Trump Legal Troubles

[ZRod]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Not excusing her's at all.  It just doesn't have anything to do with the case.

No one is complaining about the morality of Trump. It was only ever highlighted to show the complete and utter hypocrisy of the right, and their claims of Christian moral superiority. When push comes to shove they'll bed up with the devil of their choice without a moments hesitation.

[Mike Mcdee]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

Is that what’s going on jj?  Is it really?    The most liberal of networks is saying Willis is toast and you complain about me?     Maybe, possibly, could be something else in that “relationship with a man” that is unethical/illegal?   Sorta kinda?   
 

But JJ’s gotta shoot the messenger.   No not the liberal news media messenger saying the same things as Archy.   Nope.   He’s gotta skip that and get his weekly digs in.   
 

 

So I actually watched most of this yesterday. I don't agree with the MSNBC personality at all. The line of questioning from the defense caused them to trip over their own laces several times. The "putting it on his business credit card" isn't the gotcha they think. I use mine for everything as well. Then when tax time comes, I present them to the accountant and he tells me what I can and can't deduct. All good. The insinuation of cash at her home was from ill gotten means is preposterous. I have cash in my home at all times in case of emergencies. My in-laws have told us that they have about $25k in their home as a safe guard against some banking emergency. It's somewhat of a generational thing. Going after Wade about how much the state of Georgia or Fulton County paid him fell flat as well. His partnership was paid the $300k and then it was divided between the partners. So while yes, he was in possession of the whole amount at one point, he only kept his 1/3 of it. It all equaled out to what he filed on his financial disclosure. 

 

@Archy1221in your eyes, what about their relationship was unethical? Was it that he was married? His wife cheated on him in 2015 at which point he told her that they would divorce once their youngest went to college. He stayed around for the family. Kept it a 2 parent home while his kids were still growing. Was it the trips they took? She says she reimbursed him because she wanted to pay her own way. I've known several women who have echoed this same mentality. Especially women who have gone through a divorce and were either an equal earner or the primary breadwinner. 

 

In all honesty, Judge McAfee is the one who will decide if she should be removed from the case. His interactions with defense council didn't really lead me to believe he was leaning toward throwing her off. 

[Archy1221]

11 minutes ago, Mike Mcdee said:

in your eyes, what about their relationship was unethical?

From what I understand, and please correct me if I am getting this wrong…..

 

She hired her paramour for this case (they have admitted to being together prior to the case starting) and he is cashing in above what his experience level is for this type of case.   Again, if I have that incorrect please let me know.  
 

She seems to have admitted to taking “lots of cash” out of her election campaign for personnel expenditures and I’ve always thought this was campaign finance issues.   I may be wrong here and please let me know.   
 

How do we know she even paid him back since this seems to be one of the few areas where she pays things in cash.   It looks like a funneling system that they used money paid to him for personnel vacations.  Again good be wrong but “experts” being interviewed are implying this.  
 

Do I care that he cheated on his wife?  No.   With her? If it weren’t related to him being hired for the case I would say no?  Since he’s in the case, that seems pretty relevant.  

[BigRedBuster]

 

[JJ Husker]

3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Is that what’s going on jj?  Is it really?    The most liberal of networks is saying Willis is toast and you complain about me?     Maybe, possibly, could be something else in that “relationship with a man” that is unethical/illegal?   Sorta kinda?   
 

But JJ’s gotta shoot the messenger.   No not the liberal news media messenger saying the same things as Archy.   Nope.   He’s gotta skip that and get his weekly digs in.   
 

 

Yes that is what’s going on. I’m shooting the messenger because this particular messenger is always and constantly passing on messages that align with his party line thinking. Doing the same things constantly all day every day while tossing in infrequent brief statements about how fair and balanced you are….is that really supposed to fool us? What a joke.

[Mike Mcdee]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

From what I understand, and please correct me if I am getting this wrong…..

 

She hired her paramour for this case (they have admitted to being together prior to the case starting) and he is cashing in above what his experience level is for this type of case.   Again, if I have that incorrect please let me know.  
 

