"... and blasted the new district attorney [Alvin Bragg] for not moving ahead with an indictment... Mark Pomerantz... wrote that the team of lawyers investigating Trump had 'no doubt' he had 'committed crimes' and that Bragg’s decision not to move ahead with prosecuting Trump 'will doom any future prospects that Mr Trump will be prosecuted for the criminal conduct we have been investigating.' 'His financial statements were false, and he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people,' Pomerantz reportedly wrote."
Here's the letter (acquired by the NYT).
पोस्ट्स
१०४ टिप्पण्या:
Well then why didn’t they charge him?
he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people,' Pomerantz reportedly wrote."
The part about lying to banks might be a crime (what do the banks that supposedly loaned him money under false pretenses have to say about it?), but the other ones clearly aren't and the fact that this prosecutor lumps them all together as though they all should have weight in the eyes of the law tells me all I need to know about this prosecutor.
This has been out there for a long time. The prosecutor is trying to make a crime out of transactions in which there is no victim. He’s claiming that because the value of Trump real estate was higher on his loan documents than on his tax records there is some sort of fraud. But he ignores that we all take out mortgages, especially in refinancing to take advantage of lower interest rates, based on an assessed market value of the home. Yet we all pay taxes based on another type of assessment made by the tax collector. My assessed value for my home is substantially below that of my home’s market value as real estate prices have increased. The fact in the Trump case is that they could not prove any willful fraud by Trump. After all, the assessed value for the loan was performed by third party specialists. The prosecutor’s case wants us to believe the specialists valued the property differently for Trump than for any other assessment. Why would specialists do that for one case and risk losing their business if caught. The whole case is level 4 Trump Derangement Syndrome.
The value of a property is the plot and the buildings added up, for taxes. The value is the value of the ongoing business plus those for bank loans. They're much different.
Walls definitely closing in.
Avoiding a trial lets them get the accusation out without having to prove it. It's interesting that this investigation is being done at the behest of Trump's political opponents rather than Trump's business partners, though.
Don't worry though, our government only wants the best for you and trusts you with the truth.
I have to wonder how he arrived at his opinion, if the evidence is so "overwhelming" he resigned and of slandered Trump by releasing his letter to the media. Either the amount of money was wasted in the investigation, or the office is incompetent and malicious.
so, it is Now a 'felony violation' to NOT be a democrat?
or as tim maguire points out: it is Now a 'felony violation' to be "lying" to "the American people"?
If the “prosecutor” can’t name the crime then she should shut up and go away. She’s been fishing for YEARS and she found nothing. Do democrats really want rogue prosecutors who can’t articulate a fucking felony in plain English? Really? That’s not how our system is designed. Where’s the victim? What statute did Trump violate? How is his real estate business different from other NYC organizations, like the Durst family or other big builders?
The entire Guardian article was vague assertions like these assholes have been spouting for years. When will these outlaw prosecutors be brought to heel? Is this justice being applied fairly and equitably?
I have to wonder how he arrived at his opinion, if the evidence is so "overwhelming" he resigned and of slandered Trump by releasing his letter to the media. Either the amount of money was wasted in the investigation, or the office is incompetent and malicious.
I was confused for a second, This sounds exactly like the Democrat Jan 6 investigation.
Releasing letters, documents, evidence, to the public, rather than prosecute a crime, or draft a conclusion, supported be facts.
"He believed ...." Case closed!
The letter was 'acquired' by the NY Times? Is that what we now call offering up something that was not requested?
Joe Biden took millions from the Ukraine. How about we look into that? Anyone? Bueller? Baquet?
Don’t know if anything this guy’s whining about came through the grand jury, but pretty sure prosecutors aren’t supposed to be blabbing publicly about investigations once they leave. I gather the Times “obtained “ his resignation letter, I wonder how that ever happened ….
Is this prosecutor on the jury?
Does this letter constitute defamation by the writer? Or does he have some kind of privilege —even though he has resigned and can’t press a legal process where such claims can/must be stated?
It’s one thing to say “Based on my findings I believe we could have made a successful case against X for armed robbery,” and it’s another to say “X is a thief.”
This letter seems more the latter than the former.
My guess is that Trump did exaggerate the values of his properties as much as possible in order to get the best deals possible, like every other business person in the history of the world. Did it reach criminality? Magic eight ball says no, otherwise you wouldn't be seeing this kerfuffle. Banks don't simply take your word for it.
