 5th Circuit), which would increase the caseload / burden but not by all that much I would think.

It is a pretty radical opinion in the context of settled administrative law practices going back a century, though this has been telegraphed in a lot of court decisions the past five years or so (I think including some SCOTUS opinions). Not that it makes it much less radical, just less unexpected.

You are right that the one area in particular that this mucks up is the set of violations that are written with the intention of being enforced primarily or even exclusively through administrative actions (including follow on actions, and actions seeking to bar brokers & others from the industry). That definitely gets more complicated - I think the SEC could probably bring those in district court and ask the court to use its equitable / injunctive powers to bar the relevant individual from the industry, but I imagine that's a lot less predictable in terms of the remedies that you would get.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 10:44 pm I mean, as an SEC attorney I can tell you that I don't expect it to change my work much at all, since like I said we've already been avoiding administrative actions in any contested (non-settled) context for this reason. I have to think that the vast majority of the admin actions at this point are settlements. I imagine more settlements get filed in district court (at least inside the 5th Circuit), which would increase the caseload / burden but not by all that much I would think.
I guess my question is what happens if say some not insignificant percentage of cases stops settling? With the worst of the worst working a delay game? The legal risk math has changed quite now hasn't it (at least the 5th for now)? Something that occurred to me overnight is that the government doesn't have the greatest track record winning jury trials on complicated financial matters. I wonder how risk averse the government will be knowing they might be drawn into complex litigation where they have to explain securities law to a non-expert audience.
It is a pretty radical opinion in the context of settled administrative law practices going back a century, though this has been telegraphed in a lot of court decisions the past five years or so (I think including some SCOTUS opinions). Not that it makes it much less radical, just less unexpected.
Yeah I got what you were saying there but it is pretty alarming to see it happening. For those who see the various dangers approaching this seem like another domino falling. It is a little relief that you think it won't change much but I can't help but worry about all the unintended consequences.
You are right that the one area in particular that this mucks up is the set of violations that are written with the intention of being enforced primarily or even exclusively through administrative actions (including follow on actions, and actions seeking to bar brokers & others from the industry). That definitely gets more complicated - I think the SEC could probably bring those in district court and ask the court to use its equitable / injunctive powers to bar the relevant individual from the industry, but I imagine that's a lot less predictable in terms of the remedies that you would get.
The only bright spot having read the opinion it seems there is an escape hatch that Congress could redraft the law. Will it happen? It doesn't feel like it.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Unagi »

El Guapo wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 10:44 pm It is a pretty radical opinion in the context of settled administrative law practices going back a century
I'm starting to see a pattern...
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16436
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Zarathud »

The Supreme Court is expecting Congress to act and pass good laws. If only that was still true.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by LordMortis »

Unagi wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 9:59 am
El Guapo wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 10:44 pm It is a pretty radical opinion in the context of settled administrative law practices going back a century
I'm starting to see a pattern...
Is that :lol: or a :cry: I'm supposed to reply with?
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

Zarathud wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:10 am The Supreme Court is expecting Congress to act and pass good laws. If only that was still true.
I don't think they are expecting that. It's more the conservative majority wants to blow a hole in major governmental action and responses that it doesn't like. And while doing so it's useful for them to pretend that it's simple for Congress to fix it if they are so inclined.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Unagi »

Yeah, they are shoving the toy train off the track and telling the kid they should have designed the toy train better if they didn’t want someone to just shove it off the track.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:28 am
Zarathud wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:10 am The Supreme Court is expecting Congress to act and pass good laws. If only that was still true.
I don't think they are expecting that. It's more the conservative majority wants to blow a hole in major governmental action and responses that it doesn't like. And while doing so it's useful for them to pretend that it's simple for Congress to fix it if they are so inclined.
This. Expanding on the earlier point that this was seen coming, it's no surprise that long-time thorns in the side of conservatives are now being targeted for destruction. They've been telling us about their radical plans for years. No one believed it could happen. But it is and people start getting ready because this is only the beginning. We are facing years of chaos.