She seems to have admitted to taking “lots of cash” out of her election campaign for personnel expenditures and I’ve always thought this was campaign finance issues.   I may be wrong here and please let me know.   
 

How do we know she even paid him back since this seems to be one of the few areas where she pays things in cash.   It looks like a funneling system that they used money paid to him for personnel vacations.  Again good be wrong but “experts” being interviewed are implying this.  
 

Do I care that he cheated on his wife?  No.   With her? If it weren’t related to him being hired for the case I would say no?  Since he’s in the case, that seems pretty relevant.  

I could see them being viewed as a funneling system, but the amounts don't add up. She stated that the most she reimbursed was $4k. There were three vacations in question. Napa vacation, Belize vacation, and I think a cruise. The other issue is, they are trying to say two things about these vacations. Either they weren't reimbursed and she obtained illegal contributions. Or she reimbursed him and it's a funneling scheme. It can't be both. The legal system is based on what can be proven. Not what someone could imply. As far as the funds origination, there has to be some sort of link between her taking the funds out and then using them for personal gain. I haven't heard that brought up either yesterday or today yet.

 

As far as hiring her significant other and being over paid for his qualifications, they addressed that was well. He signed a contract to do work. Was only allowed to charge a capped amount of hours. He went through invoices and it showed that he worked significantly more on the case and was unpaid because of the cap. Again, if the assumption is that he was then repaid through these vacations, it's not enough. Her testimony stated that she had contracted several lawyers at rates of between $150-$300/ hour. Not an outrageous number for lawyers. 

 

As far as him cheating, again, he was the one who suffered the infidelity that irretrievably broke their marriage. And I don't know that I would equate dating to being a paramour. 

 

I'll admit it's not the cleanest of looks to have them dating and working together. But I don't see how the judge, based on facts entered into evidence, removes her from the RICO case.

Edited February 16 by Mike Mcdee
wording

[Archy1221]

15 minutes ago, Mike Mcdee said:

The other issue is, they are trying to say two things about these vacations. Either they weren't reimbursed and she obtained illegal contributions. Or she reimbursed him and it's a funneling scheme. It can't be both.

I believe it could be both…..

 

Sounds like it’s not factual to say they dated before this Trump trial started to take place.   She hired this gentleman she was seeing to help prosecute even though he has zero experience in dealing with a RICO case (from what I understood and please correct me if I’m wrong).  Now I understand lawyers have to get experience at some point with certain types of cases, but is the highest profile case EVER the place to hire an in-experienced lawyer (unless you are Trump, HA) I would think not.   I also wouldn’t mind knowing his billable hours for the two years prior to this trial and the billable hours generated since this trial by him.   If his billable’s have gone up extensively, would it be fair to say his lover was the cause of that using state tax dollars on a case he doesn’t have experience with (again if wrong let me know)?  
 

So then, he has potentially lots more income that is able to used to go on vacations and trips from the tax payer gig he has and she possibly doesn’t pay her half of the expenses because if can’t be proven she did (or didn’t).   
 

again, I also believe she stated the took an amount of a cash from her campaign and kept it at her house to use as expenses.  I’ve always thought that was a no-no.  Let me know if I’m wrong about that.  

[commando]

that has to sting

 

 

[TGHusker]

[Archy1221]

 

[Scarlet]

 

[TGHusker]

Some highlights below

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/rcna135283

Quote

 

During the trial, Trump and executives at his company, including his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, attempted to blame exaggerated financial statements that were the heart of the AG's case on the accountants who compiled them. Engoron disagreed.

"There is overwhelming evidence from both interested and non-interested witnesses, corroborated by documentary evidence, that the buck for being truthful in the supporting data valuations stopped with the Trump Organization, not the accountants," he wrote. 

 

The judge also cited the lack of remorse by Trump and his executives after the fraud was discovered as showing the need for a monitor.

"Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological. They are accused only of inflating asset values to make more money. The documents prove this over and over again. This is a venial sin, not a mortal sin. Defendants did not commit murder or arson. They did not rob a bank at gunpoint. Donald Trump is not Bernard Madoff. Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways," Engoron wrote.

"Defendants’ refusal to admit error — indeed, to continue it, according to the Independent Monitor — constrains this Court to conclude that they will engage in it going forward unless judicially restrained," he added. 

 

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-civil-fraud-trial-decision-02-16-24#h_4c84dd526d2a139cb28b37c4cfff980d

Quote

 

Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump’s adult sons, Donald Jr. and Eric, liable for a host of civil fraud counts in New York, including issuing false financial statements, falsifying business records and conspiracy.  

He ordered them each to pay $4 million for their personal profits from the fraud. 

In addition, Engoron fined former Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg $1 million. 

 

Quote

 

While Judge Arthur Engoron barred Donald Trump from serving as an officer or director of a New York corporation in New York for three years, he did not dissolve the business certificates for the Trump Organization, as he had initially laid out in his summary judgment issued last year.

Engoron wrote that his September order was “modified solely to the extent of vacating the directive to cancel defendants’ business certificates.”

Engoron wrote that a monitor he put in place for the company was to stay in place for at least three years, and that an independent director of compliance should be installed at the company’s expense

 

 

[commando]

to really hurt donald... make him pay that fine to ukraines defense fund

[Mike Mcdee]

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

I believe it could be both…..

 

Sounds like it’s not factual to say they dated before this Trump trial started to take place.   She hired this gentleman she was seeing to help prosecute even though he has zero experience in dealing with a RICO case (from what I understood and please correct me if I’m wrong).  Now I understand lawyers have to get experience at some point with certain types of cases, but is the highest profile case EVER the place to hire an in-experienced lawyer (unless you are Trump, HA) I would think not.   I also wouldn’t mind knowing his billable hours for the two years prior to this trial and the billable hours generated since this trial by him.   If his billable’s have gone up extensively, would it be fair to say his lover was the cause of that using state tax dollars on a case he doesn’t have experience with (again if wrong let me know)?  
 

So then, he has potentially lots more income that is able to used to go on vacations and trips from the tax payer gig he has and she possibly doesn’t pay her half of the expenses because if can’t be proven she did (or didn’t).   
 

again, I also believe she stated the took an amount of a cash from her campaign and kept it at her house to use as expenses.  I’ve always thought that was a no-no.  Let me know if I’m wrong about that.  

To the bold, I don't know about the 2 years before and 2 years after, he was asked the split between his work for the state and Fulton County, and income derived from his private practice. He testified it was a 50/50 split as far as income. As far as time consumption, it was 99% for the state and Fulton County and 1% to his private practice. He testified he was paid before taxes and expenses roughly around $100,000 for the 2022 or 23 year. Just doing the math, he and his partners were paid at the $150/hour rate if you are assuming 2080 hours of work. 

 

The underlined portion I know is wrong. She testified that she couldn't identify exactly where the cash came from because it was an accumulation over years. The defense attorney was wanting her to get very detailed as to providing a receipt for withdraw that could be traced back to for the cash's source. She stated she wouldn't have an exact withdraw receipt because, again the cash was an accumulation of cash on hand at the home over years. 

 

As far as the experience factor, I missed his bona fides. He did teach a class that she attended in 2019 I believe. He became a trusted colleague and someone she felt could help. 

 

I again state, I don't know if the optics are the best to be dating a subordinate in this high profile of a case. But the defense team for the most part has failed, in my eyes, to draw a direct correlation between the money paid to Wade and wrong doing. Nor any gifts to Willis from Wade that would rise to the level of impropriety. 

[Archy1221]

8 minutes ago, Mike Mcdee said:

 

The underlined portion I know is wrong. She testified that she couldn't identify exactly where the cash came from because it was an accumulation over years

Well this is her directly stating she took money from her campaign and kept cash from that.  FYI.  I don’t follow this account nor care about the commentary listed.  It’s just from looking through the trending tweets on her.