Due Diligence:
"Professionals define due diligence as an investigation or audit of a potential investment consummated by a prospective buyer. The objective is to confirm the accuracy of the seller’s information and appraise its value."
I guess prosecutors don't have ethical obligations in NY. I didn't think Avenetti's was a career path to emulate. Hope Trump sues him and takes everything he has and will ever have.
His resignation should not be accepted.
He should be fired.
This whole thing is so outside the ken of the vast majority of people, it easy to gaslight them.
I know nothing of the realm of real estate developers.
But I have been watching the sale of real estate, Iowa farm ground, as cultural touchstone, for a lifetime. The principles involved are a part of my DNA.
It started when Dad bought the adjoining farm when I was 7. I remember the whispers that the price paid, would ruin him. $700/acre. The last time it sold (I sold it) $13850.
The point being. Those that live in the culture, know the value. Give me a county in eastern IA, and I, not a person making a living in the buying and selling of property, can give you a sales value within 10%, with 15 minutes on the internet.
The same is true of NYC real estate. These investigations only serve to smear President Trump. If a trial would happen, the govt will lose. No big deal, its taxpayer money, there is no risk, and justice was never the goal.
he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media
Trump lies to the national media! That's a blatant felony right there!!
I don’t believe he is guilty because the prosecution failed to present such a case in court to be tried to any legal standard.
what are these felonies?
The part about lying to banks might be a crime (what do the banks that supposedly loaned him money under false pretenses have to say about it?),
Banks get audited every year. Part of that audit involves valuing of collateral securing loans. Government audits of banks, to protect the deposits of customers.
Loan officers value that property, knowing an auditor will challenge the value. Protecting the banks balance sheet, if the loan must be foreclosed.
For the prosecutor's allegations to be true, the loan officer, AND the govt auditor are both incompetent Brandons.
So your question actual is "what do the Government bank auditors, have to say about it"?
In his 2015 campaign financial statement to the FEC, that ran something like 100 pages, he claimed to be worth a bit more than $9 billion.
Lots of people, including Forbes magazine and many commenters here said that he lied and was only worth $3 billion.
The statement was signed by him, not a minion, acknowledging that lying on the statement was a felony.
It always seemed to me that if he really was not worth $9bn, if he lied on the statement, his candidacy could have been stopped in August 2015 before it even really got going.
Yet nobody, none of the people so desperate to stop him, asked the FEC to investigate.
Funny how that works isn't it? People make all sorts of allegations about Donald Trump's finances. But nobody ever brings them to court, much less convicts him of anything. He has probably been investigated over the years more than any 10 other Americans. Yet nobody ever finds anything to charge him with, much less convict him of.
The financial statement in, or at least was, online. I downloaded a copy back in 15. I did not spend a lot of time on it but it did seem pretty complete. If someone can't find something to complain about in a 100 page financial statement, they are either pretty stupid or there is nothing there.
John LGBTQBNY Henry
Trump's a fucking Boy Scout. Who'd a thunk? But apparently it's true.
A partial list of the agencies who have poured Donald Trump's entire business and personal life through a fine screen looking for dirt of any kind to use against him:
FBI/ Justice Dept
CIA/ US Intelligence
IRS
Numerous other government bureaus
The State of NY
The City of NY
Numerous other states and cities
MI5
MI6
FSB
Chinese MSS
Mossad
Every other intelligence agency in the world
The DNC
The RNC
The Clinton Machine
The Bush Machine
NYT
CNN
The Networks
Every major news gathering organization in the world
Probably lots of well-funded private investigations were done too.
What did they come up with? He sampled a porn star.
lawyers investigating Trump had 'no doubt' he had 'committed crimes' ..
'His financial statements were false..
wasn't there a country once? A country where you were "Innocent Until PROVEN Guilty"*?
what ever happened to that country? Did it ever exist? Or was it all just a dream
"Innocent Until PROVEN Guilty"* I guess that belongs with things as "right to a speedy trial"
Make him guilty without a trial.
Soviet justice.
Someone mentioned that the value of a commercial property is based on revenue, not plot and building value.
