Jump to content

Trump Organization found guilty on multiple counts of criminal tax fraud


Recommended Posts

Posted
20 hours ago, ozimoron said:

The guilty verdict comes as Trump is under scrutiny by federal and state prosecutors for his handling of classified documents, the effort to overturn the 2020 election results, and the accuracy of the Trump Organization’s business records and financial statements. He is also facing a $250 million civil lawsuit from the New York attorney general alleging he and his adult children were involved in a decade long fraud. The attorney general is seeking to permanently bar them from serving as an officer or director of a company in New York state, among other penalties.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/06/politics/trump-organization-fraud-trial-verdict/index.html

Donald Trump and his family were not charged in this case.     ????

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, digger70 said:

Donald Trump and his family were not charged in this case.     ????

Plenty more investigation still in progress. It's fanciful to think that his company can be convicted of criminal fraud and no indictments will flow from that. He was fingered as being complicit in the fraud.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Plenty more investigation still in progress. It's fanciful to think that his company can be convicted of criminal fraud and no indictments will flow from that. He was fingered as being complicit in the fraud.

Didn't you Read my Post? 

 Donald Trump and his family were not charged in this case. 

That means, Not This Time  

Let it be .We wait and see what comes Next.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, digger70 said:

Didn't you Read my Post? 

 Donald Trump and his family were not charged in this case. 

That means, Not This Time  

Let it be .We wait and see what comes Next.

If you meant to expand on your concise comment you should have done so at the time. "That means" is useless after the fact when nobody has a clue what "that means" beyond what you actually said.

 

No need to let it be either. We can pile on just like the Republican party is doing.

 

 

 

 

Posted
15 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

If you meant to expand on your concise comment you should have done so at the time. "That means" is useless after the fact when nobody has a clue what "that means" beyond what you actually said.

 

No need to let it be either. We can pile on just like the Republican party is doing.

 

 

 

 

????   Keep it up. Shush.

  • Like 1
Posted
15 hours ago, ozimoron said:

I'm watching Alvin Bragg on CNN right now saying their work isn't finished yet. The House judicial committee has no say in those investigations. Meantime, the House J6 committee has announced that it will be making criminal referrals to the DoJ.

 

The prosecutor in that case explicitly claimed that Trump authorized the fraudulent tax dodging scheme. It would be silly to presume nothing will come of that.

 

The special counsel has also just subpoenaed several state officials asking for their communications with Trump associates around Jan 6.

Democrat Party Ahabs chasing their Trump white whale ???? ???? 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Democrat Party Ahabs chasing their Trump white whale ???????? 

Actually, a quick glance at the press reveals that the Republican party has the knives out. The Democrats are still singing and dancing.

  • Like 2
Posted
15 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Nobody was named as a defendant, it was a case against the company. However one of those involved Allen Weisselberg, who for decades was one of Donald Trump's most trusted and loyal employees as chief financial officer has already pleaded guilty in a separate case and did a plea deal for testifying in this case so he only gets a 5 month jail term.

Exactly...the corporate entity was charged with wrong doing. And apparently this Weisselberg character was padding the books. Nothing to do with Donald Trump ???? 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

You clearly didn't read where Trump signed the checks and authorized the frauds.

Is that why he wasn't separately charged...because he authorized the scheme?

  • Love It 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Is that why he wasn't separately charged...because he authorized the scheme?

That came out in the trial. They didn't have a crystal ball. It's unreasonable to think that there won't be further charges. Trump was shown to have personally benefited by avoiding taxes.

  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That came out in the trial. They didn't have a crystal ball. It's unreasonable to think that there won't be further charges. Trump was shown to have personally benefited by avoiding taxes.

That was proven at trial...my recollection is that President Trump asserted his Fifth Amendment right to not testify in this case and nothing was proven against him.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/10/1116714746/trump-testimony-deposition-new-york

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
Just now, Pattaya Spotter said:

That was proven at trial...my recollection is that President Trump asserted his Fifth Amendment right to not testify in this case and nothing was proven against him.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/10/1116714746/trump-testimony-deposition-new-york

In that case. I'm just saying that this trial will not be the end of that matter. Given that Trump's complicity was proven it would be illogical to assume otherwise I believe.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

And Mr Biden?

who?

 

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Was he charged with something?  Was he indicted?  Was he found guilty, of anything criminal?

So that's it, he never will be despite being fingered in a criminal fraud case?

Posted
1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

In that case. I'm just saying that this trial will not be the end of that matter. Given that Trump's complicity was proven it would be illogical to assume otherwise I believe.

We will wait and see.

Posted
1 minute ago, In Full Agreement said:

For ease of conversation I always refer to the  legions of followers of Donald John Dump as "Dumpsters".

 

I now wonder if their loyalty to Mr. Dump will be shaken by  a jury finding Dump's company guilty of an ongoing fraud all the while Dump knowing full well what was happening.

There's been little to no give in this forum. The mantra still seems to be "nothing to do with Trump".

  • Like 1
Posted

Yep you have a partisan state and prosecuting attorney finding Trump organization guilty, but Hillary did not commit any crime, and Joe Biden knew nothing about the documentation contained on Hunter's Laptop. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

because 17 tax fraud convictions

And a jury found OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony "not guilty" of murder.  I guess that proves they didn't commit the crime either. 

If the DeSantis prosecuting attorney in Florida or the Abbot prosecuting attorney in Texas found Biden guilty would you not cry partisan politics. 

 

New York State chief judge Sol Wachtler was famously quoted by Tom Wolfe in The Bonfire of the Vanities that "a grand jury would 'indict a ham sandwich,' if that's what you wanted."


You'll get a fair trial followed by a first class hanging.

Judge Roy Bean

That is exactly what happened in New York.  Trump was found "guilty" before the trial ever began. 


 




 

  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Longwood50 said:

And a jury found OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony "not guilty" of murder.  I guess that proves they didn't commit the crime either. 

If the DeSantis prosecuting attorney in Florida or the Abbot prosecuting attorney in Texas found Biden guilty would you not cry partisan politics. 

 

New York State chief judge Sol Wachtler was famously quoted by Tom Wolfe in The Bonfire of the Vanities that "a grand jury would 'indict a ham sandwich,' if that's what you wanted."


You'll get a fair trial followed by a first class hanging.

Judge Roy Bean

That is exactly what happened in New York.  Trump was found "guilty" before the trial ever began.

wow.

 

edit: I mean, really? Actually I'm lost for words.

Edited by ozimoron
  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...