Please see Styx thread on the Registered Shipmates consultation for the main discussion forums - your views are important, continues until April 4th.

The trials and tribulations of an ex-president (including SCOTUS on the 14th amendment)

18911131458

Comments

  • I hear Don Jr wants to become the new Rush Limbaugh.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    I hear Don Jr wants to become the new Rush Limbaugh.

    I doubt he has the tolerance for that amount of coke.
  • Just when we thought we were finally rid of the old one.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    I hear Don Jr wants to become the new Rush Limbaugh.

    I doubt he has the tolerance for that amount of coke.

    Or prescription opioids
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    Or hearing loss.
  • Wesley JWesley J Circus Host
    Dad had a coke button in his office.
  • Reports are Trump has handed over his tax returns to the Manhattan District Attorney. Now we wait.
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    Wait for the DA to laugh so hard at the contents that they roll out into the street?
    ;)
  • Golden Key wrote: »
    Wait for the DA to laugh so hard at the contents that they roll out into the street?
    ;)

    Maybe
  • Heh. Yeah, there will be some interesting times ahead. I just hope the contents don't leak and screw up the prosecution. (If they DIDN'T screw up the prosecution, I think I'd have a hard time caring)
  • I expect that someone is carefully counting dates and pages to make sure that they have actually received everything, and no-one accidentally forgot to put the really interesting bits in.
  • I see that they have cast a golden idol of the golden idol. At least they're no longer pretending they're not idolaters.
  • Trump in shorts - no thank you.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    I see that they have cast a golden idol of the golden idol. At least they're no longer pretending they're not idolaters.

    When that photo first came up in my newsfeed I thought it was a photoshop joke. I am appalled that it is real. Did not any of the "Christians," in the group think maybe this might not be a good idea? Apparently not.

  • Dave W wrote: »
    Trump in shorts - no thank you.

    Would you prefer him without shorts?
    :flushed:
  • How's about a shroud?
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    No! Think of the future thread about that!
    :grimace:
  • Eww. Ewww, ewww, ewww!
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    LC--

    Just for clarification: which idea are you "ewwwing" about?
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    I hereby devote my declining years to the study of time travel. Certain unfortunate past events urgently require Undoing.
  • Golden Key wrote: »
    LC--

    Just for clarification: which idea are you "ewwwing" about?

    Both.
  • How's about a shroud?

    With 14th century radiation burns?
  • Just to be clear, there's very little risk that the New York prosecutors don't have all the documents they want.

    The supoener was not issued to Mr Trump but to Mazars who are an accounting firm who handled Trump's taxes.

    Mazars have never contested the supoener, that was Trump.

    Moreover, it's in their interest to hand over everything.

    There already exists clear evidence that Mr Trump entered incorrect returns. That does not necessarily mean he committed a crime. He could honestly believe he was entitled to certain deductions. That's not fraud. What then happens though is when it's shown that your wrong, you have to pay back what you owe plus interest.

    So far, no actual big deal.

    However, consider these two facts:
    1. Mr Vance, District Attorney was very keen to have these documents and spent over 2 years in the courts to get them
    2. Mr Trump, (soon-to-be disgraced) Ex-president was extremely keen to keep these documents hidden.

    I conclude from this that it is extremely likely that within them will be found one or more carefully worded memo(s) outlining why certain actions are a breach of the tax code.

    If I am right, that shows intent and deliberate falsification of a tax return.

    From Mazars perspective they have always been willing to hand them over, presumably because they show that a) Mazars had no involvement is a criminal conspiracy and b) they correctly advised their client.

    Making a mistake is expensive but not criminal. If you have had professional advice that you have ignored, that is not a mistake, it is mens rea (a guilty mind) and The Donald is in serious criminal jeopardy.

    Time will tell but there are strong reasons to come to this conclusion.

    AFZ
  • orfeoorfeo Suspended
    There already exists clear evidence that Mr Trump entered incorrect returns. That does not necessarily mean he committed a crime. He could honestly believe he was entitled to certain deductions. That's not fraud. What then happens though is when it's shown that your wrong, you have to pay back what you owe plus interest.

    The whole question of Trump honestly believing things is a profoundly difficult one, given he frequently shows signs of living in an entirely different universe, of which he is the centre.

    It's entirely possible that he 'honestly' believes things that are completely outside the bounds of normal reasoning.