I would add that it is based on future, not past or even current revenue. That requires looking into a crystal ball. That crystal ball is based on assumptions. The assumptions (There will be a new subway station built a block from the building in 2030 for example) and will be stated in the valuation or footnotes. It is up to others to decide whether your assumptions are valid and have a reasonable basis. But they are still nothing more than predictions about the future. Getting the predictions wrong (NYC decides to build the station 10 blocks north) is hardly a crime.
John LGBTQBNY HEnry
Can Of Cheese for Hunter asked...
what are these felonies?
"Can I provide a list of these felonies? No. I can't... Not in this context I can't."
So Trump is he most ethical and law abiding business person in the history of the country and probably the world.
The amount of investigative resources applied to one person that could not find a single crime to prosecute is amazing.
Compare this to Obama or Biden or Hillary.
They have had to try just as hard to not find and cover up the corruption as they tried to find Trump's completely nonexistent corruption.
He’s claiming that because the value of Trump real estate was higher on his loan documents than on his tax records there is some sort of fraud.
...and that's the claim. That's it. His accountants used different valuation methods for different purposes and found different valuations. Not a crime...
...the substance here (if you can call it that) is purposeful only to wave around for the political benefit of doing so. It is the equivalent of the Steele dossier, which was waved around as the basis for politically motivated government intervention...
...now THAT was a crime...
'His financial statements were false, and he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people,' Pomerantz reportedly wrote."
What he really meant to say, but was afraid of the woke mob to do so, is:
'The msm and the Democrat establishment, but I repeat myself, has smeared DJT ever since DJT left the Democrat Party. They claim that DJT's financial statements are false, and that he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people."
FIF Mark Pomerantz. Don't thank me, Mark Pomerantz. I do this as a public service for criminal Democrats, such as yourself.
p.s.
To answer some questions the Justice nominee Brown could not:
Some one who is convicted of a crime is a criminal. Some one who is accused of a crime is a defendant.
A woman is an adult human female, with XX chromosomes and female reproductive equipment.
I suspect that Mark Pomerantz would also be incapable of answering these simple questions.
Highly inappropriate IMO. For the uninitiated, here's the text of Model Rule of Professional Responsibility 3.8(f):
(f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, [a prosecutor shall] refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this Rule.
I'll have a ham and Swiss on rye. Hold the ham.
By the way, further to my last comment, investigation and censure of an attorney violating Rule 3.8 would not be subject to the outlandish "actual malice" standard that's been superimposed onto American libel law.
Blogger Bob Boyd said...
What did they come up with? He sampled a porn star.
I don't think there is even any evidence that he "sampled" Stormy Daniels. All we have is her allegation. Which cost here a few hundred thousand dollars to make.
OT but why do we refer to porn actors and actresses as porn "stars"? How many people went on PornHub et al and searched for Stormy Daniels? A few porn actresses may be stars but very few are. They are just interchangeable bodies performing interchangeable sex acts for not a whole lot of money. $500-1000 a day, I understand. Which is not bad per day, but they may only work 50 days a year or so. Hardly the riches of Croesus.
Trump has to be pretty clean if his enemies couldn't get him. I wonder how many other developers/entrepreneurs in New York could survive the scrutiny that Trump has endured.
Just so we're clear about how the media should handle documents purporting to contain scandalous information...Ashley Biden's diary and Hunter Biden's laptop were discounted (or ignored outright) because, said the media, they might be fake; or because there was no good chain of custody or title. NYT sniffed at the laptop story because the laptop was said to have been abandoned in an obscure computer repair shop run by a man with poor eyesight. Ashley Biden's diary might have been stolen, and how did Project Veritas get its hands on it? Etc etc.
So in these cases it is incumbent on the media to not cover the story unless and until everything is authenticated and double-checked; and God forbid that the media would traffic in materials that might have been purloined. Or that were subject to rules of secrecy, such as a resignation letter by a prosecutor full of substantive accusations of wrongdoing. Publish that? Oh my goodness, no!
Sorry for the obvious sarcasm here.
If an attorney wrote a letter and it gets published in the NYT, it must be true!
Not.
"Trump lies to the national media! That's a blatant felony right there!!"
Of course it's not, and your limp sarcasm avoids the point: as a prosecutor would point out in a trial, it shows Trump's propensity and long pattern of lying. It goes to his character, and reveals him to be generally untruthful.