Edit: I mean this week we are seeing some level of legal mayhem elsewhere. The NY AG is going after Twitter for not anticipating the Buffalo livestream with some people saying that the livestream censoring likely fell afoul of the TX Social media law. If you really start paying attention, you can see that frictions/contradictions in our system mean we are facing increasing risks of destabilization.
User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 17424
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by pr0ner »

Because I don't fall into the doom and gloom camp, a couple of other threads on the SEC decision.



Hodor.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

Honestly, one smart way to respond to this ruling is to say "fine, but if this is the way that things are going to go, we need to massively increase the number of judgeships and then fill them to manage the caseload in federal court". And then start filling those spots ASAP.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:22 am Honestly, one smart way to respond to this ruling is to say "fine, but if this is the way that things are going to go, we need to massively increase the number of judgeships and then fill them to manage the caseload in federal court". And then start filling those spots ASAP.
That's certainly a path forward. How the heck do they actually do it though? And filling those courts? We know some people who are adept at gumming those works up and do the inverse when they are in charge.
pr0ner wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:15 am Because I don't fall into the doom and gloom camp, a couple of other threads on the SEC decision.
I'm in the doom and gloom camp because IMO it's a matter of just looking at where we are now and then remembering when people said what is happening now was doom and gloom 5 years ago. 5 years ago was the doom and gloom of 10 years prior. It's accelerating.

In any case, I totally get where he is coming from but I'm pretty skeptical of these reasonable takes. While they are eminently reasonable - they are not *possible* in a system that is failing. And I just don't get why people can't see that. We see more and more evidence every day. I honestly understand 1930s Germany now. I'm not going to say it'll get even close to that bad but I more mean this belief in stability while it's actively collapsing around them.
Last edited by malchior on Thu May 19, 2022 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:33 am
El Guapo wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:22 am Honestly, one smart way to respond to this ruling is to say "fine, but if this is the way that things are going to go, we need to massively increase the number of judgeships and then fill them to manage the caseload in federal court". And then start filling those spots ASAP.
That's certainly a path forward. How the heck do they actually do it though? And filling those courts? We know some people who are adept at gumming those works up and do the inverse when they are in charge.
Well, as always the ability to do anything is contingent on the good will of Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema. FWIW neither of them has (as far as I'm aware) obstructed anything as the Biden administration has filled as many courts as possible. I think it's more likely that they would go along with a bill that simply increases the number of judgeships than a bill that would address the substance of the ALJ issue. Honestly this seems like a potential opportunity to do court packing at the Court of Appeals / District Court levels without taking too much heat from the mainstream media.

However, the bigger issue may be the calendar - they'd have to get the bill done and get the resulting judges at least mostly confirmed before January 2023 (unless they hold onto the Senate, which is possible but I don't know how optimistic I am at this point).
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:33 am
In any case, I totally get where he is coming from but I'm pretty skeptical of these reasonable takes. While they are eminently reasonable - they are not *possible* in a system that is failing. And I just don't get why people can't see that. We see more and more evidence every day. I honestly understand 1930s Germany now. I'm not going to say it'll get even close to that bad but I more mean this belief in stability while it's actively collapsing around them.
Oh, I'm in the doom and gloom camp generally, just that this decision isn't apocalyptic to me. I'm way more worried about other decisions coming down the pike. And as to securities enforcement, I'm way more worried about how this court will interpret the elements of securities fraud going forward.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:39 amHowever, the bigger issue may be the calendar - they'd have to get the bill done and get the resulting judges at least mostly confirmed before January 2023 (unless they hold onto the Senate, which is possible but I don't know how optimistic I am at this point).
Also, the hole is probably going to get much bigger. I guess I see this type of thinking as tactical reaction to ever changing conditions for something that's already in the oven. We're cooked and the sooner people realize it the higher the chance they take the critical upcoming elections seriously. We need to have large outsized victories for democracy.
El Guapo wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:42 amOh, I'm in the doom and gloom camp generally, just that this decision isn't apocalyptic to me.
On this we agree. I don't see it as individually apocalyptic. It's more about the larger picture for me. We're seeing courts unafraid to be radical. Anyone who has studied authoritarian collapses knows that the courts are the last thing that goes off the tracks before the fall happens. And that's what I unfortunately see us facing here.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

