Congress plainly views itself as having sweeping authority to investigate illegal conduct of a President, before and after taking office. This court is not prepared to roll back the tide of history.
Donald J. Trump, et al, VS House Oversight Committee U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Case No. 19-cv-01136 (APM)
Judge Amit P. Mehta has ruled. The ruling? That Mazars USA must comply with the House Oversight Committee's request for the Mazars accounting firm's Trump-related data and documents.
What's next? President Trump's lawyers have already started the appeal process, to take it to a higher court.
Donald J. Trump, et al, VS House Oversight Committee U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Case No. 19-cv-01136 (APM)
Judge Amit P. Mehta has ruled. The ruling? That Mazars USA must comply with the House Oversight Committee's request for the Mazars accounting firm's Trump-related data and documents.
What's next? President Trump's lawyers have already started the appeal process, to take it to a higher court.
Roll Tide..!
I mean... do you really think there's something there? Are you unable to see that this is all political? If he eventually gets something, he'll make it public (which he shouldn't) but will find a loophole, and push a narrative. There will be nothing illegal, but the narrative will be something like... he's not as wealthy as he says, or... look, he doesn't pay taxes... etc... and it'll be a political ploy.
I'd like to think you're smart enough to recognize this... really, everyone else (Democrats included) see this for what it is. It's OK for you to be political, but don't pretend like the rest of us are stupid.
For what it's worth, I worked for Nick Saban for several years. He's Republican.
President Trump's financial situation has been opened up to public examination, and despite some grousing that his net worth is not quite as remarkable as he has tried to make public audiences believe, there is nothing in these documents and numbers that say "Trouble ahead" or "President Trump is literally 'owned' by a Russian oligarch."
That is a (possible) future news headline you would never see, if not for this judge's ruling.
Of course, it's still being appealed.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-22-2019).]
That is a (possible) future news headline you would never see, if not for this judge's ruling.
Of course, it's still being appealed.
And then what? Move on to the next thing looking for proof? Why is it that this man has to keep putting up with this? We had a two-year FBI investigation of our sitting president, that revealed NO COLLUSION. ... and that's not good enough for you?
Look, I don't know if you actually believe this stuff... but no one actually believes this. It's for political purposes. So I say again, either the Democrats are stupid, or they think everyone else is stupid. You tell me which it is...
And then what? Move on to the next thing looking for proof? Why is it that this man has to keep putting up with this? We had a two-year FBI investigation of our sitting president, that revealed NO COLLUSION. ... and that's not good enough for you?
Look, I don't know if you actually believe this stuff... but no one actually believes this. It's for political purposes. So I say again, either the Democrats are stupid, or they think everyone else is stupid. You tell me which it is...
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 05-22-2019).]
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: And then what? Move on to the next thing looking for proof? Why is it that this man has to keep putting up with this? We had a two-year FBI investigation of our sitting president, that revealed NO COLLUSION. ... and that's not good enough for you?
Look, I don't know if you actually believe this stuff... but no one actually believes this. It's for political purposes. So I say again, either the Democrats are stupid, or they think everyone else is stupid. You tell me which it is...
That is (almost) exactly correct. The Special Counsel's investigation was focused on the 2016 presidential campaign, and on the Obstruction of Justice concerns related to the Special Counsel's investigation. The Mueller report, so far as it has been revealed to the public, focused on those two particular avenues of investigation, and not (hardly) anything outside of those two avenuses.
quote
The [Washington] Post analysis of Democratic inquiries and other records identified more than 20 investigations directly connected to Trump, his family or the White House that have been met with partial or complete stonewalling by the administration.
<SNIP>
Congress and the executive branch have always had a tense relationship, especially when the opposition party controls the House or Senate. When President Barack Obama was in the White House, House Republicans held Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over documents pertaining to the “Fast and Furious” gunrunning case in the Justice Department.