Highly inappropriate IMO. For the uninitiated, here's the text of Model Rule of Professional Responsibility 3.8(f):
(f) except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, [a prosecutor shall] refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused and exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this Rule.
I guess '...unless you're on your way out the door...' is acceptable.
A Trump sandwich - two slices of bread and wishing you had some ham.
Cook,
So you think Trump committed some crime? Could you tell us:
What specific crime?
Your basis for thinking he committed this crime? Why do you think he did it when dozens (many listed above) of agencies could never find enough evidence to even bring charges much less convict. Where does your inside knowledge come from?
They have had to try just as hard to not find and cover up the corruption as they tried to find Trump's completely nonexistent corruption.
LOL! So true.
Actually, Robert Cook, if Trump were tried the prosecution would not be permitted to introduce evidence of uncharged dishonesty to show dishonest character. It’s known as “propensity” evidence, and is precluded except in very narrow circumstances.
I don't think there is even any evidence that he "sampled" Stormy Daniels. All we have is her allegation.
Fair enough. But even if he had given Stormy a poke, Bill Clinton, the Democrats and their media allies rendered that kind of sexual transgression harmless as a political cudgel years ago.
All the federales say
They could have had him any day
They only let him slip away
Out of kindness, I suppose
If a person lies on a financial statement given to a federally insured bank, that's a federal crime. But the context is usually that the bank got stiffed and lost money.
Did any of Trump's bank creditors lose money?
And I also note that valuation of real estate, especially in NYC, is very much an art and not a science. It's all opinion. An opinion is NOT a lie or fraud. If it was, Al Gore and the CAGW crowd would all still be in jail.
He’s claiming that because the value of Trump real estate was higher on his loan documents than on his tax records there is some sort of fraud.
I invite anyone living in Cook County to explain how their property value has been assessed for county taxes. It is a black box system made to confuse people and to enrich tax lawyers and politicians.
Trump has been paying political graft in order to prosper. In contrast, career politicians live off the graft and prosper. That is why Trump must be destroyed. He threatens the American way of life.
John henry said...
Cook,
So you think Trump committed some crime? Could you tell us:
What specific crime?
Your basis for thinking he committed this crime? Why do you think he did it when dozens (many listed above) of agencies could never find enough evidence to even bring charges much less convict. Where does your inside knowledge come from?
******************
It obviously comes from inside his fundament.
" it shows Trump's propensity and long pattern of lying."
Cookie would produce anti-Trump propaganda at a trial, but don't worry, he won't put you up against the wall on fake evidence, come the revolution.
I think we should all extend our thanks to the ex-prosecutor, for making it easy for us to disregard this saga out of hand simply on the basis of his evident lunacy.
The Guardian?? May as well quote the National Enquirer.
Long ago, I said that Bill Clinton seemed like a liar. The response I got was something like, "A politician who lies! Unbelievable!" I wish I remembered the exact words, but the assumption was that politicians always bend the truth to suit their ends.
It's especially absurd in the age of Biden to believe that Trump was some great liar and needs to be punished again and again for that. Trump came out of real estate, promotions, and entertainment and liked to perform and put on a show. So far as lying in office goes, Biden and his team leave him far behind.
"... and blasted the new district attorney [Alvin Bragg] for not moving ahead with an indictment... Mark Pomerantz... wrote that the team of lawyers investigating Trump had 'no doubt' he had 'committed crimes' and that Bragg’s decision not to move ahead with prosecuting Trump 'will doom any future prospects that Mr Trump will be prosecuted for the criminal conduct we have been investigating.' 'His financial statements were false, and he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people,' Pomerantz reportedly wrote."
The ones in bold aren't crimes. For the prosecutor to focus on them shows that he's a political hack, not an ethical prosecutor
As for the others, if true they should be charging Trump. Because if true, then it's documented, they have the documents, and they'd be in front of a Grand Jury getting an indictment.
So he's a liar and a political hack
Blogger Dave Begley said...
Did any of Trump's bank creditors lose money?
Actually, did ANY of Trump's creditors, bank or other, ever lose money? As in did not get repaid in fully?
Including the the creditors in the bankruptcies.
