myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Trump will likely be a defendant for the rest of his life
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17322
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Mon Aug 29, 2022 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isobars missed the message. Make elections just suggestions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Tue Aug 30, 2022 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ooops, gee the RNC is not going to pay trumps legal fees for the stealing of top-secret documents...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republican-party-refusing-to-pay-trump-s-legal-bills-over-mar-a-lago-documents-scandal-report/ar-AA11hvUD?cvid=82be3e71e49c4d5af681176a536b930b&ocid=winp2sv1plustaskbarhover


Republican Party refusing to pay Trump's legal bills over Mar-a-Lago documents scandal: report


Quote:
ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl wrote in his post-Donald Trump administration book that on Jan. 20, as Trump was flying from the White House for the final time, he spoke to the head of the Republican Party and threatened to start his own party. RNC chair Ronna Romney McDaniel reportedly told Trump that if he started a third party that the RNC would stop paying his legal bills, which were costing the party millions.

Politico reported Tuesday, however, that that decision has ended. According to the report, any legal fees having to do with Trump's retention of government documents is not being paid by the RNC.

The report explained that Trump hired Chris Kise, a former Florida solicitor general, to represent him in the FBI search case, it was announced on Tuesday. Thus far, Trump has suffered with a legal team that is moving quickly to appear on television but not in filing a legal defense for their client.

Related video: Trump's legal team to request review of seized Mar-a-Lago documents

planning to ask a Florida judge to appoint an intermediary to review
Play
Current Time 0:05
/
Duration 3:18
LQ
CaptionsFullscreen
Trump's legal team to request review of seized Mar-a-Lago documents
Unmute
0
View on Watch
Christina Bobb may be under her own legal problems after signing court documents saying that Trump had already turned over all of the documents. That turned out to be false.

Estás buscando trabajar desde casa y obtener un segundo ingreso? Mira esto
Ad
Mejores Inversores
Estás buscando trabajar desde casa y obtener un segundo ingreso? Mira esto
IN OTHER NEWS: DOJ obtains second search warrant for phone of Trump lawyer John Eastman

Thus far, the legal team has argued that Trump isn't bound by the laws about handling classified material or stealing government documents. Sources close to Trump revealed that on multiple occasions he shouted, "They're mine!" That's false. As with past presidents, the presidential library will be able to possess papers, but not until they go through the archiving process from the National Archives. The government agency manages the documents even if they're in a presidential library, they explained in a press release dispelling Trump's accusation that Barack Obama stole 30,000 documents.

Politico also reported that for his legal services, Kise will be paid by Trump, who regularly stiffs lawyers and business partners when it comes time to sign off on the bill.

"A person familiar with the matter confirmed that the Republican National Committee is not paying for Trump’s legal fees related to the FBI’s investigation and retrieval of documents at Mar-a-Lago," Politico reported. "That’s a departure of sorts from the past. The RNC has, for example, paid for Trump’s legal bills involving New York Attorney General Tish James’ investigation into the former president’s private businesses. The committee would stop paying Trump’s legal fees should he formally declare his candidacy for president in the 2024 election — a step he has hinted at but has yet to take."

In the past, Trump has said that he can't announce for president "yet" because doing so would start a lot of campaign finance things in motion. In reality, what would be set in motion is that his legal fees couldn't be covered by the RNC because he isn't the GOP nominee. Declaring also means he would no longer be able to raise money into a super PAC. He would be restricted to only raising money into a presidential campaign.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2022 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As we know pediophile trump has been involved in court more than any other human in the history of the world. sued and been sued more than any human in the history of the world. Including a case of sexual assult and being a pediophile raping a 13 year old child. He did not counter sue either of those cases.

Well here is one catching up with huim... He sued Clinton after leaving office... and the judge threw it out and was not to kind to the serial sexual molester child rapist.

Remember he made a promise to go after anyone that lied about his sexual assult and pediophile because he is rich... but to date he has gone after any of those just seems Hillary... again he ordered Barr to go after his "KILL FILE" as we just found out from a book from one involved in his legal attacks while president on his opponents.


https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-anti-clinton-lawsuit-fails-badly-lead-sanctions-rcna47016



Trump’s anti-Clinton lawsuit fails badly, could lead to sanctions


Quote:
When Donald Trump threatens to sue a perceived foe, the rhetoric is often hollow. The Republican likes to occasionally try to intimidate people into submission, and his allusions to litigation — with no real intentions of follow-through — are his way of thumping his chest.

Every once in a while, though, the threats have meaning, at least to the extent that the former president and his lawyers actually file the case. That does not mean, however, that the lawsuits have merit.

