Tag: President Crook

  • The hand descends on the shoulder at last

    Welp, it’s on.

    Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Tuesday evening that the US House of Representatives will launch impeachment proceedings into Donald Trump, setting up an extraordinary constitutional clash over allegations he sought the help of a foreign country to harm a political rival.

    “The president must be held accountable. No one is above the law,” Pelosi said on Capitol Hill moments after 5pm on Tuesday.

    After months of resistance amid calls from many fellow Democrats in Washington, Pelosi determined that Trump’s alleged conduct and his administration’s refusal to comply with congressional requests for information and testimony has forced the House’s hand, leaving them no choice but to move forward with a formal impeachment inquiry.

    The sharp change of course comes as Democrats from across the party amplified their calls from impeachment after revelations of a whistleblower complaint that the intelligence community’s internal watchdog, Gen Michael Atkinson, deemed credible and an “urgent concern”. The White House has refused to share the complaint with Congress as typically required by law, arguing that the allegations do not fall within the intelligence community whistleblower statute.

    With impeachment, from what I understand, it will be harder for the trumpies to refuse to hand over the evidence.

    I hope Trump is having a screaming fire-everyone pants-wetting meltdown right now.

  • They were there to see Las Meninas

    Way back on August 22

    President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani confirmed Thursday that the State Department assisted his efforts to press the Ukrainian government to probe two prominent Democratic opponents of the president: former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.

    Specifically, Giuliani has wanted Ukrainian officials to look into any impropriety related to the former vice president’s push to crack down on corruption in Ukraine and his son Hunter Biden’s involvement in a natural gas company there. Giuliani also sought to have Ukraine examine whether the Democratic National Committee worked in connection with Ukrainian officials to harm Trump’s 2016 campaign by releasing damaging information on the president’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.

    Giuliani had conversations with Andriy Yermak, a Ukrainian official closely allied to Zelensky, on the phone and in person in Madrid. (Why in Madrid? Was Giuliani trying to play Casablanca? Madrid is neutral territory so if he talks to a Ukrainian official there it doesn’t count as a violation of the Logan Act? Or just that Giuliani is more interested in Madrid than Kiev? Who knows.)

    Trump’s attorney [i.e. Giuliani] confirmed to NBC News that the State Department helped put him in touch with Yermak.

    “Times completely turned a story about astounding allegations of serious crimes of state concerning Dems into a piece trying to suggest I did something nefarious except they can’t say what it is,” Giuliani told NBC News in a text message Thursday. “Typical spin against Trump or anyone close to him.”

    The State Department put Yermak “in contact with me,” Giuliani said. “Not other way around, and I told him they should not be cowered [out of] fully investigating serious possible crimes like bribery, extortion, fraud, money laundering and illegal interference in 2016 election.”

    But but but Giuliani wasn’t (and isn’t) a government employee. He’s Trump’s personal lawyer. What business does he have meeting with foreign officials? Especially given the fact that Yermak wasn’t clear about his status?

    The Times reported that Yermak was sent to Washington to build relationships with U.S. officials, discuss sanctions related to a Russian oil pipeline and lay the groundwork for a meeting between Trump and the Ukrainian president…

    Yermak told the Times he asked Volker to arrange discussions with Giuliani, additionally saying it was unclear to him whether Giuliani was representing Trump in their discussions.

    Which means Giuliani and the State Department people were careful not to make it clear to Yermak that Giuliani is not a government employee and was not representing Trump as part of his administration but only as his dirty personal lawyer.

  • Thumping the Ukraine theme

    Ed Pilkington at the Guardian wonders why the hell Giuliani is doing what he’s doing.

    Giuliani began thumping the Ukraine theme in April, when he laid out his theory – some would say, conspiracy theory – on Fox News. He accused the former vice-president of using bribery to shield his son from legal peril relating to business activities in the eastern European country.

    Specifically, Giuliani alleged that Biden leant on a former Ukraine president to fire a top prosecutor who had been investigating corruption within a gas company on whose board Hunter Biden then served.

    A week after Joe Biden launched his presidential campaign, Giuliani blabbed to the New York Times that he had discussed the issue of the Bidens and Ukraine with Trump on “multiple occasions”. He also divulged that he planned to make a trip to Kiev to meet the Ukrainian president.

    Under US law, it is categorically illegal for anybody to solicit the help of any foreign national – let alone a government – for a US election. Yet here was Giuliani blithely telling the same newspaper a week later his visit to Kiev was intended to kickstart an investigation into the Bidens that could be helpful in next year’s presidential race.