There were allegations that he stiffed contractors. Yet only one name was ver publicly mentioned and him very little. This was a carpenter/firm who claimed that Trump did not pay his whole invoice, claiming sub-par work. Yet the same carpenter/firm continued to do work for Trump even after that.
It is hard to stay in business for 40+ years if you don't pay what you owe. Very soon nobody will do business with you.
John LGBTQBNY Henry
Lying to the public and media about your finances is not a felony. Banks and counter-parties are supposed to do due-diligence for any dealings. Real estate developers always always hype their projects. Trump has been filing tax returns all his life and the IRS has had plenty of motivation to audit him every single year, and they have done so at least a few times. His business is a corporation. Real estate is a tricky business for tax purposes. Trump has billions tied up in land and buildings, depreciation (based on the tax code), income, sales of property, expenses. It would be a headache to do his taxes. But no different than other developers.
I seriously doubt that this prosecutor understands the tax code and business well enough to identify felonies if they don't understand property valuation.
After Trump is dead, they will still be wailing about him.
It is interesting that the Clinton foundation raked in millions while Hilary was sec state and running for president and then donations dropped 95%. This is such obvious influence peddling but no gov agency seems to care.
Oh Happy Days. How nice that you people can all get on the same page for a moment.
it shows Trump's propensity and long pattern of lying. It goes to his character, and reveals him to be generally untruthful.
Cook and that ex-prosecutor seem to belong to the same political party. I won't mention the name but they refer to each other as "Comrade." I think it was the Red Queen who said, "Sentence first. Trial after." Or was that Lavrentiy Beria ?
OT but why do we refer to porn actors and actresses as porn "stars"? How many people went on PornHub et al and searched for Stormy Daniels?
Pornhub was the 10th most visited website in 2021, with 2.29 billion visits (according to Statista.com). Xvideos was 13th, 2.13 billion visits. There are a few others in the top 20 that might be porn based on their names, but I cannot say for certain (e.g. Xnxx.com?).
Meanwhile, CNN had an average (according to them) of 143 million visitors per month, which comes out to 1.716 billion for the year.
Maybe "star" is the correct term after all.
Let me guess....the walls are finally closing in??
That's fine. We now have the verdict of a jury of one.
Bob Boyd - Trumpo and the Lefties?
Howard: "Oh Happy Days. How nice that you people can all get on the same page for a moment."
As always, it is wise of you to avoid attempting to post something substantive since, you know, you're a bit of a dolt.
So good on ya.
Have you figured out what a woman is yet?
Good luck with your research.
Back in the nineties, when I was still a prosecutor, if construction projects went south, investors sometimes complained that the principal had falsified his financial statement to the bank.
After investigating several of these we found that in each case the financial statement had been prepared by an underling in accordance with directions by bank officials to facilitate acquisition of a loan. Different bank, different statement.
That may not have been the case with Trump, but it was certainly an industry practice. Sometimes a grand jury subpoena was necessary to get bank officials to acknowledge that banks were complicit, not victims.
This prosecutor may be confused. Lying to the media and the public about finances is not a crime. If it were QuidProJoe and many other elected Democrat grifters would be in serious trouble.
Owen @7:52am… excellent point!
Xnxx is just xvideos with a different interface, it's the same owner with the same movies from the same servers. Most of these sort of sites are owned by the one of the two big companies.
Rule 3.8 of the NY Rules of Professional Conduct does not apply. It details the "special responsibilities" of prosecutors to an "accused", including the obligation to avoid public comments that might prejudice the rights of an "accused." But Trump is not accused of anything. That would require a charging instrument (typically, an indictment for a felony), and there is none. Second, the letter was addressed to (and as far as appears) delivered by Pomerantz to DA Bragg; no idea who leaked it to the NYT. Whoever did may well have violated a host of legal rules, but probably not Rule 3.8. But as far as I am aware, there is nothing to show (at least yet) that Pomerantz was involved in the leak.
So former ADA Mark "Lavrentiy Beria" Pomerantz is unhappy that the crime he showed for the man he hates was not sufficient to get him sent to the gulag.
Who cares, Drago. Your boy has helped Vlad every step of the way on his Ukrainian plan. These small domestic potatoes are meaningless. No doubt the persecution of Donald helps you justify your anti-American hatred of the Free world.