Here is an argument that the SEC decision invites even more chaos. He also provides some context about the judges in the majority.

malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 11:09 am Yeah, and it doesn't really matter all that much whether the indictment holds up and gets a conviction. It becomes another narrative talking point (see? The Biden DOJ indicted someone for the Russia investigation hoax!). On top of that, this becomes another way to lean on any potential whistleblower on Trump / Republican misdeeds in the future (because who is going to risk a federal indictment to report on Trump to the FBI)?
The Sussman trial is underway and we have Fox News critiquing the goddamn jury pool in near real-time. This is why we will see the GOP win this "civil war". There is an entire MAGA army babbling about this trial. They are all talking about how the trial is rigged. Does anyone think Giuliani wouldn't have lost his mind if someone did this to him when he was a prosecutor? Sheesh. All to protect Trump and end our democracy.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 5:53 am Here is an argument that the SEC decision invites even more chaos. He also provides some context about the judges in the majority.
Yeah, the point about the Social Security ALJ judges is a good one - that would be an enormous problem. And about how the decision is legally bonkers (especially the first two conclusions - as he notes the 'fireability' issue is at least one that conservatives have been laying the groundwork on for awhile now, meaning that there is precedent in prior decisions for that point at least).
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 11:55 amAs he notes the 'fireability' issue is at least one that conservatives have been laying the groundwork on for awhile now, meaning that there is precedent in prior decisions for that point at least).
That one in particular is bonkers to me. It is legitimately an autocratic stance. The President should be able to put his thumb on the scales to influence civil proceedings at his whim? The current balance seems far superior as a governance model to protect ALJs from undue pressure. But then again it clearly isn't about governance.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 12:01 pm
El Guapo wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 11:55 amAs he notes the 'fireability' issue is at least one that conservatives have been laying the groundwork on for awhile now, meaning that there is precedent in prior decisions for that point at least).
That one in particular is bonkers to me. It is legitimately an autocratic stance. The President should be able to put his thumb on the scales to influence civil proceedings at his whim? The current balance seems far superior as a governance model to protect ALJs from undue pressure. But then again it clearly isn't about governance.
It's this whole "unitary executive theory" bullshit that the Federalist Society has been peddling for awhile now. The idea being that the President is head of the executive branch, so everyone there ultimately works for them, so if Congress (a separate branch) tries to put limits on what the president can do with regards to people in the executive branch it is unconstitutional interference in a co-equal branch of government.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

El Guapo wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 12:03 pm
malchior wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 12:01 pm
El Guapo wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 11:55 amAs he notes the 'fireability' issue is at least one that conservatives have been laying the groundwork on for awhile now, meaning that there is precedent in prior decisions for that point at least).
That one in particular is bonkers to me. It is legitimately an autocratic stance. The President should be able to put his thumb on the scales to influence civil proceedings at his whim? The current balance seems far superior as a governance model to protect ALJs from undue pressure. But then again it clearly isn't about governance.
It's this whole "unitary executive theory" bullshit that the Federalist Society has been peddling for awhile now. The idea being that the President is head of the executive branch, so everyone there ultimately works for them, so if Congress (a separate branch) tries to put limits on what the president can do with regards to people in the executive branch it is unconstitutional interference in a co-equal branch of government.
Yeah. It's a mess. You have to memory hole that all the branches are supposed to have checks on each other anyway. The President can or could have vetoed the laws creating the restrictions in the first place. Or that the courts routinely step on the executive when *they* feel like it. All that bullshit is a snake eating its own head.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Grifman »

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Grifman »

Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Smoove_B »

I'm sure this will totally work:
Donald Trump removed himself from the board of his Sarasota-based social media company, records show, just weeks before the company was issued federal subpoenas by both the Securities and Exchange Commission and a grand jury in Manhattan.