The Obama administration begrudgingly cooperated with several Republican investigations that the Democratic president’s allies viewed as politically motivated. The House Oversight Committee conducted private interviews with several IRS officials amid allegations that the tax agency was targeting tea party groups for scrutiny. And some of Obama’s top White House aides sat for closed-door depositions as part of the GOP’s years-long Benghazi investigation.
Trump’s approach toward House Democrats’ investigations, experts say, is different because of the sheer number of [House Committee] investigations he is choosing to ignore or actively resist.
"Trump and his allies are blocking more than 20 separate Democratic probes in an all-out war with Congress" Rachael Bade and Seung Min Kim for the Washington Post; May 11, 2019. https://www.washingtonp ost....m_term=.7f9e7656296a
If I find the image that I wanted to have for this--a list of all of the investigations--I will put it up here.
While the various House committees are pursuing their investigations, there were 14 other investigations that Mueller parceled out or handed off to various federal jurisdictions. There is the Michael Cohen investigation and the Roger Stone case, neither of which is complete. And 12 other spin-off investigations from the Mueller probe that have not been publicly revealed because of concern that public disclosure would interfere with these investigations. "Redacted."
Trump is an investigation magnet. It was baked into him as President from the day that he was elected. Trump should be focusing on his policy and legislative agenda, and let this awesome plethora of investigations take their course. But he's clearly incapable of it, by personality. He doesn't have the ability to compartmentalize.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-22-2019).]
Rinse, that's the biggest load of bull sh!t you've ever posted on this Forum. Trump is being investigated because the DNC feels that HRC got screwed over in the election. The media NEVER vetted BHO when he was running, nor did they lift a finger to check him out after he was elected. Benghazi and F&F were investigated because people died. You're right, Trump should be focused on policy, and he has been, even though the media and DNC do their unscrupulous best to distract and block anything he and the RNC attempt, but he still gets a ton done. And your comment that he is unable to compartmentalize is incredibly naive.
To add.... The American public couldn't even have access to BHO's educational record, but the Left is now clamoring for DJT tax records that very few of them will even be able to understand. The hypocrisy of the Liberal Left is unbelievable. It's like dealing with third graders. You mention Trump being an investigation magnet, and that it was baked in from the moment he was elected. I suspect the 'bakers' will have a lot of time on their hands to think about the cake they made for themselves.....
[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 05-22-2019).]
Originally posted by randye: As I've pointed out before, none of Ronald's psychopathic spew ...
"I beg your pardon..."
That's the short way to end a discussion.
You're not fit for any civilized discussion forum. You're the very definition of "gutless." You have not shown any capacity whatsoever to argue or discuss any kind of topic or point without immediately lowering the tone and temperament of the discussion straight into the gutter.
I am trying to hold back, but sooner or later I expect I will give in and "return the favor" by using this forum to publish my medical diagnosis of your condition. Based on some reading that I have done. You won't like it.
What are you afraid of? That I might "pull some wool over the eyes" of some of the other forum members? Then you don't have any respect for them, either.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-23-2019).]
Originally posted by olejoedad: Rinse, that's the biggest load of bull sh!t you've ever posted on this Forum. Trump is being investigated because the DNC feels that HRC got screwed over in the election. The media NEVER vetted BHO when he was running, nor did they lift a finger to check him out after he was elected. Benghazi and F&F were investigated because people died. You're right, Trump should be focused on policy, and he has been, even though the media and DNC do their unscrupulous best to distract and block anything he and the RNC attempt, but he still gets a ton done. And your comment that he is unable to compartmentalize is incredibly naive.
To add.... The American public couldn't even have access to BHO's educational record, but the Left is now clamoring for DJT tax records that very few of them will even be able to understand. The hypocrisy of the Liberal Left is unbelievable. It's like dealing with third graders. You mention Trump being an investigation magnet, and that it was baked in from the moment he was elected. I suspect the 'bakers' will have a lot of time on their hands to think about the cake they made for themselves.....