Fortunately, the Axis of evil (Trump, Xi and Putin) is collapsing rapidly. Your Russian heros can't get their oil to your ChiCom friends. Both are being bitch slapped by a dementia ridden hack and a flock of eurotrash soyboys. As you like to say: Lolololol
and yet - Biden family corruption is a big nothing in our corrupt modern American government and media elite.
and
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
Certainly Hillary did this with the use of her private server.
Where is the justice?
Bank: How much do you want?
Me: 4 billion dollars.
Bank: What do you have to offer as collateral in case you default?
Me: My baseball card collection. It covers 1976 through 1982. My mom threw away part of it when she cleaned my closet, but for the most part it's in good shape. I think it's worth 4 billion dollars.
Bank: Good enough for us. Here's your money.
If you think that banks take the word of a customer as gospel when it comes to collateral for loans, you are delusional.
They tend to check those things before handing out money.
Howie -If you're gonna toss out lies about Trump and Russia - you better back it up with some facts.
The fact is - Putin never did a thing while Trump was prez.
Biden is prez- a weak corrupt shell - and Putin invades and starts a war.
Facts, Howard. Facts.
Some facts and reminders from Walter Russel Meade: time machine...
"If Donald Trump were the Manchurian candidate that people keep wanting to believe that he is, here are some of the things he’d be doing:
-Limiting fracking as much as he possibly could
-Blocking oil and gas pipelines, and domestic drilling (and opening calling for the destruction of American fossil fuel extraction)
-Opening negotiations for major nuclear arms reductions
-Cutting U.S. military spending
-Trying to tamp down tensions with Russia’s ally Iran.
oops -that's all Potemkin Joe.
Howard said...
Oh Happy Days. How nice that you people can all get on the same page for a moment.
************
Howard, you need to up your pathetic game, by calling us "you folk".
Does he also believe in the magic in a young girl's heart? Because belief is not evidence or proving beyond a reasonable doubt. If he believes all these things, why have they not been presented to a grand jury? Instead this guy has engaged in gossip and slander, but then that is the modern prosecutor.
Glenn Reynolds sums it up.
"... the entire “Russian collusion” narrative that the press pushed for his entire presidency has been thoroughly exploded.
But someone is doing these things, right now. I’m talking, of course, about Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., who at his shambolic Wednesday press conference gave Russia the go-ahead to invade Ukraine, though it was quickly walked back by backwalker-in-chief Jen Psaki, his press secretary.
The last time something like that happened was in 1950, when Secretary of State Dean Acheson gave North Korea what appeared to be a green light to invade South Korea. The result was the Korean War. One hopes Biden’s blunder will not bear similar consequences."
Do you recall that Howard ? Biden rolled out the red carpet for Soviet Poot's war.
Bar complaint warranted.
The NY Rules of Professional Conduct does not have a section 3.8(f) - it ends with 3.8(e) and has no section directly comparable to 3.8(f).
It does include Rule 3.6, which prohibits a lawyer who is "participating in or has participated in a criminal or civil matter" from making extrajudicial statements that the lawyer knows or should reasonably know would be disseminated to the public and that would have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter. This specifically includes statements that relate to "the character, credibility, reputation or criminal record" of a party or a suspect in a criminal investigation, as well as "any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of a defendant or a suspect in a criminal matter that could result in incarceration." This strongly suggests that the publication of the letter was a violation of the rules, whether charges have been brought or not (else why the inclusion of both "defendant " and "suspect").
Further, the rule expressly extends to cover other lawyers who are associated with the firm or governmental agency for which any other lawyer is or has participated in a criminal matter, subjecting them to the same prohibitions. So whoever leaked it would also be in violation.
Do your research. Putin's geopolitical architect gave Brannon and Trump the playbook that they tried their best to execute, but failed. Hyper religious, nationalistic, super macho strong leader, anti-elite, homophobic... It's like they are clones.
Putin's Rasputin
Howard links the Washington Post, the spies' mouthpiece that foisted the Gulf War on us, as if it has some authority, then chides others for gullibility.
Putin is no friend of the United States, but neither is the CIA.
Banks don't simply take your word for it.
Due Diligence:
"Professionals define due diligence as an investigation or audit of a potential investment consummated by a prospective buyer. The objective is to confirm the accuracy of the seller’s information and appraise its value."
