.jpg)
By William Silveira
The question atop today’s observation is on many people’s minds. How likely do I think it is that Trump will be indicted for alleged crimes or misdemeanors after he leaves office? My opinion has nothing to do with the fact-finding that I did as a judge when I had a dispute before me. But I do have an opinion, based on news published in credible newspapers, such as the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Wall Street Journal.
| ...hush-money payments... |
The Manhattan district attorney’s office suggested on Monday that it had been investigating President Trump and his company for possible bank and insurance fraud, a significantly broader inquiry than the prosecutors have acknowledged in the past.The “affairs” referred to include alleged payoffs to Stormy Daniels.
The suggestion by the office of the district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., came in a new federal court filing arguing that Mr. Trump’s accountants should have to comply with a grand jury subpoena seeking eight years of his personal and corporate tax returns....
Until now, the district attorney’s inquiry had appeared largely focused on hush-money payments made in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election to two women who said they had affairs with Mr. Trump.
| ...both civil and criminal implications... |
President Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election could serve to significantly complicate his efforts to fight off a host of lawsuits and investigations into himself and his company, forcing him to shed what has been one of his most effective legal shields for the past four years, according to legal experts.How would I feel if a man who had betrayed the Office of President as Donald Trump has were not indicted because of possible “extraordinary political fallout”?...How would you feel?
...Upon departing office on Jan. 20, Trump would have to shift that strategy as he faces the new reality of managing his defenses as a private citizen, both with respect to pending civil cases, as well as investigations which could have both civil and criminal implications.
“There’s no question that there are a number of active investigations that could implicate Donald Trump, private citizen, and lead to his indictment and prosecution,” said attorney Richard Ben-Veniste, a former top prosecutor on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force that investigated former President Richard Nixon.
Experts questioned, however, the likelihood of any federal investigation into Trump being launched given the extraordinary political fallout that could come as a result. Nearly all of the current legal threats Trump could face are not criminal in nature and charging a former president with a crime is unprecedented.
| ...one more scam before Trump leaves office... |
President Trump isn’t really trying to overturn the election. He’s simply running one more scam before he leaves office that would enable him to enrich himself.How do I feel about this?...How do you feel about it?
That’s the way it appears, at least, from the scores of fundraising emails his campaign has sent out since the election. He seems to be asking for funds to challenge the election, but the fine print shows that the money could let him line his own coffers. The tin-pot-dictator routine looks more as if it’s about passing the tin cup.
“They’re trying to STEAL this Election,” declared one such Trump campaign fundraising missive from “Donald J. Trump, President of the United States” on Wednesday afternoon. “I promise you my team is fighting the clock to DEFEND the integrity of this Election, but we cannot do it alone. We need EVERY Patriot, like YOU, to step up and make sure we have the resources to keep going.…Please contribute ANY AMOUNT RIGHT NOW to DEFEND the Election.”
...Sixty percent of the contribution, up to $5,000, goes to “Save America,” Trump’s newly created leadership PAC. And 40 percent of the contribution up to $35,500, goes to the Republican National Committee’s operating account, its political (not legal) fund.
Only after reaching the first maximum would a single penny go to Trump’s “Recount Account,” and only after reaching the second maximum would a penny go to the RNC’s legal account.
Whatever the case might turn out to be, it is my understanding that it is illegal to apply funds for personal use that were raised to fund a political campaign.
| ...Trump has refused to concede the election... |
With President Trump refusing to acknowledge President-elect Joe Biden’s victory and continuing to falsely declare himself as the winner of the White House, the president and his campaign are soliciting donations from supporters for an “election defense fund” designed to “defend the integrity” of the election.Other credible articles report that the federal prosecutors for the Eastern District of New York are readying a case against Trump alleging fraud in financial statements issued by him to secure financing for some of his properties. There may be other allegations of which I am unaware. More than one article has reported that prosecutors have delayed filing their criminal complaints against Trump because they believed they could not proceed against a sitting president. He will not be a sitting president (I hope) after the inauguration of Joseph Biden.
...The most recent federal campaign finance records available showed the Trump campaign with $60 million cash-on-hand at the beginning of October. The campaign would go on to spend upwards of $160 million on television ads in the final month before the election.
CBS News projected Mr. Biden as the winner of the presidential race Saturday, as he cleared the 270 electoral votes needed to secure the White House. But Mr. Trump has refused to concede the election and instead has falsely claimed he is the winner.
...Still, Mr. Trump is attempting to drum up support for his legal battles, sending out fundraising appeals that declare the election is “far from over,” as election results have not yet been certified by the states and some states will hold recounts.
As to the people who still believe Trump’s lies, I can only say it surpasses all understanding. I had to reread Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer – a book that was popular when I was an undergraduate. It seems to me that Trump’s “base” are a group of true believers who will believe his every utterance, no matter how evidently untrue and contradictory of overwhelming the evidence otherwise. Hoffer sums it all up in his book.
| Copyright © 2020 by William Silveira |
Bill, if Trump is indicted and encounters big problems finding an effective line of defense, do you think that any legal counselor of his could reasonably suggest “not guilty by reason of insanity”?
ReplyDeleteI have requested that a copy of Hoffer’s book be held for me at a UNC library. (And I apologize for not seeing until now that you misspelled his name; I’ll go add the second letter ‘f.’)
ReplyDeleteWilliam Silveira, would you please comment on the following, either here or in a follow-up column?
ReplyDeleteLet me start here: “FinCEN Fines Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort $10 Million for Significant and Long Standing Anti-Money Laundering Violations.” How is it possible that paying a $10-million fine for a situation such as this, in 2015, did not disqualify Donald Trump from running for president, especially in light of his refusal to release income tax information and other business records during the 2016 campaign? This fine, along with the years of murky financing of Trump's business efforts, the friendships and business dealings with Russian oligarchs, and a $300-million loan with Deutsche Bank he reportedly defaulted on then sued the bank for threatening to take action to collect the debt, raise a question: Was Trump a businessman, or an international money launderer?
I don't recall any of this information being brought to light during the 2016 campaign: did I somehow miss all this being discussed, or was this a failure on the part of law enforcement, the media, Hillary Clinton and the Democrats - or all three? How was it possible that so many people were well aware of this factual information, and no one used it to prevent someone who was very possibly running an international money laundering operation from becoming President of the United States? Are there no laws in place to protect the public and the government of this country from such, or are the laws not enforced because these are "just" white-collar crimes? As I understand it, if someone robs a convenience store and becomes a convicted felon, they can't even vote - much less hold public office. If that is correct, where is the weakness in our legal system that a small-time felon can't vote, but someone who pays a $10-million fine for his involvement in international money laundering can become president?
Interesting. Not sure that prosecuting Trump will do anything but keep him in the headlines and headlights which he loves. Keeping his true believers riled up and sending money. I think I remember that book. I advocate ignoring him, which he hates, and letting his private creditors go after him. And the tax collector.
ReplyDeleteNeil, I think that Trump’s true believers will continue to be riled up, come what may. The essential point for me is that a man who has so extensively and wantonly betrayed a hallowed office established by the United States Constitution should receive his just desserts. To let him go would be an unconscionable betrayal of "justice for all," "all equal under the law."
DeleteI collected a copy of Hoffer’s book at UNC this morning. I am interested to see whether I agree with William Silveira’s seeming assessment that what Hoffer says by way of profiling the true believers of his day applies to Trump die-hards.
Since Trump wasn't prosecuted (he just paid a fine) for money laundering and since Deutsche Bank apparently never went after him for defaulting on a $300-million loan - all before he became president - it is hard to imagine prosecutors or creditors going after him now that he has been president.
DeleteIn America we like to believe bullies eventually pay a steep price; in reality most of them perfect their shtick and get away with it most of their lives. We of a certain age like to believe life plays out like a moralistic Jimmy Stewart movie, 'Dumb and Dumber' might be a more apt comparison.