Last summer, for example, Trump sued social media giants, accusing them of conspiring against him. The litigation was more of a stunt than a legitimate case, and it was dismissed.

Around the time that lawsuit was collapsing, the former president came up with a related idea: Trump sued Hillary Clinton and several other Democrats, alleging they tried to rig the 2016 presidential election by bringing attention to his Russia scandal. The case, believe it or not, alleged “racketeering” and a “conspiracy to commit injurious falsehood,” among other things.

By any fair measure, the lawsuit was utterly bonkers, though some on Fox News encouraged its viewers to take the matter quite seriously. The suit certainly had a serious goal: Trump claimed the Russia scandal cost him more than $24 million — and he wanted his legal targets to pay far more than that.

Unfortunately for the former president, he will not be collecting any money through this case. Axios reported this morning:

A U.S. judge has thrown out former President Trump’s lawsuit against presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, saying the former president “is seeking to flaunt a two-hundred-page political manifesto outlining his grievances against those that have opposed him.”

At face value, this was the obvious and inevitable resolution of a case that never should’ve been filed. As a recent Washington Post analysis explained, before the ruling was issued: “From the very beginning of Donald Trump’s lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and a smattering of nearly 50 others, it becomes abundantly clear what this is about — and it’s not about winning a legal judgment. ... This is a press release.”

U.S. District Court Judge Donald Middlebrooks was rather explicit in endorsing this criticism.

But just below the surface, there’s a little more to this.

What Sarah Palin and the GOP don’t understand about her defeat
First, it’s worth emphasizing that American courtrooms are not supposed to be abused by politicians filing frivolous cases for no reasons. In fact, those who do open themselves up to possible sanctions — and in this case, the district court judge seemed open to that possibility.

Second, in April, Trump’s lawyers asked Middlebrooks to recuse himself from the case because he was nominated for the federal bench by Bill Clinton. The jurist obviously declined, though he raised a point at the time that’s even more interesting in hindsight.

“I note that [the former president] filed this lawsuit in the Fort Pierce division of this District, where only one federal judge sits: Judge Aileen Cannon, who Plaintiff appointed in 2020,” Middlebrooks wrote. “Despite the odds, this case landed with me instead. And when Plaintiff is a litigant before a judge that he himself appointed, he does not tend to advance these same sorts of bias concerns.”

In other words, when Trump and his lawyers filed this foolish case, they appear to have been “judge shopping” — a practice in which attorneys file litigation in specific courts in the hopes of getting a specific judge who’ll give them favorable treatment. When suing Clinton, Team Trump hoped the case would land in Aileen Cannon’s courtroom.

And who’s Aileen Cannon? She’s the Trump-appointed judge who agreed to Trump’s request for a special master in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case — in a legal ruling that experts from the left, right and center panned as indefensible.

Unfortunately for the Republican, his anti-Clinton civil case ended up in more capable hands.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-and-barr-s-corruption-of-the-justice-department-was-worse-than-we-knew/ar-AA11BYhw?ocid=winp2sv1plustaskbar&cvid=8d533eb36901421295b6e07ab511fea6


Trump and Barr’s Corruption of the Justice Department Was Worse Than We Knew


Quote:
The conventional wisdom regarding Donald Trump’s presidency is that the system works. Yes, Trump may have raged on Twitter about locking up his enemies and shutting down all the investigations, but when the smoke cleared, Robert Mueller was able to complete his work, Hillary was not locked up, and adults like William Barr were able to land the plane.


Geoffrey Berman’s inside account from the Justice Department deeply undercuts this comforting belief. Berman, who served as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York until Barr sacked him, describes constant pressure to go easy on Trump’s cronies while bringing charges against anybody who opposed him. That is hardly a surprise; Trump blurted out his belief that the Justice Department was his personal weapon all the time, and a stream of underlings has affirmed that he made these demands loudly and repeatedly behind closed doors.

The truly novel revelations brought forward by Berman is that Trump’s pressure campaign frequently succeeded. Officials loyal to Trump successfully pressured the Department of Justice to bring charges against Gregory Craig, a Democratic lawyer, for violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Berman responded that, after investigating the matter, he believed Craig was innocent, but his deputy told him to “even things out” — a reference to previous cases charging Republicans — by indicting Craig.

When Trump began publicly demanding the Department charge John Kerry for violating the Logan Act by trying to persuade Iran not to build a nuclear weapon, Trump began publicly calling him a criminal. Trump’s demands made their way down to Berman, who was forced to investigate Kerry, and faced complaints that he wasn’t moving quickly enough.