    “There’s nothing illegal about it,” he told the Times. “Somebody could say it’s improper … That information will be very, very helpful to my client.”

    Giuliani’s a lawyer – he’s a former prosecutor. He’s a former big name prosecutor in a big name district, and now his client is the US president. You’d think he’d be well familiar with the relevant laws.

    Giuliani cancelled his Kiev trip. Instead, he travelled to Madrid in August, where he met a top Ukrainian official whom he “strongly urged” to reopen the investigation into the Bidens.

    Perhaps most incendiary of all are suggestions Trump and Giuliani may have tried to encourage the Ukraine government to play ball by invoking US aid to the country.

    It sounds like Bugs Bunny playing gangster – “Give us the doit on Biden and we’ll give you 250 million smackeroos.” It sounds like broad comedy but it’s real Giuliani.

  • We’re a free republic or we’re not

    The Wall Street Journal on Trump and Ukraine:

    President Trump in a July phone call repeatedly pressured the president of Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden ’s son, according to people familiar with the matter, urging Volodymyr Zelensky about eight times to work with Rudy Giuliani on a probe that could hamper Mr. Trump’s potential 2020 opponent.

    “He told him that he should work with [Mr. Giuliani] on Biden, and that people in Washington wanted to know” if his lawyer’s assertions that Mr. Biden acted improperly as vice president were true, one of the people said. Mr. Giuliani has suggested Mr. Biden’s pressure on Ukraine to fight corruption had to do with an investigation of a gas company for which his son was a director. A Ukrainian official this year said he had no evidence of wrongdoing by Mr. Biden or his son Hunter Biden.

    Mr. Giuliani in June and August met with top Ukrainian officials about the prospect of an investigation, he said in an interview. After the July call between the two presidents, the Ukrainian government said Mr. Trump had congratulated Mr. Zelensky on his recent election and expressed hope that his government would push ahead with investigations and corruption probes that had stymied relations between the two countries.

    Mr. Trump on Friday defended his July call with Mr. Zelensky as “totally appropriate” but declined to say whether he had asked the Ukrainian leader to investigate Mr. Biden. At the same time, he reiterated his call for an investigation into Mr. Biden’s effort as vice president to oust Ukraine’s prosecutor general. “Somebody ought to look into that,” he told reporters.

    In recent months, Mr. Giuliani has mounted an extensive effort to pressure Ukraine to do so. He said he met with an official from the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office in June in Paris, and met with Andriy Yermak, a top aide to Mr. Zelensky, in Madrid in August. Mr. Giuliani said in an interview this month that Mr. Yermak assured him the Ukrainian government would “get to the bottom” of the Biden matter.

    The August meeting came weeks before the Trump administration began reviewing the status of $250 million in foreign aid to Ukraine, which the administration released earlier this month. Mr. Giuliani said he wasn’t aware of the issue with the funds to Ukraine at the time of the meeting.

    Walter Shaub puts it this way:

    It’s not complicated. If the executive really did abuse his power to push a foreign government to knock out his political rival before the next election, that’s either too much for you or nothing ever will be. Don’t need a statutory citation. We’re a free republic or we’re not.

    It’s the “if the executive really did” part that’s not entirely nailed down.

    Cory Booker:

    This story is stunning and should be shaking Washington right now—Donald Trump’s moral vandalism disqualifies him from being president. As I’ve said before, it’s time for impeachment proceedings.

    Joyce Vance:

    Trump didn’t ask Ukraine’s President to work with our government – he asked him to work with Trump’s personal lawyer to investigate the front runner to be Trump’s opponent in the 2020 election.

  • What’s in HIS wallet?

    Interesting. It seems Trump has been using the military to improve revenues at his golf resort in Scotland. What a coincidence: just the other day he used Pence’s drop-in on Dublin to improve revenues at his golf course on the far side of the country. Fun fact: he’s not allowed to do that. It’s corrupt, and he’s not allowed to do corrupt things. Sadly, though, we don’t enforce our own rules, so oh well.

    In early Spring of this year, an Air National Guard crew made a routine trip from the U.S. to Kuwait to deliver supplies.

    What wasn’t routine was where the crew stopped along the way: President Donald Trump’s Turnberry resort, about 50 miles outside Glasgow, Scotland.

