Donald Trump

ikiT

he never encountered a situation as President when he should have kept quiet where he didn't run his goddamned mouth.

He will always be the worst.

josevolution

OnWis97 said:

josevolution said:

DewieCox said:

2nd worst behind Reagan 

I’d say
1
1A

You can bring up the damage that some of the did and make an argument that they're worse than Trump, I suppose.

To me, though, Trump is untouchable atop the list. I remember Reagan and I know he was all about helping the rich and flexing our international muscle. And I know that some of what he was doing helped us get to where we are.  But nobody was less knowledgeable about American than Trump. Nobody cared about America less. Nobody was a self-centered. Nobody else had their eye on dictatorship (and the things that go with it in terms of the nepotism, villification of the media, etc.). Nobody else would burn the whole thing down out of spite or for his own reputation. 

If we avoid one-party dictatorship, it will be in spite of his efforts.  

I suppose if we're lucky, the argument will be able to be made that there were presidents that had a worse impact.  But there's no way anyone was more unfit.

I have to agree completely! To me the scariest thing about this debacle is the following he has attained!, just last weekend I drove past a trump rally of about 100 people as if it was campaigning time..

Bentleyspop

Not surprising.....

https://twitter.com/jsrailton/status/1410749283502989312?s=19

ikiT

he also bankrolled Bannon's shirt budget.  why so many shirts?

mickeyrat

 

Manhattan New York Laws Government and politics

Tax law experts see 'strong' case against Trump Org. CFO

By KEN SWEET, MICHAEL R. SISAK and ERIC TUCKER

2 Jul 2021

NEW YORK (AP) — Companies give perks to their employees all the time. Many top executives at Fortune 500 companies have access to a corporate jet for personal use, a company apartment, or an expense account for fancy meals. Even lower-level employees regularly get access to perks like tuition reimbursement or cash to join a gym.

But the extravagant perks prosecutors say the Trump Organization lavished onto its CFO Allen Weisselberg — apartments, cars, cash for holiday tips, tuition for his grandchildren to name a few — are well beyond the level of compensating a valued employee, some tax law experts said.

And the case against Weisselberg appears to be much stronger than was originally expected by those watching the progress of the Manhattan District Attorney's investigation of the Trump Organization, its employees and its namesake leader.

“This is an overwhelmingly strong case,” said Daniel Hemel, a law professor at the University of Chicago.

According to the indictment unsealed Thursday, Weisselberg cheated tax authorities by taking a hefty chunk of his annual compensation in fringe benefits. They say that over 15 years these off-the-books perks were worth nearly $1.8 million.

Weisselberg alone was accused of defrauding the federal government, state and city out of more than $900,000 in unpaid taxes and undeserved refunds. He is pleading not guilty.

“Mr. Weisselberg intends to plead not guilty and he will fight these charges in court,” Weisselberg’s lawyers, Mary Mulligan and Bryan Skarlatos, said in a statement.

Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump and his allies have tried to frame the indictment against Weisselberg and the Trump Organization as a “witch hunt” by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. and New York Attorney General Letitia James, both Democrats. They have said the perks involved were standard for successful American companies.

But the case against Weisselberg is not necessarily unusual. Some compared the indictment to a tax fraud case involving another real estate tycoon from 30 years ago: Leona Helmsley, the so-called “Queen of Mean” who tried to get her real estate empire to pay for a $3 million home renovation in the 1980s.

Trump himself called Helmsley a “disgrace to humanity” for fraudulently avoiding taxes all those years ago.

“The dollar figures and the charges are more serious than what we had thought over the last few days with the little information we had,” said Daniel R. Alonso, a former chief assistant district attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. "In particular, the tax loss alleged is $900,000. That is a fraud amount that is definitely in the jail range for typical cases of that magnitude.”

Melissa Jampol, who as a former assistant district attorney in Manhattan specialized in prosecuting white-collar crimes, said the indictment's allegations stretched far beyond the allegations of fringe benefit abuse that some had presumed would be the crux of the case.