Recommended video: Former Attorney General Bill Barr Says The Dept. Of Justice Is Close To Having Enough Evidence To Indict Donald Trump

technical case against Trump for his handling of sensitive documents

Berman also notes that Barr’s deputies tried to remove any references to illegal behavior by Trump from the indictment of Trump lawyer Michael Cohen. Barr tried and failed to stifle the investigation into the violations of campaign-finance laws Cohen had undertaken at Trump’s behest. Trump was never charged.


What Berman reveals is that the pressure to weaponize the Justice Department against Trump’s enemies (and to protect him and his criminal friends) did not always fail, and it did not merely come from Trump himself. Barr and other officials in the Department frequently applied pressure to advance Trump’s corrupt ends. Barr successfully intervened several times to help Trump, by reducing sentences for Roger Stone and attempting to drop its prosecution of Michael Flynn.

It is true that Barr was only willing to go so far, and when Trump’s attempt to secure an unelected second term devolved into conspiracy theories so bizarre they couldn’t win a court case, Barr was ready to concede defeat. Even then, however, he left quietly and wrote an obsequious note praising Trump rather than warn the country that the president had gone stark raving mad.

Berman got his job because he had worked on Trump’s campaign. The system “worked” to the extent that Barr was less deranged than, say, a Rudy Giuliani. It did not protect either the process or the outcome of the Justice Department’s nonpolitical integrity.

What is perhaps most notable is the conclusions the relevant Republican actors have drawn from the experience. The Republican Establishment has decided Barr is a hero. Trump has decided he needed an attorney general even more loyal than Barr. And virtually the entire GOP believes the Justice Department is currently being corrupted, and that Merrick Garland is only investigating Trump’s stolen documents because Joe Biden wants to help the Democratic midterm campaign.

The system did not work under Trump. And every indication is that the next time Trump or any other Republican gains control over it, the outcome will be worse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-trump-lawyer-warns-ex-president-in-serious-legal-water-and-could-be-barred-from-running-for-office/ar-AA11HMtE?cvid=825f4e7df3154c8886fa0e72e2c4cb58&ocid=winp2sv1plustaskbarhover


Former Trump lawyer warns ex-president ‘in serious legal water’ and could be barred from running for office


Quote:
Trump administration White House lawyer Ty Cobb believes the former president is “in serious legal water” and that the investigation into the Mar-a-Lago papers is part of a broader inquiry into crimes relating to the Capitol riot and efforts to overturn the 2020 election.


He also thinks that the former president’s actions on January 6 could see him barred from running for the presidency ever again.

Speaking to CBS News podcast The Takeout, Mr Cobb said: “It is about the bigger picture, the January 6 issues, the fake electors, the whole scam with regard to the ‘big lie’ and the attempts to … cling to the presidency in a desperate fashion.”

Mr Cobb says he came to this conclusion because of the broad scope of the search warrant that allowed FBI agents to enter Donald Trump’s Palm Beach home.

“The search warrant is unusually large and broad,” the former federal prosecutor told CBS chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett. “It’s very, very comprehensive in terms of the types of documents that the government could take.”

“For example, you can take any box that has a document. You can take any box adjacent to a box that has it,” he added. “Those are pretty broad parameters.”

Regarding the former president’s legal prospects, Mr Cobb said: “I think the president is in serious legal water, not so much because of the search, but because of the obstructive activity he took in connection with the January 6 proceeding.”


“I think that and the attempts to interfere in the election count in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and perhaps Michigan. That was the first time in American history that a president unconstitutionally attempted to remain in power illegally,” he added.


Mr Cobb believes the possibility of an indictment against Mr Trump is “very high”.

Regarding the motives of the former president for denying the outcome of the 2020 election and attempting to overturn the results, Mr Cobb said: “I believe former President Trump to be a deeply wounded narcissist, and he is often incapable of acting other than in his perceived self-interest or for revenge.”

He added: “I think those are the two compelling instincts that guide his actions.”

Further, Mr Cobb thinks that Mr Trump’s actions on 6 January 2021 could lead him to being barred from running for the presidency again.

“There is a simple way to disqualify President Trump,” Mr Cobb said. “He clearly violated the 14th Amendment of the Constitution’s Article III when he gave aid and comfort and three hours of inaction with regard to what was happening on the grounds of the Capitol. That clearly gave aid and comfort to the insurrectionists.”