    Since April, the House Oversight Committee has been investigating why the crew on the C-17 military transport plane made the unusual stay — both en route to the Middle East and on the way back — at the luxury waterside resort, according to several people familiar with the incident. But they have yet to receive any answers from the Pentagon.

    Any guesses as to why? Could it at all be because the Pentagon is part of the executive branch and the executive branch is currently enslaved by Trump?

    The inquiry is part of a broader, previously unreported probe into U.S. military expenditures at and around the Trump property in Scotland. According to a letter the panel sent to the Pentagon in June, the military has spent $11 million on fuel at the Prestwick Airport — the closest airport to Trump Turnberry — since October 2017, fuel that would be cheaper if purchased at a U.S. military base. The letter also cites a Guardian report that the airport provided cut-rate rooms and free rounds of golf at Turnberry for U.S. military members.

    Taken together, the incidents raise the possibility that the military has helped keep Trump’s Turnberry resort afloat — the property lost $4.5 million in 2017, but revenue went up $3 million in 2018.

    The “possibility” – they’re so polite.

    On previous trips to the Middle East, the C-17 had landed at U.S. air bases such as Ramstein Air Base in Germany or Naval Station Rota in Spain to refuel, according to one person familiar with the trips. Occasionally the plane stopped in the Azores and once in Sigonella, Italy, both of which have U.S. military sites, the person added.

    More in the general direction of travel, you see. Glasgow is in another direction altogether.

    But on this particular trip, the plane landed in Glasgow — a pitstop the five-man crew had never experienced in their dozens of trips to the Middle East. The location lacked a U.S. base and was dozens of miles away from the crew’s overnight lodging at the Turnberry resort.

    The crew’s overnight lodging at the Turnberry resort. What a breathtaking sentence that is. The crew flew in the wrong direction so that Donald Trump could charge his own government for housing the crew overnight.

    One crew member was so struck by the choice of hotel — markedly different [from] the Marriotts and Hiltons the 176th maintenance squadron is used to — that he texted someone close to him and told him about the stay, sending a photo and noting that the crew’s per diem allowance wasn’t enough to cover food and drinks at the ritzy resort.

    That’s nice. They put money in Don’s pocket, and they went hungry doing it.

    The revelation that an Air Force mission may have helped line the president’s pockets comes days after Vice President Mike Pence was pressed about his decision to stay at Trump’s property in Doonbeg, Ireland, despite its location hundreds of miles away from his meetings in Dublin.

    Yes, it does, and both cases are absolutely grotesque.

    Several weeks after being alerted to the curious overnight stop, the Oversight Committee wrote a letter to acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan asking for documents related to Defense Department expenditures at Trump Turnberry and the nearby Glasgow Prestwick Airport.

    The letter, signed by signed by House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), notes that U.S. military expenditures at the airport “appear to have increased substantially since the election.”

    Prestwick Airport has long been debt-ridden. The Scottish government bought it in 2013 for £1, but it has continued to lose money in the years since. In June, the government announced its intent to sell the airport, which the panel’s letter described as “integral” to the success of the Turnberry property, 30 miles away.

    Because of that, the lawmakers argued that the spending at the airport — in addition to the spending at the Trump property — raises concerns about conflicts of interest and possible violations of the domestic emoluments clause of the Constitution…

    Oh good grief. It’s a failing airport, and Trump made the mistake of buying a golf resort that depends on a failing airport…so he’s using his government job to try to keep the airport from folding as well as to stick money directly in his pocket. The sleaze doubles with each new fact.

  • A ravenous appetite for risk

    The NY Times dropped a big article on Deutsche Bank and Trump late yesterday, which Everyone Is Talking About.

    Before Trump stole the presidency he and DB had a mutually beneficial relationship. It’s obvious how he benefited; how they did, not so much.

    Mr. Trump used loans from Deutsche Bank to finance skyscrapers and other high-end properties, and repeatedly cited his relationship with the bank to deflect political attacks on his business acumen. Deutsche Bank used Mr. Trump’s projects to build its investment-banking business, reaped fees from the assets he put in its custody[,] and leveraged his celebrity to lure clients.

    I’m not sure what it means to “build” an investment-banking business via bad loans to a cheat, but maybe the fees and celebrity were enough to offset that.

    When Trump succeeded in stealing the election, DB got nervous. Employees were told not to utter the word “Trump.”

    More than two years later, Mr. Trump’s financial ties with Deutsche Bank are the subject of investigations by two congressional committees and the New York attorney general. Investigators hope to use Deutsche Bank as a window into Mr. Trump’s personal and business finances.

    Deutsche Bank officials have quietly argued to regulators, lawmakers and journalists that Mr. Trump was not a priority for the bank or its senior leaders and that the lending was the work of a single, obscure division. But interviews with more than 20 current and former Deutsche Bank executives and board members, most of them with direct knowledge of the Trump relationship, contradict the bank’s narrative.

    In other words, the bank is lying.

    The bank always knew he was dangerous.

    But Deutsche Bank had a ravenous appetite for risk and limited concern about its clients’ reputations. Time after time, with the support of two different chief executives, the bank handed money — a total of well over $2 billion — to a man whom nearly all other banks had deemed untouchable.

    What kind of lunatic has a ravenous appetite for risk? What were they doing?

    It’s like this:

    In the late 1990s, Deutsche Bank, which is based in Germany, was trying to make a name for itself on Wall Street. Its investment-banking division went on a hiring binge.

    The bank recruited a handful of Goldman Sachs traders to lead a push into commercial real estate. One was Justin Kennedy, the son of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. Another was Mike Offit, whose father was the writer Sidney Offit.

    The Kennedy connection, as we saw, cast a big shadow on Justice Kennedy when he retired at a moment convenient for Trump. As far as I know nothing has happened to disperse that shadow.

    At Deutsche Bank, Mr. Offit’s mandate was to lend money to big real estate developers, package the loans into securities and sell the resulting bonds to investors. He said in an interview that one way to stand out in a crowded market was to make loans that his rivals considered too risky.

    Jesus tapdancing christ. Oh yes those loans that other bankers considered too risky – the ones that sank the global economy and erased the savings of millions of people. Those loans. Whatever’s good for Mr Offitt, and screw everyone else; that’s capitalism.

    So of course Trump was one such risky. Offitt approved loan after loan for Donnie Two-scoops.

    Not long after, Edson Mitchell, a top bank executive, discovered that the signature of the credit officer who had approved the Trump Marina deal had been forged, Mr. Offit said. (Mr. Offit was never accused of forgery; the loan never went through.)

    Not long after that Offitt was fired for being reckless. He says he wasn’t reckless.

    Over the next few years, the commercial real estate group, with Mr. Kennedy now in a senior role, kept lending to Mr. Trump, including to buy the General Motors building in Manhattan. Occasionally, Justice Kennedy stopped by Deutsche Bank’s offices to say hello to the team, executives recalled.

    Ick.

    Starting in 2003 DB had a team selling bonds on behalf of Trump. They were a tough sell because people didn’t trust Donnie Two-scoops. Donnie promised the team a freebie at Mar-a-Lago if they sold the bonds; they sold lots of bonds; Donnie pretended he’d forgotten about the freebie but the executive in charge made him cough up. Then…

    A year later, in 2004, Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts defaulted on the bonds. Deutsche Bank’s clients suffered steep losses. This arm of the investment-banking division stopped doing business with Mr. Trump.

    But the other arms went right on hugging him.

    Trump wanted another loan to build a 92-story skyscraper in Chicago.

    As Deutsche Bank considered making the loan, Mr. Trump wooed bankers with flights on his private plane, according to a person familiar with the pitch. In a Trump Tower meeting, he told Mr. Kennedy that his daughter Ivanka would be in charge of the Chicago project, a sign of the family’s commitment to its success.

    Or, rather, a sign of the family’s weird confidence in itself.

    But there were warning signs.

    Mr. Trump told Deutsche Bank his net worth was about $3 billion, but when bank employees reviewed his finances, they concluded he was worth about $788 million, according to documents produced during a lawsuit Mr. Trump brought against the former New York Times journalist Timothy O’Brien. And a senior investment-banking executive said in an interview that he and others cautioned that Mr. Trump should be avoided because he had worked with people in the construction industry connected to organized crime.

    You’d think those would be enough in the way of warning signs, wouldn’t you? A massive lie about his net worth and mafia connections? Wouldn’t you?

    Nonetheless, Deutsche Bank agreed in 2005 to lend Mr. Trump more than $500 million for the project. He personally guaranteed $40 million of it, meaning the bank could come after his personal assets if he defaulted.

    By 2008, the riverside skyscraper, one of the tallest in America, was mostly built. But with the economy sagging, Mr. Trump struggled to sell hundreds of condominium units. The bulk of the loan was due that November.

    Then the financial crisis hit, and Mr. Trump’s lawyers sensed an opportunity.

    A provision in the loan let Mr. Trump partially off the hook in the event of a “force majeure,” essentially an act of God, like a natural disaster. The former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan had called the financial crisis a tsunami. And what was a tsunami if not a natural disaster?

    They’re kidding, right? No. Trump thought it was a brilliant idea.

    Days before the loan was due, Mr. Trump sued Deutsche Bank, citing the force majeure language and seeking $3 billion in damages. Deutsche Bank countersued and demanded payment of the $40 million that Mr. Trump had personally guaranteed.

    Was it all over between them then? Nah.

    In 2010, Deutsche Bank and Mr. Trump settled their litigation over the Chicago loan. Mr. Trump agreed to repay most of what he owed by 2012, Mr. Schlesinger said.

    Then Trump wanted another loan.

    Deutsche Bank dispatched a team to Trump Tower to inspect Mr. Trump’s personal and corporate financial records. The bankers determined he was overvaluing some of his real estate assets by as much as 70 percent, according to two former executives.

    By then, though, Mr. Trump had become a reality-TV star, and he was swimming in cash from “The Apprentice.” Deutsche Bank officials also were impressed that Mr. Trump did not have much debt, according to people who reviewed his finances. Aside from his history of defaults, he was an attractive borrower.

    I beg your pardon? “Aside from his history of defaults, he was an attractive borrower”? How is that a fact claim rather than a punchline?

    Mr. Trump also expressed interest in another loan from the private-banking division: $48 million for the same Chicago property that had provoked the two-year court fight.

    Mr. Trump told the bank he would use that loan to repay what he still owed the investment-banking division, the two former executives said. Even by Wall Street standards, borrowing money from one part of a bank to pay off a loan from another was an extraordinary act of financial chutzpah.

    “I want to borrow money from you to pay back the money I owe you.” I can’t see any problem with that, can you?

    There were people at DB who said let’s not, but others said yes let’s.

    And then the campaign and the election happened.

    After Mr. Trump won the election, Deutsche Bank’s board of directors rushed to understand how the bank had become the biggest lender to the president-elect.

    A report prepared by the board’s integrity committee concluded that executives in the private-banking division were so determined to win business from big-name clients that they had ignored Mr. Trump’s reputation for demagogy and defaults, according to a person who read the report.

    Hey that would make a nice name for a Trump bar and grill – Demagogy and Defaults.

    Two years after Mr. Trump was sworn in, Democrats took control of the House of Representatives. The chamber’s financial services and intelligence committees opened investigations into Deutsche Bank’s relationship with Mr. Trump. Those inquiries, as well as the New York attorney general’s investigation, come at a perilous time for Deutsche Bank, which is negotiating to merge with another large German lender.

    Next month, Deutsche Bank is likely to start handing over extensive internal documents and communications about Mr. Trump to the congressional committees, according to people briefed on the process.

    We look forward to it.

  • Repeated and willful self-dealing transactions

    Bam.

    The Donald J. Trump Foundation will close and give away all its remaining funds under judicial supervision amid a lawsuit accusing the charity and the Trump family of using it illegally for self-dealing and political gain, the New York attorney general’s office announced Tuesday.

    The attorney general, Barbara Underwood, accused the foundation of “a shocking pattern of illegality” that was “willful and repeated” and included unlawfully coordinating with Mr. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

    “This amounted to the Trump Foundation functioning as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests,” Ms. Underwood said.

    In short, he’s a crook and a liar and a fraud and a thief…and he’s also the president of the United States.

    His kids are also crooks, liars, frauds, thieves.

    The closure of the foundation is a milestone in the investigation. But the broader lawsuit, which also seeks millions in restitution and penalties and a bar on President Trump and his three oldest children from serving on the boards of other New York charities, is proceeding.

    While he continues to squat in the Oval Office, doing his best to destroy the country as he goes down.

    Ms. Underwood’s office sued the Trump Foundation in June, charging it with “improper and extensive political activity, repeated and willful self-dealing transactions, and failure to follow basic fiduciary obligations or to implement even elementary corporate formalities required by law.”

    Nonprofit foundations are supposed to be devoted to charitable activities, but the attorney general’s office, following a two-year investigation, accused the Trump Foundation of being used to win political favor and even purchase a $10,000 portrait of Mr. Trump that was displayed at one of his golf clubs. The existence of the portrait was first reported by The Washington Post.

    The lawsuit accused the foundation of virtually becoming an arm of the Trump campaign, with its campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, directing the foundation to make disbursements in Iowa only days before the state held its presidential nominating caucuses.

    So you’re not supposed to use a charitable foundation to bribe voters? Who knew?

    The foundation lawsuit follows years of scrutiny of President Trump’s charitable activities and adds to his extensive legal challenges, amid a continuing investigation by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III.

    Tick tock tick tock.

  • Fingers crossed behind back ok sir?

    Trump’s lawyer basically told Walter Shaub that Trump’s financial disclosure wasn’t true and asked if that would be ok, USNews reported a year ago:

    President Donald Trump’s attorneys initially wanted him to submit an updated financial disclosure without certifying the information as true, according to correspondence with the Office of Government Ethics.

    Attorney Sheri Dillon said she saw no need for Trump to sign his 2016 personal financial disclosure because he is filing voluntarily this year. But OGE director Walter Shaub said his office would only work with Dillon if she agreed to follow the typical process of having Trump make the certification.

    He put it more strongly on Twitter just now.

    https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/996813720524349441

    Back to the story:

    The documents indicate that after OGE pushed back, Trump now plans to certify the information by mid-June [2017]. But his attorney’s effort to sidestep certification of his personal financial disclosure marks another departure from the norm. Each year, the OGE processes thousands of those forms, all of which are certified.

    “This is not at all typical; in fact I’ve never heard of anyone trying this,” said Marilyn Glynn, an OGE employee for 17 years before retiring in 2008. Her positions included acting director and general counsel. “It would be as unusual as not signing your taxes.”

    It’s downright absurd. “Is it ok if we don’t include the bit that says ‘this is all true and accurate’?” Erm, no, that’s not ok, because the goal is disclosure, and you can’t call it disclosure if you don’t want to say it’s true.

    The certification means that if a person knowingly included incorrect financial information, the OGE can seek a civil penalty such as a fine, or even make a referral to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.

    Glynn said OGE has indeed used those tools to enforce the integrity of certification.

    The letters indicate Shaub and Dillon talked through the importance of Trump presenting true information and signing off on it as such. OGE typically works with federal employees and their representatives and also certifies the financial disclosures.

     Talked through it? Because what, she didn’t understand that before?

    These people are just nuts.

  • Any inquiry you may be pursuing

    The Times on Trump’s oopsie:

    President Trump’s financial disclosure, released on Wednesday, revealed for the first time that he paid more than $100,000 to his personal attorney, Michael D. Cohen, as reimbursement for payment to a third-party.

    That is, this is the first time Trump has admitted it to the feds.

    Mr. Trump’s disclosure of the 2016 payment to Mr. Cohen raises the question of whether he erred in not reporting the debt on last year’s disclosure form. The document released Wednesday said that Mr. Trump was reporting the repaid debt “in the interest of transparency” but that it was “not required to be disclosed as reportable liabilities.”

    Yet a letter accompanying the report sent to Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, from the government ethics office’s acting director, David J. Apol, said that the Office of Government Ethics had determined “the payment made by Mr. Cohen is required to be reported as a liability.”

    Let’s see the rest of what the letter said:

    Dear Mr. Rosenstein,

    I write to you in connection with the complaint by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington on March 8, 2018 with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE). Specifically, the complaint requested that DOJ and OGE investigate whether a payment made by Mr. Michael Cohen to a third party constituted a loan to President Trump that should have been reported as a liability on his public financial disclosure report signed on June 14, 2017 (for calendar year 2016), and if so, whether the failure to report it was knowing and willful.

    Today I certified President Trump’ s financial disclosure report signed on May 15, 2018 (for calendar year 2017). OGE has concluded that, based on the information provided as a note to part 8, the payment made by Mr. Cohen is  required to be reported as a liability. OGE has determined that the information provided in that note meets the disclosure requirements for a reportable liability under the Ethics in Government Act. I am providing both reports to you because you may find the disclosure relevant to any inquiry you may be pursuing regarding the President’s prior report that was signed on June 14, 2017.

    Then his signature. Notice he doesn’t address the knowing and willful part.

  • With omission under false statement liability

    This could get interesting.

    https://twitter.com/NormEisen/status/996803765264113664

    SIREN: by disclosing Cohen debt on his just-released 278, Donald Trump just substantiated our @crewcrew criminal complaint that he should have disclosed it last year as well. Form is here https://oge.app.box.com/v/Trump2018Annual278 … and our criminal complaint is here

    https://twitter.com/NormEisen/status/996810077414854656

    BREAKING: @OfficeGovEthics agrees with our @CREWcrew analysis that Trump was required to report Cohen debt & sends last year’s form with omission under false statement liability to DOJ & Rod Rosenstein in case “relevant to any inquiry you may be pursuing”! https://oge.app.box.com/v/OGELettertoDOJ …

    Well. No doubt Trump will explain it all in a tweet.

  • The war continues

    Meanwhile Congressional Republicans are also pretending to think Mueller is a Secret Agent for The Democrats Plus The Devil Plus The King of the Mooslims.

    Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein adamantly defended the character and impartiality of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, as he came head-to-head on Wednesday with an increasingly aggressive campaign by Republicans to discredit the inquiry.

    The Republicans’ effort received a fresh jolt from the release one night earlier of text messages exchanged last year between an F.B.I. agent, Peter Strzok, and an F.B.I. lawyer, Lisa Page, describing the possibility of an election victory by President Trump as “terrifying” and saying that Hillary Clinton “just has to win.” Mr. Mueller removed Mr. Strzok from the Russia investigation as soon as he learned of the texts, a step that Mr. Rosenstein praised.

    But is that political? Or is it because Trump is the most disgusting person in the world? That’s the thing about Trump: the horror of him goes way beyond the political, even though the political is certainly included. He’s a terrible person in every perceptible way, and he’s in a position to do damage we quail from itemizing. He terrifies plenty of Republicans.

    “The public trust in this whole thing is gone,” said Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, summing up sentiments among his party. “It seems to me there are two things you can do: You can disband the Mueller special prosecutor, and you can do what we’ve all called for and appoint a second special counsel to look into this.”

    But the swelling campaign to undermine Mr. Mueller’s investigation, which has dominated conservative media for days, appeared to have little effect on Mr. Rosenstein, who oversees Mr. Mueller. Mr. Rosenstein said he would only fire Mr. Mueller if he had cause under Justice Department regulations — and he said nothing that has happened so far met that standard.

    There’s no low they won’t happily stoop to.

    Republicans repeatedly pressed Mr. Rosenstein to appoint a second special counsel to investigate political partisanship in the department in its handling of the Trump-Russia investigation or in last year’s decision not to charge Mrs. Clinton with a crime over her use of a private email server while secretary of state — an idea that has been promoted heavily by commentators on Fox News and elsewhere in recent days.

    Fox News is running the country now. Not informing the people who run the country along with the citizens who vote for them, but just plain running the damn country. It’s so pathetic.

    Mr. Mueller, a registered Republican appointed by President George W. Bush to direct the F.B.I., has long had critics in the most pro-Trump corners of the House and the conservative news media. But in recent weeks, as his investigation has delivered a series of indictments to high-profile associates of the president and evidence that at least two of them are cooperating with the inquiry, those critics have grown louder and in numbers.

    So the more criminal Trump appears to be, the harder Fox and Co try to protect him. I see.

    Democrats say the pattern is becoming clear: As Mr. Mueller moves closer to Mr. Trump’s inner circle, Republicans try to discredit federal law enforcement and undercut the eventual findings of the special counsel. The Republican effort may also be intended to blunt the political repercussions should Mr. Mueller be fired, Democrats say.

    Representative Jerrold Nadler, the Judiciary Committee’s senior Democrat, called the new Republican demands “wildly dangerous” to American institutions.

    “I understand the instinct to want to give cover to the president,” he said. “I am fearful that the majority’s effort to turn the tables on the special counsel will get louder and more frantic as the walls continue to close in around the president.”

    Perhaps more portentous is the restive Senate, a less partisan body where Mr. Mueller’s appointment in May was greeted with relief. Skepticism about the special counsel’s investigation is starting to take root there, too.

    It’s sickening and alarming.

  • Possess your own SoHo

    Pro Publica, the New Yorker, and WNYC have collaborated on an investigation of that time a few years ago when New York prosecutors were considering bringing a felony fraud case against Ivanka and Donald Junior Trump, but didn’t.

    In the spring of 2012, Donald Trump’s two eldest children, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr., found themselves in a precarious legal position. For two years, prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office had been building a criminal case against them for misleading prospective buyers of units in the Trump SoHo, a hotel and condo development that was failing to sell.

    Oh surely not. Real estate grifters never mislead prospective buyers.

    By which I mean, they do that routinely; I’m surprised to learn that anyone even considers prosecuting them. I thought they had some kind of Real Estate Grifters’ Exemption to lie to people about the product.

    In June 2006, during the season finale of “The Apprentice,” Donald Trump Sr. unveiled the Trump SoHo as a visionary project. The luxury development was intended to mark the ascension of Ivanka and Donald Jr. — then 24 and 28 years old, respectively — as full players in the Trump empire. They signed the licensing deal alongside their father, and photographs of Ivanka were featured in the Trump SoHo’s advertising, under the tagline “Possess your own SoHo.”

    A rather tasteless double meaning there.

    The Trump SoHo was beleaguered from the start: Named for one of Manhattan’s trendiest neighborhoods, the development wasn’t really in SoHo, but located just west of it, near the entrance ramp to the Holland Tunnel.

    Ummmyeah, “just west” but a world away, because who the fuck wants to live near the entrance ramp to the Holland Tunnel? Plus that business of naming it SoHo when it’s not SoHo – that’s so Trump. So, not surprisingly, people didn’t rush to snap up these hot properties. That’s where the lying and fraud comes in…well, that plus the massively undesirable terms.

    Zoning laws wouldn’t allow a residential tower at the location, so the Trumps fell back on an alternative: a “condo-hotel,” in which buyers got a hotel room rather than an apartment, and were legally prohibited from staying there more than 120 nights per year. Worse, the high-priced condos hit the market in September 2007, just as the global economy began to crater in what became the largest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

    Oh, awesome – who wouldn’t want to pay an inflated price for a third of a hotel room overlooking the entrance to the Holland Tunnel? Besides absolutely everyone?

    And yet…

    Business was slow, but the Trump family claimed the opposite. In April 2008, they said that 31 percent of the condos in the building had been purchased. Donald Jr. boasted to The Real Deal magazine that 55 percent of the units had been bought. In June 2008, Donald Jr. and Ivanka, alongside their brother Eric, gathered the foreign press at Trump Tower in Manhattan, where Ivanka announced that 60 percent had been snapped up. “We’re in a very fortunate position,” she said, “where we have enough sales and now we are strategically targeting certain buyers.”

    That’s amazing!

    But not true.

    None of that was true. According to a sworn affidavit by a Trump partner filed with the New York attorney general’s office, by March of 2010, almost two years after the press conference, only 15.8 percent of units had been sold.

    This was more than a marketing problem. The deal hinged on selling at least 15 percent of the units. By law, the sales couldn’t close with anything less. The Trumps and their partners would have had to return the buyers’ down payments.

    Some buyers concluded that they’d been cheated. In August 2010, some sued the Trump Organization and others involved in the project in New York federal court. “This action seeks to redress the substantial and ongoing pattern of fraudulent misrepresentations and deceptive sales practices” by the Trumps and the other defendants, the suit charged. The plaintiffs argued that there’s a vast difference in value between a unit in a building that is 15 percent sold and one that is 60 percent sold. Their complaint accused the sellers, including the Trumps, of “a consistent and concerted pattern of outright lies.”

    I guess the deal with real estate grifting is that they can talk whatever bullshit they like about what’s going to happen, because who can demonstrate they knew it wouldn’t happen? But lying about what has already happened is not quite so easy to get away with.

    They did get away with it though.

    After the civil suit was filed, the Manhattan district attorney’s office opened a criminal investigation. Prosecutors are often wary of getting involved in a dispute between wealthy litigants. But in this instance, according to a person familiar with their thinking, the lawyers in the Major Economic Crimes Bureau quickly concluded that there was enough to warrant an investigation. They believed that Ivanka and Donald Jr., might have violated the Martin Act, a New York statute that bans any false statement in conjunction with the sale of a security or real estate. Prosecutors also saw potential fraud and larceny charges, applying a legal theory that, by overstating the number of units sold, the Trump were falsely inflating their value and, in effect, cheating unsuspecting condo buyers.

    But then Marc Kasowitz paid a call on the DA, who told the prosecutors to drop the case. Kasowitz had contributed $25 k (which seems like a trivial sum to me) to the DA’s re-election campaign; the DA returned it after that meeting.

    I recommend reading the whole article. It’s not an “aha!” about the money; it’s not at all clear that that made a difference. But. The whole thing is just skeevy as hell. It’s typical Trumpiana – lying, gilding, puffing, cheating, hyping, thieving, manipulating, backrooming, sleaze sleaze sleazing. It just sickens me that people like this are running the government. They’re cheap crooks and they should be selling used cars in Perth Amboy.