========
I am given to understand [per Hillary] >>> Russian / Deutschen Banks don't do it the way American Banks do it >>> Trump guilty as charged
Another example of the Dems' Double Standard . . . .
Lost count of the number of times Dems have explained that absent **EVIDENCE** it would be wrong to investigate one of their own (and all the while I had understood that it was the investigation that was supposed to deliver evidence, if there was any to be had).
Here's the mirror image . . . we have an investigation that was initiated on, what, a random thought, "there's a lot of this in the real estate business, Trump probably did it too, maybe a lot."
And now, after more then two years, this investigator is sure (which means no actual trial-worthy evidence has been produced) that the investigation should continue.
So whoever leaked it would also be in violation.
========
leaker guilty ; leakee not guilty because 1A?
does leakee have to be PRESS/LAWYER to claim privilege?
I recall Comey dodge with his "lawyer friend'
tim in vermont said...
"Howard links the Washington Post," Which is, of course, the nations High School Newspaper of record. Why next ole' Howard will quoting CNN. Oh. Wait. He's already done that.
But in his defense he did vote for Biden so critical thinking isn't his forte'.
Blogger Howard said...
Do your research. Putin's geopolitical architect gave Brannon and Trump the playbook that they tried their best to execute, but failed.
Poor Howard. Still flogging the dead horse of Trump=Putin. When was the last time you had an original idea, Howard?
Mark Pomerantz reenacts the battle of Pearl Harbor
This is just sour grapes. Pomerantz had the chance to put together a case with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump intentionally submitted financial statements that contained misrepresentations. He failed to do so, as judged by his boss, a progressive, anti-Trump DA.
As I understand the case, the charge was that the financial statements contained false representations about the value of property. Ignore for the moment the fact that the banks to which these statements were submitted conducted their own valuations and did not rely on Trump's valuations. Let us also assume that Trump's valuations were based on the opinions of third party appraisers, which was his usual practice. Thus, he can only be attacked for fraudulent valuations if he submitted false information to the appraisers. All the information that he gave to the appraisers is in writing and readily available to the prosecutors. Either that information was false or it was not. If there was strong proof that Trump gave false factual information to the appraisers, this would be an easy case to charge. Apparently that evidence doesn't exist.
Mark said...
Bar complaint warranted.
----
in re Mark F. Pomerantz, age 70+,
Cyrus Vance Jr., the longtime Manhattan district attorney hauled Mark F. Pomerantz, 70, out of retirement to prosecute President Trump for something -- anything.
If banks would only take an applicant's word for the value of a home, then they wouldn't need to order an appraisal for a home loan and delay the funding of said loan. Appraisers were so busy in King County that our mortgage company had to offer a $1,000 premium to get an appraiser to take the job. It still took a couple months to get the appraisal done. And its value was very close to my appraisal just using Zillow's values for nearby homes, the square footage of said homes and the County's assessment of the land values.
Trump could have told the banks his tower was worth $1B, but the bank would have been criminally negligent to take Trump's word for the value. The tax assessor doesn't give a rat's ass about what Trump thinks the tower's worth, that's why the assessor has a team of assessors to make that determination. The two values are rarely the same, most of the time the appraised value is more than the assessed value. The only time the true value is known is upon sale. All other times, these values are just educated guesses.
It’s springtime for Trump and time for a little Bad Haiku:
Walls are closing in,
the beginning of the end
Wait, what’s that you say?
"as a prosecutor would point out in a trial, it shows Trump's propensity and long pattern of lying. It goes to his character, and reveals him to be generally untruthful."
The job of a prosecutor is to prosecute crimes, not tell us what a bad person Trump is. If Trump committed actual crimes they have actual evidence of, then they should prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law. If he didn't (or they don't have enough evidence that he did) then they should shut the fuck about it. They are supposed to be lawyers, not politicians.
Exactly as I predicted a couple of weeks ago on the last thread on this topic.
Prosecutor resigns and claims a long list of offenses that Trump supposedly is guilty of that said Prosecutor could never prove in court.
Lefties eat it up.
Nice spin. The resignation is because the prosecutor is being investigated for the harassment of Trump.
dreams said...
Trump has to be pretty clean if his enemies couldn't get him. I wonder how many other developers/entrepreneurs in New York could survive the scrutiny that Trump has endured.
Yep.