Sharply worded, but civilized. In stark contrast to the message that came right after it. And the even more idiotic message after that. The two messages from the [REDACTED]
I know that I will not be able to make any sense myself of Donald Trump's tax returns, banking records and other financial data.
When this information becomes public--and it is looking more and more likely that it will become public--there will be subject experts crawling all over it to analyze and summarize it for the general public.
I have it from a source that I have found credible that the most recent financial disclosure from President Trump lists more than 550 separate LLCs. You think he might be trying to hide something? Setting up an enormous and artificially complicated labyrinth of accounting entities, not for the purpose of commerce, but for the purposes of tax evasion, bank fraud, disguising conflicts of interest with his office as President, and so on.
I'm not losing any sleep over Barack Obama's grades from college.
It's a privilege to be part of a country where anyone can work their way up the ladder and become "Individual One" in an SDNY court filing.
And as I said in another recently active discussion topic, "someone" needs to Fall Back ...
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-23-2019).]
Look, I don't know if you actually believe this stuff... but no one actually believes this.
Explain what you mean by "no one"? Reason being is there are several people I know that do believe it. They so vehemently loathe Trump that they would believe that he bites off the heads of babies in sacrifice to Kuthulu (sp) if they saw a meme claiming it.
No you aren't. You're lashing out again Ronald. Are you going to mail some poop again?.
Are you going to stay up all night again and pound out another long, garbled and tear stained 30 paragraphs of your psychotic desperation?
You are going to end up harming yourself or others unless you GET HELP.
Thanks for reminding me. Here's the latest from NBC News. This is copy and paste.
* * *
A key congressional committee has already gained access to President Donald Trump’s dealings with two major financial institutions, two sources familiar with the House probe tell NBC News, as a court ruling Wednesday promised to open the door for even more records to be handed over.
Wells Fargo and TD Bank are the two of nine institutions that have so far complied with subpoenas issued by the House Financial Services Committee demanding information about their dealings with the Trump Organization . . .
A federal judge ruled Wednesday that two other banks — Deutsche Bank and Capital One — can hand over financial documents related to their dealings Trump and his businesses to Congress. The Trump family had sued to prevent those two banks from complying with the congressional subpoena and the ruling paves the way for the committee to now have access to years of financial records from at least four financial institutions.
The documents that have been provided so far are a fraction of those requested by Waters, whose committee has also sent subpoenas to Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Royal Bank of Canada and Toronto-Dominion Bank and JP Morgan Chase. The Royal Bank of Canada is in the process of complying with the subpoena . . .
Deutsche Bank has been the Trump Organization’s biggest lender, financing more than $2 billion in loans to the president during his business career, and he still owes the bank at least $130 million, according to Trump’s latest financial disclosures. . . .
An NBC News analysis finds that at least 14 different Democratic-led House committees are investigating various aspects of Trump and his presidency, with 50 different inquiries that are seeking documents from the executive branch or outside entities. . . .
While lawmakers have been stymied in obtaining additional documentation that could be central to an obstruction of justice case against the president or members of his administration, accessing bank records could provide new momentum for an investigation centered around questions of whether foreign individuals or governments hold financial leverage over the president, his family or his businesses.
Anger is never without a Reason, but seldom with a good One. ~ Benjamin Franklin; Poor Richard's Almanack (1753).
In summary, Tuesday and Wednesday of this week brought rulings from federal judges that favor the Democrat-led House committees in their quest for access to a veritable plethora of banking and financial records for President Trump and his closest relatives, and the various commercial entities that are known, collectively, as the "Trump organization." I call out Mazars USA, which has been the accounting firm for all things "Trump", and Deutsche Bank, for particular notice in this regard.
As both of these rulings are being appealed by President Trump's lawyers, it is as yet unclear as to whether or when the various House committees will actually have access to all of the records that they want. But they already have some of the records from some of the banks that they wanted to receive such records from. [... records from. A"brutal" sentence terminating preposition.]
New York's governor, Andrew Cuomo, is currently thinking about whether he wants to sign a bill into law that would allow (or require?) the state of New York to provide individual New York State taxpayer filings to these same Congressional committees in the U.S. House of Representatives that are pursing the many current lines of investigative inquiry about President Trump and the Trump administration. President Trump has many such New York state taxpayer filings on record, and these state taxpayer filings duplicate, to a certain extent, President Trump's corresponding federal taxpayer filings for the same years.
I think these rulings from the federal judges are "spot on."
I am aware that there is no law or legal requirement that automatically requires a Presidential candidate or a serving President to reveal their taxpayer filings and other financial information to either the public at large, or to Congress--with one very exceptional exception. That being the law that was enacted in 1924 that says that the IRS shall provide any individual's federal taxpayer filings upon request of the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.
No automatic or perfectly general requirement for such taxpayer and financial disclosures, but in this case--and I think that the federal judges had this in mind--we have a President who partly by his own decisions and actions has prompted inquiries about such matters from the U.S. House of Representatives in the course of their constitutionally mandated "Article 1" oversight function, vis-à-vis the Executive branch.
Such as "Helsinki." That one word--the name of a city in Finland--is literally self-explanatory in this context. And the Mueller report, which I can summarize as quickly as anyone might down a single serving of espresso; to wit:
Volume One, "Conspiracy", yeah, there is the appearance of "a wink and a nod" style of conspiracy in which the Trump campaign slyly conspired with foreign persons and entities that were part of, or in service to the Russian Federation and some other foreign nations, but the evidentiary links that would connect the conspirators are not so robust and complete as to warrant calling for an impeachment of the President himself, without further deliberations by Congress.
Volume Two, "Obstruction of Justice." President Trump tried "every which way to Sunday" to interfere with the Special Counsel's investigation of the 2016 presidential election.
So let the investigations of the various Democrat-led House committees proceed.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-23-2019).]
Deutsche Bank employees reportedly flagged suspicious transactions involving Trump and Kushner
More copy and paste here, from NBC News.
* * *
Tammy McFadden, a former Deutsche Bank employee, said she reviewed transactions that involved Kushner's company and Russians in the summer of 2016.
Anti-money laundering specialists at Deutsche Bank flagged multiple transactions involving Donald Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, from 2016 and 2017. Those specialists recommended the activity be reported to the federal government's financial crimes unit, The New York Times reported Sunday.
But top executives at the global financial giant rejected that advice, current and former employees told The Times.
Over the past few years, Deutsche Bank has been punished by both U.S. and European authorities for its role in money laundering schemes, paying hundreds of millions in fines as a result. The bank has a substantial relationship with Trump, as it was the only major financial institution to continue lending to Trump after he went through a financial downturn in the 1990s. Deutsche Bank lent Trump and his businesses more than $2.5 billion and, when he became president, the bank held more than $300 million in Trump's debt.
In 2016, McFadden reviewed a series of transactions involving Kushner's real estate company, Kushner Companies, that were flagged by the bank's software system. McFadden told The Times that she found that money had moved from the real estate company to Russians and felt the transactions needed to be reported to the Treasury Department — particularly as Deutsche Bank had come under intense scrutiny for its involvement in Russian money laundering schemes.
But bank managers in New York felt McFadden's concerns were unwarranted and did not send a report to the federal government, employees told The Times.
Then, after Trump became president, an internal anti-financial crime team reviewed the president's transactions and "produced multiple suspicious activity reports involving different entities that Mr. Trump owned or controlled," three former bank employees who saw the reports told The Times.
The reports involved Trump's LLC's and the now-defunct Trump Foundation. But, as The Times reported, the bank chose not to file those reports as well.
Take a listen. One side wants silence, the other is opening books. I will be watching this, and will eat crow if proven wrong. Keep an eye out lefties. You may get me here.