Trump, the chairman of Trump Media and Technology Group, was one of six board members removed on June 8, state business records show.

Among the board members removed were Kashyap Patel, Trump's former point man in the White House; Scott Glabe, a former assistant to Trump who was counsel for the media company; and Donald Trump, Jr.

The SEC served Trump Media and Technology Group with a subpoena on June 27, according to a regulatory filing.
If they're no longer listed as board members, clearly they could not have been doing crime. Solid thinking.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Octavious
Posts: 20035
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:50 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Octavious »

Honestly it will probably work based on past history. I barely knew the company. All I ever heard was that it was bad news.
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.

Shameless plug for my website: www.nettphoto.com
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19324
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Jaymann »

In before the indictment.

Image
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Pyperkub »

The grifts just keep on coming...
Back in 2010, Trump Jr. and his business partners made a surprising vow to build millions of units of prefabricated low-cost housing for some of the world’s poorest families and ship them to countries across the globe. The company also had what it marketed as a seemingly miraculous solution for helping to power the homes: Along with the housing kits, it would distribute small energy-producing wind turbines that could be affixed to their roofs.

What happened next offers a glimpse into how Don Jr. does business...

...Business plans for the company, newly obtained in the course of our investigation, include Donald Trump Jr.’s photograph and financial projections that indicated hundreds of thousands of homes would be built, creating billions of dollars in revenue. In reality, all we were able to find are a few properties that the company built, including one for the mayor of North Charleston, South Carolina, a major booster of the company, and a handful of kits the company sent abroad.

In the process, they left investors high and dry and sued creditors rather than pay them what they were owed. The company made questionable promises about wind energy turbines, claimed giant losses on its tax returns, damaged a small law firm by failing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills, and refused to pay a temporary employment agency for workers the company provided.

Ultimately, one burned customer told us, Don Jr. resembled more “a three-card monte dealer” than a benevolent son of a billionaire trying to make his mark.
Yup. You *will* be swindled if you go into business with these grifters.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
coopasonic
Posts: 20969
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Dallas-ish

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by coopasonic »

Who decides it's a good idea to invest in a business with any Trump involved? I used to work in commercial banking on the IT side. I know most commercial lending is considered very low risk, but do SOME risk assessment.
-Coop
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Pyperkub »

coopasonic wrote: Fri Jul 22, 2022 1:24 pm Who decides it's a good idea to invest in a business with any Trump involved? I used to work in commercial banking on the IT side. I know most commercial lending is considered very low risk, but do SOME risk assessment.
Eh, Like any mark in a Con, they don't think they'll be the ones who get burned. It's part of the Con.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Enlarge Image
coopasonic wrote: Fri Jul 22, 2022 1:24 pm Who decides it's a good idea to invest in a business with any Trump involved? I used to work in commercial banking on the IT side. I know most commercial lending is considered very low risk, but do SOME risk assessment.
Your can make money if you end up on the right side of the scam. Greed will make people take greater risks.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41247
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by El Guapo »

Pyperkub wrote: Fri Jul 22, 2022 1:27 pm
coopasonic wrote: Fri Jul 22, 2022 1:24 pm Who decides it's a good idea to invest in a business with any Trump involved? I used to work in commercial banking on the IT side. I know most commercial lending is considered very low risk, but do SOME risk assessment.
Eh, Like any mark in a Con, they don't think they'll be the ones who get burned. It's part of the Con.
Yeah, I'm sure there's a lot of "Trump wouldn't screw me - he only screws people that are dumb and/or who deserve it."
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by Grifman »

Trump’s legal team is preparing defenses (but they won’t work), by the always excellent Teri Kainefield:

Last edited by Grifman on Mon Aug 01, 2022 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Post by malchior »

Grifman wrote: Mon Aug 01, 2022 3:07 pmTrump’s legal team is preparing defenses (but they won’t wor)
Narrator in 2 years: They worked.
Post Reply