I doubt I could come out as clean as Trump, if I went through the same level of investigation
“Mark Pomerantz... wrote that the team of lawyers investigating Trump had 'no doubt' he had 'committed crimes”
Sure, but this was after three prosecutors on the team who didn’t believe the evidentiary standard was met exited the team late last year under previous DA Vance. So, get rid of everyone with “doubt” and you’re left with “no doubt”. The weakness of the evidence has been discussed by other commenters above, and DA Bragg clearly agreed, especially for such a weak charge. The case and charge are so weak, in fact, that even if they were able to get a conviction, if the public became aware of the details of the charge, it would be more likely to redound to Trump’s political benefit. Well, except for true believers like Pomerantz. Remember that this charge doesn’t normally even carry a jail sentence.
“If you strike at the king, you must kill him.”
Howard said...
Who cares, Drago. Your boy has helped Vlad every step of the way on his Ukrainian plan.
That may very well be the stupidest thing you've every written, Howard.
Our boy blocked Vlad at every turn, for four years.
Your boy, OTOH, was VP to the guy who promised Vlad "he'd have more room to maneuver" after the 2012 election.
Your guys:
1: Russia "reset"
2: "The 80's called"
3: Letting RusAtom get access to US Uranium deposits in exchange for a $100 million payoff to the Clinton Foundation
4: Backing down over Syria "Red Line" because Vlad would be upset
5: Letting Vlad violate the Budapest Accords and try to dismember Ukraine in 2014
6: Driving down US oil and gas production, driving up prices, making Putin richer and more powerful
7: Green lighting a "minor incursion" by Russia into Ukraine
8: Removing sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline
Trump years: Russia did nothing
Obama & Biden years: Russia invades multiple countries
There's someone giving Vlad free reign. it's not Trump
Howard said...
Do your research. Putin's geopolitical architect gave Brannon and Trump the playbook that they tried their best to execute, but failed. Hyper religious, nationalistic, super macho strong leader, anti-elite, homophobic... It's like they are clones.
Putin's Rasputin
If Putin installed a traitor in the white house they would:
-Block exploration of US energy.
-Restrict US domestic oil and gas extraction.
-Import Russian oil and NG
-Drive the price of gasoline up to punish the working class and force them to give Putin money.
-Cancel the Keystone XL Pipeline
-Sign a deal with Iran giving them billions of dollars and allow Iran to buy nuclear facilities and expertise from Russia
-Invite Putin to start a "minor incursion" into Ukraine
-Get caught on a hot microphone telling the Russian President "I will have more flexibility after the election"
It looks like Hunter got millions of dollars from the Russian oligarchs so it makes sense.
But if you are a stupid piece of shit like Howard you think calling Trump and his supporters traitors still works. At this point everyone knows none of this happens if Trump is president. Biden made all of this happen.
Really Howard do keep it up.
You are just making yourself look really gullible and dumb.
If a Democrat DA in New York didn't move forward with the case, it's because there's no there there.
"That may very well be the stupidest thing you've every written, Howard."
You are assuming he's writing in good faith. I suspect much of what he writes is along the lines of "let's see if this gets those right wing assholes going!" He even goes through the trouble of making shit up to get a reaction.
There must be ethical breaches in "publishing" an indictment of crimes without actually pursuing an indictment.
Howard: "Who cares, Drago. Your boy has helped Vlad every step of the way on his Ukrainian plan."
I used to think Howard was simply playing a role with his projection schtick.
Now however, one has to ponder the very real possibility that he is simply that stupid and easily led around by the nose.
You have to love Howard's adolescent commitment to the democratical cause.
Everyday he is confronted with the undeniable facts of the the democraticals caving to Xi and the russkis and the Iranians and pretty much everyone else and Howard just goes into 5 year old mode by sticking his fingers in his ears and screeching "no one cares!" and Nuh Uh!!!
The prosecutor should look for work as a Title IX administrator.
When you're the investigator, the prosecutor and the judge (don't need no jury, we've always known what's fact and what's not) you don't need to put up with petty crap like having to produce evidence to support your case.
Perhaps we should be questioning the use of a prosecutor who takes the post on an unpaid basis to specifically work on just one case. Isn’t that highly suggestive of bias? What were his motives for donating his life force to investigating Trump? Why did the State not consider the Trump case worthy of using its resources?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा