Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dajoki

(10,678 posts)
Sat Jun 30, 2018, 08:08 AM Jun 2018

The Inconvenient Legal Troubles That Lie Ahead for the Trump Foundation

The Inconvenient Legal Troubles That Lie Ahead for the Trump Foundation
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-inconvenient-legal-troubles-that-lie-ahead-for-the-trump-foundation

Barring an unexpected change, the Donald J. Trump Foundation will be defending itself in a New York courtroom shortly before this fall’s midterm elections. The proceedings seem unlikely to go well for the institution and its leadership; President Trump and his elder children, Ivanka, Donald, Jr., and Eric, are being sued by New York’s attorney general, Barbara Underwood, for using the charity to enrich and benefit the Trump family. On Tuesday, the judge in the case, Saliann Scarpulla, made a series of comments and rulings from the bench that hinted—well, all but screamed—that she believes the Trump family has done some very bad things.

<<snip>>

A series of subpoenaed e-mails and a fascinating deposition offer a glimpse into the work of a mysterious figure, Allen Weisselberg, who has handled Donald Trump’s finances for as long as he’s had any. First hired by the President’s father, Fred Trump, Weisselberg has been the one steady presence in the Trump Organization for the entire period that Donald Trump has run the company. I have spoken to many current and former Trump Organization employees who have shared the same description of the company: it is a chaotic mess, in which projects are randomly distributed to in-house staff. A lawyer might be asked to negotiate a real-estate deal, an executive might be tasked with setting up a product-licensing arrangement. While there are traditional titles, such as general counsel or senior vice-president of operations, there is no standard business hierarchy. Trump, before he became President, would tell people what they should do with no clear regard for consistency. The currency of the place was always one’s proximity to the big boss, Donald Trump, so people didn’t tell colleagues which projects they were handling, out of fear that those colleagues might undermine them. I heard, repeatedly, that there were only two people who knew about every deal the company made: Trump himself and Allen Weisselberg. However, Trump, rather famously, rarely concerned himself with details and often forgot who had received which assignments and how different deals were structured.

Weisselberg’s testimony in the trial, then, could prove revealing. He is perhaps the only non-family member who knows the inner workings of the Trump Organization. Michael Cohen will be a key figure in understanding Trump’s recent business relationships with several overseas partners suspected of potentially engaging in money laundering, corruption, and sanctions violations. (A federal criminal investigation of Cohen includes more than four million business files that will soon be turned over to investigators and are likely to shed light on the company’s operations during the ten years that Cohen was involved.) But it is only Weisselberg who can recount the essence of the Trump Organization from the beginning of Donald Trump’s involvement: in the nineteen-seventies, when the company first discriminated against African-Americans; in the eighties, when Trump appears to have been in business with the New York mafia; in the nineties, when Trump’s casino was in violation of anti-money-laundering laws; and through the aughts, as Trump developed ties to many Russian and former-Soviet oligarchs and political figures.

The Trump Foundation case may have already revealed a potential rift between Weisselberg and the family. His deposition in the case is fascinating reading. Weisselberg makes it quite clear just how sloppy an operation the foundation was, with no meetings and no careful accounting. In a compelling exchange, Weisselberg describes how he flew to Iowa with a checkbook to give money to political allies of Trump, then a Presidential candidate, and he makes it clear that he did this because his boss told him to. It is a damning statement, and the first evidence I have seen that Weisselberg, when cornered, may be willing to shift blame to the President. Judge Scarpulla will continue pushing the Trumps to settle. Trump-watchers, though, will likely hope that the family chooses to fight. We will learn much more if Weisselberg and others take the stand.

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Inconvenient Legal Troubles That Lie Ahead for the Trump Foundation (Original Post) dajoki Jun 2018 OP
Given the 'possible' facts of the case empedocles Jun 2018 #1
I hope so n/t dajoki Jun 2018 #2
the russians have deep pockets Achilleaze Jul 2018 #13
You need money to settle. SallyHemmings Jun 2018 #3
The Trump Family FAKE Charity... AmericanBot Jun 2018 #4
"Inconvenient???" BobTheSubgenius Jun 2018 #5
I think the "inconvenient" is snark Yonnie3 Jun 2018 #6
And it is good snark. It will be mighty inconvenient for those "Charities" to explain to a ... marble falls Jun 2018 #7
I worked for/with British for around 20 years total Yonnie3 Jun 2018 #8
We both appreciate accurate snark. marble falls Jun 2018 #9
K & R Duppers Jun 2018 #10
K&R Scurrilous Jul 2018 #11
I hope this costs them dearly and ruins their reputation forever as smirkymonkey Jul 2018 #12

Achilleaze

(15,543 posts)
13. the russians have deep pockets
Sun Jul 1, 2018, 06:11 AM
Jul 2018

So Dirty Donny* and his republican cronies are all set.


* aka republican Draft-Dodger-in-Chief

BobTheSubgenius

(11,515 posts)
5. "Inconvenient???"
Sat Jun 30, 2018, 11:04 AM
Jun 2018

I hope they are a HELL of a lot worse than that.

And, I could be wrong about this, but I don't think "CFOclient privilege" is a thing.

Yonnie3

(17,271 posts)
6. I think the "inconvenient" is snark
Sat Jun 30, 2018, 11:17 AM
Jun 2018

at least that's how I'm taking it.

Oh, you don't have a leg to stand on in court, how inconvenient for you.

marble falls

(55,464 posts)
7. And it is good snark. It will be mighty inconvenient for those "Charities" to explain to a ...
Sat Jun 30, 2018, 01:56 PM
Jun 2018

judge why they call themselves a "Charity" to begin with. I don't think the old "all the other rich kids do it" will work. Even MORE inconvenient will be trying to explain why they can't pay the penalties and how hard it is for a Trump to hire a competent lawyer.

"I don't care. do u?" Ah .... the sweet jasminely scent of irony at DU on a pleasant Saturday afternoon.

If I had known there was going to be a serious demonstration in Houston I'd a gone. My mother and sister live there and my sister is an attorney. She'd a been there with me.

 

smirkymonkey

(63,221 posts)
12. I hope this costs them dearly and ruins their reputation forever as
Sun Jul 1, 2018, 05:50 AM
Jul 2018

"philanthropists". I hope they never get another dime for one of their fake charities.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Inconvenient Legal Tr...