Mr Cobb represented the White House during special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into suspected collusion with Russia in the run-up to the 2016 election. No charges were filed against Mr Trump in that inquiry.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2022 8:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

here is an old one where he admitted volting money laundrering. He has a criminal past that goes on for decades. And this is what right wingers love for their hero.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUc8ijxKdtE&t=31s

https://www.reuters.com/article/trump-ent-trumptajmahal-moneylaundering-idUSL1N0VL2L120150211



Trump Taj Mahal casino settles U.S. money laundering claims


Quote:

Feb 11 (Reuters) - The parent of Trump Taj Mahal, one of Atlantic City, New Jersey’s struggling casinos, has settled U.S. government charges that it violated federal laws designed to thwart money laundering, court filings show.

Trump Taj Mahal Associates LLC agreed to the assessment of a $10 million civil penalty by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, according to a proposed consent order filed on Tuesday with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Delaware.

The penalty will take the form of a general unsecured claim in Trump Taj Mahal’s bankruptcy.

In exchange, Trump Taj Mahal admitted to have willfully violated reporting and record-keeping requirements under the federal Bank Secrecy Act from 2010 to 2012.

These violations included many that had been previously revealed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service as far back as 2003.

The settlement requires court approval.

Any payout to the government may be less than $50,000, because unsecured creditors are expected to receive only a small fraction of sums owed, court papers show.

A lawyer for Trump Taj Mahal, whose parent Trump Entertainment Resorts Inc is also in Chapter 11, did not immediately respond on Wednesday to a request for comment.

The Bank Secrecy Act requires casinos to report suspicious transactions of $5,000 or larger.

Trump Taj Mahal failed to file about half of the required suspicious activity reports during periods covered by two recent IRS reviews, the consent order said.

Several Atlantic City casinos have closed or gone bankrupt in the last year, after competition from nearby states ended the city’s former dominance of gaming in the eastern United States.

Trump Entertainment’s bankruptcy reorganization calls for Trump Taj Mahal, which has 2,248 hotel rooms and 18 restaurants, to remain open, court papers show.

The case is In re: Trump Entertainment Resorts Inc et al U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware, No. 14-12103. (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Tom Brown)


https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-taxes-lost-money-832667/


Business Genius Trump Lost More Money Than Anyone in America Between 1985-1994


Quote:
The "art of the deal" apparently involves losing hundreds of millions of dollars year after year, according to a new report from the New York Times

BY RYAN BORT

MAY 8, 2019

The secret Trump is hiding in his taxes? He's a huge loser. WALTER MCBRIDE/REX/SHUTTERSTOCK
PRESIDENT TRUMP BUILT his reputation on his business acumen and negotiating skills. On Tuesday night, the New York Times provided a trove of evidence that he doesn’t have much of either. The news organization obtained the president’s tax information from 1985-1994, and the numbers reveal that the only real skill possessed by the vaunted real estate mogul was hemorrhaging obscene amounts of money. In fact, Trump lost more money than any other American taxpayer over the course of the decade in question: $1.17 billion.

Trump lost so much money between 1985 and 1994 — including over 250 million in both 1990 and 1991 — that he didn’t even have to pay income taxes in eight of the 10 years. Despite the losses, Trump was able to maintain his ultra-luxe lifestyle because most of the money had been borrowed from banks, and because of the $413 million (in today’s dollars, adjusted for inflation) he was able to secure from his father by bobbing and weaving his way around the tax code, as the Times reported last fall.


https://www.nbcnews.com/business/real-estate/russian-money-flows-us-real-estate-rcna17723



Russian money flows through U.S. real estate


Quote:
As President Joe Biden vows to punish Russia with financial sanctions by seizing yachts, mansions and other assets, members of the real estate community and lawmakers are skeptical about how successful he’ll be at getting access to the money Russians have been pouring into real estate for decades. From Sunny Isles, Florida, to Cleveland and high rises in Manhattan, post-Soviet oligarchs’ money has poured into big cities and the heartland in recent decades with little recourse.

That’s because there is very little the government can do to find out who owns what real estate in the U.S., which has become a “destination of choice” for money launderers throughout the world, said Louise Shelley, the director of the transnational crime and corruption center at George Mason University, who has been an expert witness about how Russian money is laundered through real estate.

At a minimum, from cases reported in the last five years, more than $2.3 billion has been laundered through U.S. real estate, including millions more through other alternative assets, like art, jewelry and yachts, according to a report in August by Global Financial Integrity, a nonprofit group that researches illicit money flows.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2022 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-says-trump-could-be-culpable-for-january-6-and-says-lawsuits-against-the-former-president-can-proceed/ar-AA12bkwm?cvid=e505c4993c2f491bf5458a6e9f9ace0a&ocid=winp2sv1plustaskbarhover

Judge says Trump could be culpable for January 6 and says lawsuits against the former President can proceed

Quote:

Civil lawsuits seeking to hold Donald Trump accountable for the January 6, 2021, insurrection can move forward in court, a federal judge said Friday in a ruling outlining how the former President could conceivably be responsible for inciting the attack on the US Capitol.

of their leaders and members for conspiring to terrorize the District

Trump’s statements to his supporters before the riot “is the essence of civil conspiracy,” Judge Amit Mehta wrote in a 112-page opinion, because Trump spoke about himself and rallygoers working “towards a common goal” of fighting and walking down Pennsylvania Avenue.

“The President’s January 6 Rally Speech can reasonably be viewed as a call for collective action,” Mehta said.

Democratic members of the House and police officers who defended the US Capitol on January 6 sued Trump last year, claiming he prompted his supporters to attack. Friday, Mehta wrote that the three lawsuits could move to the evidence-gathering phase and toward a trial – a major loss in court for Trump.

“To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step. The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent,” Mehta wrote.

“After all, the President’s actions here do not relate to his duties of faithfully executing the laws, conducting foreign affairs, commanding the armed forces, or managing the Executive Branch,” Mehta added. “They entirely concern his efforts to remain in office for a second term. These are unofficial acts, so the separation-of-powers concerns that justify the President’s broad immunity are not present here.”

While he homed in on Trump’s legal liability, the judge ruled in favor of three close allies to Trump who also spoke at the rally on January 6 – his attorney Rudy Giuliani, his son Donald Trump Jr. and Republican Rep. Mo Brooks, saying he would dismiss the claims against them.

When the Senate failed to convict Trump last year in the impeachment proceedings examining his role in the attack, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell – who voted against convicting Trump – noted that “civil litigation” was an avenue through which Trump’s conduct could be addressed.

Two of the lawsuits were brought by Democratic House members, while a third was filed by Capitol Police officers.

The lawmakers allege that they were threatened by Trump and others as part of a conspiracy to stop the congressional session that would certify the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021, according to the complaints. They argue that Trump should bear responsibility for directing the assaults.

Trump’s legal team is likely to appeal the decision, which was made at the trial-level DC District Court. Representatives for Trump didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Mehta’s ruling on what he calls a “one-of-a-kind case” sets up a rare instance where the former President could face concrete consequences for the insurrection.

But Mehta’s opinion, essentially melting away the protections of the presidency and the First Amendment because of the context of Trump’s speech and specific words and actions that day, could have further implications, including creating a new avenue to subpoena Trump and ask him questions and establishing where immunity for presidents ends.

At this time, there are no public indications that the Justice Department’s criminal investigation into January 6, which includes several sets of conspiracy charges and a sedition case, has reached Trump. And after Republican lawmakers blocked Trump’s impeachment conviction, the GOP has largely fallen back in line behind the former President. The two House Republicans now serving on the committee to investigate the insurrection have faced calls for their ouster from the party, and Trump may very well be Republicans’ 2024 nominee for the White House.

The decision, Friday, however, sets in motion a path to the judge weighing the factual allegations and evidence against Trump in the cases as well as possible civil trials months or years from now, where Trump is at the defense table.

Lawyers for the Democratic lawmakers and police were elated with the ruling Friday, though they likely face a long road of additional court tangles ahead.

“Today is a major victory for the rule of law, and demonstrates just how important the courts are for ensuring accountability,” said Joseph Sellers, who represents a group of Democratic members of Congress that was first to allege a civil conspiracy against Trump in court.

The NAACP, working alongside Sellers, also applauded the ruling, and the group’s president Derrick Johnson called for accountability for Trump and the right-wing groups.

Matthew Kaiser, a lawyer for Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, called it a “great ruling” to potentially be able to take Trump to trial.

And Patrick Malone, representing the police officers, called it a victory for democracy.

“It’s good to see that no one is above the law. Everyone should be held accountable for their actions,” Malone’s client, the Capitol Police Officer James Blassingame Jr., said in a statement.

Swalwell said in a statement that he would seek to depose Trump and gather evidence about January 6.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2022 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr 5th, probaly has claimed the 5th more than anyone in the history of the USA. Well we know as a fact before being president he bragged about going to court, well he proably has been involved before being president more than any human in the history of the human race in lawsuits. Here is an update of the current ones where he is being deposed today and taking the 5th in todays can in essence be used in court aainst him.

hahahah pediophile sexual abuser and so on trumpie

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-s-legal-troubles-come-to-a-head-in-new-york/ar-AA138DGO?ocid=winp2sv1plustaskbar&cvid=e9696b5de6c847b2bd4f488ab5adc85a

Trump's legal troubles come to a head in New York


Quote:
When Donald Trump campaigned for president back in 2016, he defended his lifelong hometown with the kind of vigor one might expect from a blunt-talking New Yorker, telling then-rival Sen. Ted Cruz: "When you want to knock New York, you've got to go through me."