  • True; but there comes a point (,egally, at least) where willful disbelief in the face of reality is no longer a defense.
  • orfeo wrote: »
    There already exists clear evidence that Mr Trump entered incorrect returns. That does not necessarily mean he committed a crime. He could honestly believe he was entitled to certain deductions. That's not fraud. What then happens though is when it's shown that your wrong, you have to pay back what you owe plus interest.

    The whole question of Trump honestly believing things is a profoundly difficult one, given he frequently shows signs of living in an entirely different universe, of which he is the centre.

    It's entirely possible that he 'honestly' believes things that are completely outside the bounds of normal reasoning.

    Indeed. But it is a standard question for a jury. And if there's a letter/memo/email from the Accountants basically saying "Don't do this, it's a breach of the tax code" then I don't think a jury will struggle to reach a verdict. The it's not a crime because everything I do is OK defensive basically hasn't worked in a Court Room since Charles I. It only worked for Nixon because his mate gave him a pardon.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    Guilty but insane?

    Trouble is, one could apply that verdict to Trump’s vocal supporters in the GOP. I think Cruz, Hawley and McCarthy are not insane, just calculatedly loyal. Trump? He has very abnormal thought processes. A controlled psychopath, sometimes more controlled, sometimes less so.
  • Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Guilty but insane?

    Trouble is, one could apply that verdict to Trump’s vocal supporters in the GOP. I think Cruz, Hawley and McCarthy are not insane, just calculatedly loyal. Trump? He has very abnormal thought processes. A controlled psychopath, sometimes more controlled, sometimes less so.

    Yeah, don't think it's a issue though coz I don't think he'd ever run that defense. Too much of a slight to his fragile ego. Besides, I do think he knows exactly what he's doing. Even while thinking the rules don't apply to him...
  • @alienfromzog — subpoena. I think you're commiting to letters a rhotic pronunciation.
  • edited February 2021
    [pedant alert] Latin for "under penalty" [/pedant alert]
  • alienfromzogalienfromzog Shipmate
    edited February 2021
    mousethief wrote: »
    @alienfromzog — subpoena. I think you're commiting to letters a rhotic pronunciation.

    Thanks. :blush:

    I can't spell and predictive text on my phone often makes things worse... :lol:
    [pedant alert] Latin for "under penalty" [/pedant alert]

    Facepalm. Of course it is. I'll be able to spell it now... thank you! :smile:
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Guilty but insane?

    Trouble is, one could apply that verdict to Trump’s vocal supporters in the GOP. I think Cruz, Hawley and McCarthy are not insane, just calculatedly loyal. Trump? He has very abnormal thought processes. A controlled psychopath, sometimes more controlled, sometimes less so.

    It's not guilty because insane, rather than the way you've put it. As an. aside, you would rarely advise your client to avoid a finding of guilt on the basis of insanity. If found guilty, the client gets a sentence and knows the length of loss of liberty. The effect of not guilty on the basis of insanity is committal to strict custody in a psychiatric institution for an indeterminate period. Could be for a year or so, could be for the rest of life.
  • Pangolin GuerrePangolin Guerre Shipmate
    edited February 2021
    Except that some subpoenae are more sub poena than others. E.g., subpoenaed by Congress , but who gives a fuck? No teeth, no bite. Show me your poena.
  • Congress actually has teeth. The trouble was that they had no spine.
  • And what is the punishment? And why not enforce it? A body's power is only as strong as they make it apparent. Over time, not enforcing that power, when it should be, means that by abdicating, it withers. Congress is writing its wither-sentence.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    I hear Don Jr wants to become the new Rush Limbaugh.

    I doubt he has the tolerance for that amount of coke.

    Or prescription opioids

    How about the viagra-junkets to well-known sex tourist destinations?
  • edited February 2021
    Congress actually has teeth. The trouble was that they had no spine.
    And what is the punishment?

    I understand that there are jail cells in the basement of Congress, designed to hold scofflaws who ignore Congressional subpoenae and who are held in contempt of Congress.
  • Congress actually has teeth. The trouble was that they had no spine.
    And what is the punishment?

    I understand that there are jail cells in the basement of Congress, designed to hold scofflaws who ignore Congressional subpoenae and who are held in contempt of Congress.

    Yep. How I wish they had used them!
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    CPAC boggles my mind. It has abandoned its raison d’etre in favour of becoming a cult rally. TPAC not CPAC.

    What really gets me is the supporting acts. Cynical manipulation of the cult followers for money and power. Elmer Gantries, every single one. A remark and revamp starring a Burt Lancaster successor looks like a project. Is Trump Elmer Gantry squared or does he really believe his own self promotion? I guess that’s the real test of whether he is insane - or just yet another poisonous cynic. Selling yet more poisonous Kool Aid to the gullible.
  • Citizen Kane?
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    edited February 2021
    There already exists clear evidence that Mr Trump entered incorrect returns. That does not necessarily mean he committed a crime. He could honestly believe he was entitled to certain deductions. That's not fraud. What then happens though is when it's shown that your wrong, you have to pay back what you owe plus interest.

    So far, no actual big deal.

    However, consider these two facts:
    1. Mr Vance, District Attorney was very keen to have these documents and spent over 2 years in the courts to get them
    2. Mr Trump, (soon-to-be disgraced) Ex-president was extremely keen to keep these documents hidden.

    I conclude from this that it is extremely likely that within them will be found one or more carefully worded memo(s) outlining why certain actions are a breach of the tax code.

    If I am right, that shows intent and deliberate falsification of a tax return.you have had professional advice that you have ignored, that is not a mistake, it is mens rea (a guilty mind) and The Donald is in serious criminal jeopardy.

    It has long been suspected that Trump was telling the taxman one thing and his loan officers something very different. If that can be sufficiently proven that means he was committing fraud on at least one (and possibly both) of those parties. Either would be a crime.
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    There already exists clear evidence that Mr Trump entered incorrect returns. That does not necessarily mean he committed a crime. He could honestly believe he was entitled to certain deductions. That's not fraud. What then happens though is when it's shown that your wrong, you have to pay back what you owe plus interest.

    So far, no actual big deal.

    However, consider these two facts:
    1. Mr Vance, District Attorney was very keen to have these documents and spent over 2 years in the courts to get them
    2. Mr Trump, (soon-to-be disgraced) Ex-president was extremely keen to keep these documents hidden.

    I conclude from this that it is extremely likely that within them will be found one or more carefully worded memo(s) outlining why certain actions are a breach of the tax code.

    If I am right, that shows intent and deliberate falsification of a tax return.you have had professional advice that you have ignored, that is not a mistake, it is mens rea (a guilty mind) and The Donald is in serious criminal jeopardy.

    It has long been suspected that Trump was telling the taxman one thing and his loan officers something very different. If that can be sufficiently proven that means he was committing fraud on at least one (and possibly both) of those parties. Either would be a crime.

    Indeed. IANAL but I'm pretty sure that in each case, fraud is an intent crime and thus mens rea applies. I remain of the view that Vance has the details and already has a strong case. However, there's probably not a prosecutor in the Western world who doesn't crave more evidence. I think that's what the accountants paperwork gives him. Especially the evidence of intent.

    AFZ
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Shipmate, Host Emeritus
    edited February 2021
    Appropriate punishments?
    It may make you laugh .....
  • I have heard that often organized crime syndicates will have two financial books: one that is fake but is used to dress everything up, and one that is accurate and keeps everything hidden. I wonder which books the DA actually got. And how will they determine what they are.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    I have heard that often organized crime syndicates will have two financial books: one that is fake but is used to dress everything up, and one that is accurate and keeps everything hidden. I wonder which books the DA actually got. And how will they determine what they are.

    From the sound of it they've got two sets of financials, one from the accountants that inform what goes to the IRS and NY state tax officials, and one from his creditors that paint a very different picture. It's entirely possible that both sets are false and that there is a real set in a gold drawer somewhere, but I wouldn't be surprised if Trump's just been bullshitting in all directions for so long that no-one actually has a clear idea of his finances, including him.
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate, Glory
    Eirenist wrote: »
    Citizen Kane?

    If so, we could've given T a Rosebud sled and made him happy.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Appropriate punishments?
    It may make you laugh .....

    Related.
  • Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Guilty but insane?

    Trouble is, one could apply that verdict to Trump’s vocal supporters in the GOP. I think Cruz, Hawley and McCarthy are not insane, just calculatedly loyal. Trump? He has very abnormal thought processes. A controlled psychopath, sometimes more controlled, sometimes less so.

    I just don't know about this, unless one is willing to classify the behavior of many rich men as pathological. Trump's steely fixation on self interest and capacity to construct his own reality seems pretty standard fare on the right of Australian politics and in the business community.
Sign In or Register to comment.