“I think the major takeaway is that there’s a lot more going on here that’s alleged in the indictment than people were aware of previously,” said Jampol, an attorney at the law firm of Epstein Becker Green.

The indictment alleges that this wasn't just a matter of Weisselberg failing to report his pay properly. It says the Trump Organization, as a company, was complicit.

The company kept internal records that tracked employee compensation, and in those records, Weisselberg’s rent, the tuition payments for his grandchildren, his cars and other things were all listed as part of his compensation package. The company even reduced Weisselberg’s payroll checks to account for the indirect compensation he was getting in free rent, the indictment said.

But that compensation was recorded differently in the company’s general ledger and none of it was reported to tax authorities, according to prosecutors.

“There’s the set that was the formal ledger and there’s the set that was Weisselberg’s compensation calculations," Jampol said.

Smaller cases involving similar practices pop up not infrequently. A Queens-based plumbing contractor was sentenced to 20 months in prison just last month. Sergei Denko was found to have cashed $5 million in checks to fund an off-the-books payroll system, avoiding paying roughly $732,000 in employment taxes. Out on Long Island, a diner owner was convicted in September of avoiding $130,000 in employment taxes as well.

Thomas M. Cryan, Jr., a Washington tax lawyer, said prosecutions over fringe benefits issued to employees are rare, but an unusually large volume of perks and an intent to conceal them as income could tip a civil matter into a criminal case.

Often cases involving fringe benefit violations remain between the company and the Internal Revenue Service, and may just result in an audit or back taxes with a penalty being paid.

But some of the allegations against Weisselberg go well beyond the abuse of fringe benefits. Weisselberg’s son Barry — who managed a Trump-operated ice rink in Central Park — paid no reported rent while living in a Trump-owned apartment in 2018, and he was charged just $1,000 per month — far below typical Manhattan prices — while living in a Trump apartment from 2005 to 2012, the indictment said.

Allen Weisselberg himself, an intensely private man who lived for years in a modest home on Long Island, continued to claim residency there despite spending a majority of his time in a company-paid Manhattan apartment, prosecutors said. By doing so, Weisselberg concealed that he was a New York City resident, and he avoided paying the city's income tax.

Though some standalone tax offenses can be handled civilly or administratively, the allegations of other misconduct — including grand larceny — help explain why prosecutors would treat this scheme as deserving of criminal prosecution, Jampol said.

But that doesn’t mean the allegations, which will require proof of willfulness, will be easy to establish in court.

“That’s really going to be the burden that the DA’s office is going to have to prove is that there was a scheme here, and that it wasn’t just a series of mistakes or misunderstandings,” she added.

____

AP Justice Writer Eric Tucker reported from Washington.

ikiT

six fucking months

HughFreakingDillon

mcgruff10 said:

josevolution said:

gvn2fly1421 said:

A little Throwback Thursday...  Have a good one all!

https://twitter.com/ilSharko/status/1409300070114156550

Worst president ever! But his even a worse human I can’t believe you or anyone for that matter look up to him it’s laughable!

Just some food for thought, this survey came out yesterday:

So who ranked worse than Trump? According to the historians, presidents Franklin “Bleeding Kansas” Pierce, Andrew “First to Be Impeached” Johnson and James “Failed to Stop the Civil War” Buchanan, who came in last.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/06/30/presidential-rankings-2021-cspan-historians/

Historians just ranked the presidents. Trump wasn’t last.

when i say worst ever, personally, I'm talking the modern era. I personally don't know enough of american history to claim since Washington. 

mrussel1

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

josevolution said:

gvn2fly1421 said:

A little Throwback Thursday...  Have a good one all!

https://twitter.com/ilSharko/status/1409300070114156550

Worst president ever! But his even a worse human I can’t believe you or anyone for that matter look up to him it’s laughable!

Just some food for thought, this survey came out yesterday:

So who ranked worse than Trump? According to the historians, presidents Franklin “Bleeding Kansas” Pierce, Andrew “First to Be Impeached” Johnson and James “Failed to Stop the Civil War” Buchanan, who came in last.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/06/30/presidential-rankings-2021-cspan-historians/

Historians just ranked the presidents. Trump wasn’t last.

when i say worst ever, personally, I'm talking the modern era. I personally don't know enough of american history to claim since Washington. 

I'd agree with the Buchanan call.  He was feckless.  Not that anyone could have stopped the Civil War, but he actively exacerbated the situation with his handling of Dred Scott and Bleeding Kansas.  While the latter started under Pierce, it was really Buchanan that split the Democratic party with his support of the capital favoring the slave states.  Trump was terrible, but didn't cause the worst bloodshed in US history.  

Bentleyspop

Cult-45 is alive and well..

Halifax2TheMax

Only the best people.

https://apple.news/AY12ldIJ5RKeTdoTxEsqgSw

mickeyrat

 

Donald Trump Media Social media Government and politics

Trump files suit against Facebook, Twitter and YouTube

By JILL COLVIN and MATT O'BRIEN

1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Donald Trump has filed suit against three of the country's biggest tech companies, claiming he and other conservatives have been wrongfully censored.

Trump announced the action against Facebook, Twitter and Google's YouTube, along with the companies' CEOs, at a press conference in New Jersey on Wednesday. He was joined by other plaintiffs in the suits, which were filed in federal court in Miami.

“We’re demanding an end to the shadow-banning, a stop to the silencing and a stop to the blacklisting, banishing and canceling that you know so well,” he said.

Under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, social media platforms are allowed to moderate their services by removing posts that, for instance, are obscene or violate the services’ own standards, so long as they are acting in “good faith.” The law also generally exempts internet companies from liability for the material that users post.

But Trump and some other politicians have long argued that Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms have abused that protection and should lose their immunity — or at least have to earn it by satisfying requirements set by the government.

Trump was suspended from Twitter, Facebook and YouTube after his followers stormed the Capitol building on Jan. 6. The companies cited concerns that he would incite further violence.

Nonetheless, Trump has continued to spread lies about the 2020 election, baselessly claiming that he won, even though state and local election officials, his own attorney general and numerous judges, including some he appointed, have said there is no evidence of the mass voter fraud he alleges.

Facebook, Google and Twitter all declined comment Wednesday.

The suits argue that banning or suspending Trump and the other plaintiffs is a violation of the First Amendment, despite the fact that the companies are private. The suit against Facebook and CEO Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook acted unconstitutionally when it removed Trump from the platform. Suits against Twitter and YouTube make similar claims. All three ask the court to award unspecified damages, declare Section 230 unconstitutional and restore Trump’s accounts, along with those of the other plaintiffs - a handful of others who have all had posts or accounts removed.

But Trump’s lawsuits are likely doomed to fail, said Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University in California who has studied more than 60 similar, failed lawsuits over the past few decades that sought to take on internet companies for terminating or suspending users' accounts.

“They’ve argued everything under the sun, including First Amendment, and they get nowhere,” Goldman said. “Maybe he’s got a trick up his sleeve that will give him a leg up on the dozens of lawsuits before him. I doubt it.”

Goldman said it’s likely Trump is instead pursuing the suits to garner attention. As president, Trump last year signed an executive order challenging Section 230.

“It was always about sending a message to their base that they’re fighting on their behalf against the evil Silicon Valley tech giants," Goldman said.

Matt Schruers, the president of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a tech industry trade group that includes Facebook, Twitter and Google, said internet companies have a right to enforce their terms of service.

“Frivolous class action litigation will not change the fact that users — even U.S. Presidents — have to abide by the rules they agreed to,” he said in a statement.

__ O’Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island. Associated Press writer Mae Anderson contributed to this report from Nashville.

mrussel1

Another frivolous lawsuit. 

Ironically if you remove the section 230 shield,  the platforms will just get more aggressive in their moderation since they would have some liability.  

Merkin Baller

It’s just another grift. 

Halifax2TheMax

Wooooo, get your name on a list POOTWH sees! Wooooooooooo, thats worth 500 clams. Suckers.

Halifax2TheMax

Only the best people, folks, only the best. Bahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaha! Desparado, particularly as another report has POOTWH cutting him off from billings. Poor Ruddy Ghouliani. Wonder if we'll see him behind home plate at Yankee Stadium? I hope it was all worth it Ruddy.

Rudy Giuliani suspended from practicing law in D.C., weeks after similar action in New York

A District of Columbia court has suspended former President Donald Trump’s most prominent attorney, Rudy Giuliani, from practicing law in the nation’s capital, roughly two weeks after a New York court took action against the former New York mayor for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

Giuliani, who has claimed rampant fraud during the 2020 presidential election, will be banned from practicing law in Washington at least until New York resolves his case, and possibly longer depending on how the District decides to proceed on the matter, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled on Wednesday. A New York court suspended Giuliani from the New York bar on June 24 for his “false and misleading” statements on behalf of Trump and the 2020 election.

Giuliani did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday’s suspension.

“We conclude that there is uncontroverted evidence that respondent communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at reelection in 2020,” a five-judge New York Supreme Court appellate panel concluded in a per curiam opinion issued on June 24.

The judges added that Giuliani’s conduct “threatens the public interest,” therefore warranting an interim suspension from practicing law. The court panel said an interim suspension, as imposed on Giuliani, is an action taken only in the most serious cases of alleged misconduct.

Giuliani argued that being punished for his public advocacy was a violation of his First Amendment free speech rights, according to the New York Court order, but the court disagreed.

“We reject respondent’s argument,” the court said in its June 24 opinion. “This disciplinary proceeding concerns the professional restrictions imposed on respondent as an attorney to not knowingly misrepresent facts and make false statements in connection with his representation of a client. It is long recognized that ‘speech by an attorney is subject to greater regulation than speech by others.’”

Trump weighed in on the New York ruling in a June 24 statement, calling Giuliani a “great American patriot” and dismissing Giuliani’s suspension as “nothing but a Witch Hunt.”

Rudy Giuliani suspended from practicing law in D.C., weeks after similar action in New York (msn.com)

Bentleyspop

Are the magats figuring out the scam?

https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1412955093184385024?s=19

ikiT

I'm not a lawyer but that would be a fun deposition to watch.  What a fucking moron.

Halifax2TheMax

Bentleyspop said:

Are the magats figuring out the scam?

https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1412955093184385024?s=19

Tim appears to be the brightest in the bunch but he's only one letter away from being Dim.

Halifax2TheMax

Grifting, grifting, grifting away
I loaned myself a mansion, then I loaned it away
It's not the world that's heavy, just the things that you steal
And I'm grifting, grifting away

Grifting, grifting, grifting along
I don’t have worries, so the worries were gone
I only blog when I want to and I sleep like a dog
I'm just grifting, grifting along

The turn coats say, "There is money to be made."
They get so damn excited, but I guess it's our way
My road it may be lonely just because it's paved
It's good for grifting, grifting away

The turn coats say, "There is money to be made."
They get so damn excited, nothing gets in our way
My road it may be lonely just because it's paved
It's good for grifting, grifting away

Grifting, grifting, grifting, uh huh
I feel like going back there, but for ever long
I sometimes wonder if they know that I'm back
I'm just grifting, grifting along
Grifting, grifting along. Grifting, grifting along

Sad! Suckers.

Trump charged Secret Service nearly $10,200 in May for agents’ rooms

Former president Donald Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, N.J., charged the Secret Service nearly $10,200 for guest rooms used by his protective detail during Trump’s first month at the club this summer, newly released spending records show.

The records — released by the Secret Service in response to a public-records request — show that the ex-president has continued a habit he began in the first days of his presidency: charging rent to the agency that protects his life.

Since Trump left office in January, U.S. taxpayers have paid Trump’s businesses more than $50,000 for rooms used by Secret Service agents, records show.

The Washington Post reported previously that Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club — where he lived from January, when he left the White House, to early May — charged the Secret Service more than $40,000 so that agents could use a room near Trump.

These newly released records provide the first proof that, when Trump moved north to Bedminster, the invoices kept coming.

The Secret Service released a bill it paid to Trump Bedminster in May, totaling $10,199.52. The agency redacted the nightly rate, but the dollar amount itself offered a clue: The bill was an exact multiple of what Trump Bedminster charged the Secret Service while Trump was still in office: $566.64 per night for a four-bedroom “cottage” on the property.

At that rate, the bill from May 2021 would have paid for 18 nights in the cottage. Trump arrived in Bedminster on May 9.

The bill from May is the only one that the Secret Service has released from Trump’s time at Bedminster this year. But the agency released another document showing that charges probably continued after that: It released an internal document called a “hotel request” form, covering the period from May 28 to July 1. The form showed that agents planned to rent rooms at Bedminster through at least the start of July.

Separately, the Secret Service also released other bills showing $3,400 in charges from Trump Bedminster before Trump himself arrived. Those receipts — from January, February and early May — did not say why the Secret Service was at the club.

Neither Trump’s family business — the Trump Organization — nor Trump’s political operation responded to a request for comment.

A Secret Service spokeswoman declined to comment, saying the agency does not talk about protective operations.

Legal experts have said there are no laws to prohibit Trump’s company from charging the Secret Service rent at his properties, either during or after his presidency. The rate is effectively up to him: By law, the Secret Service can pay whatever it must to rent rooms near its protectees for use as command posts and meeting rooms.

“The service is more focused on the protective necessity, as opposed to, ‘How much is it going to cost after the fact?’ There’s nothing they can do” if rates are high, said Jonathan Wackrow, a longtime Secret Service agent who now works for the consulting firm Teneo. “It’s a question of not, ‘Can they do it?’ but ‘Should they be charging that much?’ ”

The scale of Trump’s charges appears to be unusual among recent presidents and vice presidents.

In recent history, The Post could find only one other protected person who had charged the Secret Service rent: Joe Biden. As vice president, Biden charged the Secret Service $2,200 per month to use a cottage on his property in Delaware. In total, Biden received $171,600 between 2011 and 2017.

Biden has not charged the Secret Service rent since becoming president in January, a White House spokesman said.

The charges from Trump’s company exceeded Biden’s lifetime total by March 2017, Trump’s third month in office, according to records obtained by The Post. Trump’s company charged the State Department to host summits with foreign leaders, the Secret Service for rooms while protecting Trump and his children, and the Defense Department for aides accompanying the president to Mar-a-Lago and to his Irish golf club.

In all, Trump’s company charged the government more than $2.5 million during his presidency, according to a Post analysis of federal spending records.

It is unclear how the Trump Organization set the rates that it charges the Secret Service at Mar-a-Lago or Bedminster. Before The Post revealed the extent of the charges, Trump’s son Eric said in 2019 that the rate was “like 50 bucks” per night.

The Post has now examined charges for more than 3,600 nights at Trump properties and found no rates that low. Instead, at Mar-a-Lago, rates ranged from $396.15 to $650 per room. At Bedminster, the rate for the four-room “Sarazen Cottage” was $566.64.

As former president, Trump is entitled to a government pension of $219,000 per year; the General Services Administration said he had received $99,323 of it as of this week.

Jordan Libowitz, of the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said that — in light of Trump’s other assets and income — he should consider allowing the Secret Service to stay at his properties free.

“He obviously should have Secret Service protection,” Libowitz said. However, Libowitz said, “there’s no reason that his company should not do the patriotic thing, and just comp the government for the security it is providing him.”

Secret Service charged almost $10,200 for room used by agents protecting Trump in May. - The Washington Post

But it really doesn't matter.

rustneversleeps

cheese