Donald Trump Holds Campaign Rally In Support Of Arizona GOP Candidates
Donald Trump Holds Campaign Rally In Support Of Arizona GOP Candidates
© Mario Tama / Getty Images
But lately, New York has been knocking back. Trump's relationship with the Big Apple took an adversarial turn during his presidency, and recently a series of court actions have summoned him back from his new home state of Florida.

The cases have drawn out for years, both civil and criminal, state and federal, and "it's not a total coincidence that it's all coming together at once," according to former federal prosecutor E. Danya Perry.

"He very successfully and deftly managed to put so much of it on ice while he was president," said Perry, a defense attorney who also previously served as a New York State deputy attorney general.

E. Jean Carroll defamation case and forthcoming sexual assault lawsuit
At the federal court on Pearl Street in lower Manhattan, a judge last week ordered Trump to sit Wednesday for his second high-stakes deposition in three months. He'll be questioned by a lawyer for author E. Jean Carroll, who sued Trump for defamation in 2019 after Trump accused Carroll of lying when she said he raped her in the mid-1990s.

Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote that Trump's deposition may be used in another civil suit Carroll has pledged to file, a sexual assault claim against Trump.

Carroll will be able to pursue the lawsuit next month when a new state law, the Adult Survivors Act, briefly removes the statute of limitations for such claims in New York.

Trump has repeatedly denied Carroll's allegations.

Civil fraud lawsuit against Trump and his company
A block east of the federal courthouse is the Centre Street state civil court where for years attorneys for Trump and his company fought a losing battle to limit subpoenas in a sprawling New York attorney general probe into their financial practices. Trump's other recent deposition was ordered by Judge Arthur Engoron in this case.

Trump invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 400 times during the August questioning. His deposition was among the last pieces of evidence collected before the New York Attorney General filed on Sept. 21 a sprawling lawsuit that aims to kneecap Trump's company. New York is seeking $250 million in damages and an end to Trump business in the state. In addition to the Trump Organization, the attorney general's suit names Trump and three of his children — Don Jr., Ivanka and Eric Trump — as defendants.

Play
Current Time 0:04
/
Duration 2:09
LQ
CaptionsFullscreen
AP Explains: Kevin Spacey testifies in court
Unmute
0
View on Watch
The company and the Trumps have denied all allegations in the case and said through an attorney in September that "absolutely no wrongdoing has taken place." They have previously accused New York Attorney General Letitia James in public and in court filings of pursuing the investigation out of political animus.

La Paz Dental Implant Offers: See Prices
Ad
Ads Dental Implants
La Paz Dental Implant Offers: See Prices
The complaint alleges the Trumps and other executives at the company engaged in a yearslong scheme to enrich themselves by inflating the values of properties across the country.

That investigation was prompted by congressional testimony given in 2019 by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who said at the time that "Trump inflated his total assets when it served his purposes … .and deflated his assets to reduce his real estate taxes."

Cohen told CBS News that he believes Trump "has broken the law," but that the alleged fraud may never have been exposed had Trump not run for office.

"He might never had been caught other than the high profile nature of the position and his continuous refusal to adhere to norms," said Cohen, who is now a fierce critic of the former president.

The next hearing in that case is scheduled for Oct. 31.

Manhattan criminal fraud and tax evasion trial
By then, attorneys for the company will be busy one block north on Centre Street, at a state criminal court, where on Monday the Trump Organization's criminal fraud and tax evasion trial will begin.

Among the witnesses expected to be called in that case is former Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg, who in August entered a guilty plea in the case. The judge in that proceeding, Juan Merchan, is also presiding over former Trump adviser Steve Bannon's state criminal fraud case.

At a hearing on Sept. 12, Merchan criticized Trump Organization lawyers for "eleventh hour" changes to their defense team.

"One of the accusations is that the defense is trying to stall. You know, it's starting to feel that way a little bit," Merchan said.

Merchan's rebuke was echoed by Judge Kaplan in the E. Jean Carroll case, who wrote on Oct. 12 that Trump "should not be permitted to run the clock out on (Carroll's) attempt to gain a remedy for what allegedly was a serious wrong."

Trump has long used delay as a court strategy, according to Barbara Res, who was Trump's head of construction in the 1980s.

"His M.O. was to try to do that with contractors when he owed them money and, you know, offer them maybe 50 cents on the dollar. If they didn't take it, he would just drag through court. So, you know, they'd go bankrupt waiting for a long time," said Res.

Asked by USA Today in 2016 about contractor complaints, Trump said he docked companies pay if the Trump Organization was unhappy with their work.

"Let's say that they do a job that's not good, or a job that they didn't finish, or a job that was way late. I'll deduct from their contract, absolutely," Trump said.

If that strategy worked in the past, it may no longer be effective, according to Perry, who said, "there's a general loss of patience by litigants, and more importantly the judiciary, with some of these delay tactics and gamesmanship."

"There's been more of a 'rocket docket' with some of these matters than you might otherwise see," Perry said.

Special master in Mar-a-Lago documents probe
Five blocks south of the state criminal court building is the Brooklyn Bridge, which on the outer-borough side runs past another federal courthouse. The building's atrium is named for Raymond Dearie, the semi-retired judge who is serving as special master in Trump's lawsuit against the federal government.

That suit was filed in August after the Justice Department served a search warrant at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home, seizing White House files, some of which were labeled "Top Secret." Trump has insisted the documents were in his possession lawfully.

Dearie is reviewing thousands of pages of documents seized by the FBI, with a mandate to identify which, if any, are subject to attorney-client or executive privilege.

Trial of Trump confidant Thomas Barrack
On the eighth floor of that Brooklyn court building, another federal judge is presiding over the ongoing criminal trial of billionaire businessman Thomas Barrack, a longtime Trump friend and adviser who served as chair of the 2016 Inauguration committee.

Barrack is accused of acting as an unregistered foreign agent in an effort to sway U.S. foreign policy in favor of the United Arab Emirates' interests. He has entered a not guilty plea in the case.

During the trial so far, jurors have heard from former Trump administration Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who was called as a witness, and have been shown emails and text messages sent to and from Trump administration officials.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2022 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/trump-was-deposed-in-a-fraud-suit-that-involved-a-failed-videophone-from-2008-which-lawyers-alleged-was-doomed-almost-from-the-outset-report/ar-AA13cOP0?cvid=bd80136c1d17495ea5e644ba4a912f4d&ocid=winp2sv1plustaskbarhover


Trump was deposed in a fraud suit that involved a failed 'videophone' from 2008, which lawyers alleged was 'doomed almost from the outset:' report


Quote:

Donald Trump, his company, and his three oldest children are being sued in a class action lawsuit.
The suit claims that Trump defrauded investors into backing ACN, an MLM telecommunications company.
The company's flagship product was a "videophone" that was made obsolete with smartphones.

Donald Trump was recently deposed for a class action lawsuit that claims he misled investors into financially backing a multi-level marketing company that once sold a failed "videophone."

He was deposed earlier in October, according to Bloomberg, which cited an anonymous source familiar with the matter.

The lawsuit, filed in 2018, names Trump, his company Trump Corporation, and his three oldest children — Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and Ivanka Trump — as defendants.

It claims that from 2005 to at least 2015, the Trump family and the company received "millions of dollars in secret payments to promote and endorse" ACN, a multi-level marketing company that specializes in telecommunications.

In exchange for the payments, Trump gave glowing endorsements for the company, the lawsuit alleged.

Related video: Former US President Donald Trump hit with civil lawsuit

"Trump told prospective investors that "[y]ou have a great opportunity before you at ACN without any of the risks most entrepreneurs have to take," according to the court documents.


One of the flagship products ACN began to sell in 2008 and which Trump endorsed to convince the financial viability of the company was a "videophone." The lawsuit claims that the product was "essentially a desktop, wired telephone with a video screen and webcam in addition to the usual handset and keypad." It also required an internet connection and was only compatible with other ACN phones and subscriptions.

A spokesman for Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

"Trump repeatedly praised ACN's 'great product' — its 'new ACN Video Phone.' But ACN's videophone was anything but great — the product was doomed almost from the outset," the lawsuit said.

The videophone was quickly made obsolete by smartphones with video chat capabilities. Skype introduced video calling in 2006, and Apple would popularize video chat by installing a front-facing camera in its iPhone by 2010.

"As we complete fact discovery in this important fraud case, we could not be more pleased with the substantial body of evidence we have developed that will prove our clients' claims," Roberta Kaplan, one of the lawyers representing the investors, told Insider. "We are eager to move this case forward to trial as soon as possible."

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2022 8:52 am    Post subject: guilty... hahahaha Reply with quote

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-settles-lawsuit-protesters-allege-assaulted-security-guards-rcna55294

Trump settles lawsuit with protesters who allege his security guards assaulted them


Quote:
Former President Donald Trump reached a settlement Wednesday with a group of protesters who alleged in a lawsuit that his security guards assaulted them outside Trump Tower in 2015, lawyers for both sides said.

The attorneys didn’t disclose details of the terms of the settlement, which came as the case was in the middle of jury selection.

An attorney for the protesters, Benjamin Dictor, called it "an incredible day for our clients, who are lifelong activists in the community … who stood up to defend the right to speech on the public sidewalk and have litigated for seven years."

"And today, the matter was resolved on terms that they are very, very happy with," he said.

In a joint statement provided by Dictor and signed by the plaintiffs and Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, the parties agreed they have settled the case and will dismiss it. They also agreed "that the plaintiffs in the action, and all people, have a right to engage in peaceful protest on public sidewalks," the statement said.

Habba said in a separate statement: “Although we were eager to proceed to trial to demonstrate the frivolousness of this case, the parties were ultimately able to come to an amicable resolution. We are very pleased with this outcome and are happy to finally put this matter to rest once and for all.”

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 13867
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2022 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

here he suided for politican reasons and has to pay for his lies.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-lawyers-sanctioned-by-judge-on-clinton-conspiracy-suit/ar-AA13YIaV?ocid=winp2fpsystemprelaunch&cvid=5dc63119114644a8a251d0bb50294348


Trump Lawyers Sanctioned by Judge on Clinton Conspiracy Suit


Quote:

(Bloomberg) -- Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers who accused Hillary Clinton and dozens of other people of engaging in a conspiracy to harm his reputation were sanctioned by a federal judge who excoriated them for filing a “frivolous,” politically motivated lawsuit.

Attorney Alina habba at her apartment in the Midtown Manhattan neighborhood of New York, US, on Tuesday, May 10, 2022. Over the past year, Habba has taken over some of Donald Trump’s highest priority legal fights, including challenges to the New York attorney general’s probe of his business and his defense in a fraud suit brought by his niece.
Attorney Alina habba at her apartment in the Midtown Manhattan neighborhood of New York, US, on Tuesday, May 10, 2022. Over the past year, Habba has taken over some of Donald Trump’s highest priority legal fights, including challenges to the New York attorney general’s probe of his business and his defense in a fraud suit brought by his niece.
© Bloomberg

Alina Habba, one of Trump’s most outspoken attorneys, and other lawyers involved in the case were ordered Thursday to pay $50,000 to the court and $16,274 in legal fees and costs to one of the defendants, Democratic political operative Charles Dolan, who was involved in Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

“The rule of law is undermined by the toxic combination of political fundraising with legal fees paid by political action committees, reckless and factually untrue statements by lawyers at rallies and in the media, and efforts to advance a political narrative through lawsuits without factual basis or any cognizable legal theory,” wrote US District Judge Donald Middlebrooks in West Palm Beach, Florida.

“It should be no surprise that we will be appealing this decision.” Habba said in a statement.

Middlebrooks, a Bill Clinton appointee, dismissed Trump’s suit in September, calling it a “manifesto.” The judge was even harsher in his ruling on Dolan’s motion for sanctions, saying the failings of the lawsuit were “basic and obvious” and that the lawyers’ conduct was “willful, not simply negligent.”

“Thirty-one individuals and organizations were summoned to court, forced to hire lawyers to defend against frivolous claims,” the judge wrote. “The only common thread against them was Mr. Trump’s animus.”

Related video: US: Former President Donald Trump’s firm accused of hiding compensations

Trump’s suit repeated many of his grievances over the FBI’s 2016 investigation into whether his presidential campaign was colluding with Russia to influence the election that year, alleging the entire probe was the result of a Democratic-led conspiracy to undermine his presidency and tarnish his reputation. Along with Clinton, he named former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey, Clinton Campaign Chair John Podesta, British intelligence ex-agent Christopher Steele and many others.

Clinton and other defendants are also seeking sanctions against Trump and his lawyers. That group filed a joint motion for fees and costs totaling more than $1 million. The judge hasn’t ruled yet on that request.

Middlebrooks noted in his ruling Thursday that the many flaws in Trump’s complaint, filed in March under the civil version of a racketeering law normally used against organized crime, were correctly highlighted by Clinton in her motion to dismiss the suit. But when Habba amended the suit in an effort to address its shortcomings, she merely added irrelevant detail and new defendants, the judge said.

“This cannot be attributed to incompetent lawyering,” Middlebrooks wrote. “It was a deliberate use of the judicial system to pursue a political agenda.”

Trump and Habba have repeatedly attributed rulings against them to a broader effort by allegedly partisan judges to unfairly punish the Republican in court. Habba previously asked Middlebrooks to recuse himself from the suit because he was appointed by the lead defendant’s husband -- a request the judge denied.

The case is Trump v. Clinton, 22-cv-14102, US District Court, Southern District of Florida.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group