Reply to 8 Years of Trump Tax Returns Are Subpoenaed by Manhattan D.A.

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "8 Years of Trump Tax Returns Are Subpoenaed by Manhattan D.A."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]

Proving intent to commit fraud: should not have to rely on Cohen who will be discredited as a witness. 
1. Inflating prices of assets and properties for selling and devaluing for taxes speakers for itself;
2. First president to doggedly refuse to reveal tax statements.
If he had nothing to hide, he would have acted like every other president;
3. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for someone who openly bragged about evading taxes making him smarter;
4. Violating presidential records act by shredding lots of incriminating information. Again, if he had nothing to hide, he would not have violated this legal agreement;
5. Payments by Russian entities resulting in treasonous siding with Putin over US intelligence agencies.

“When reports emerged indicating that Bragg was reluctant to move forward with the Trump case, some legal experts noted that convicting him of tax fraud would not be easy. In the civil probe, AG James alleged that Trump may have used “fraudulent or misleading” asset valuations on six properties to obtain tax benefits, and his former accounting firm no longer stands by them. Some of the alleged discrepancies appear startling: The former president inflated the size of his Trump Tower triplex by three times and valued rent-stabilized units more than 66-fold, the attorney general has said.

Establishing criminal intent, however, could prove trickier: Weisselberg is known to be staunchly loyal to the former president, and he has fought to dismiss the case rather than cooperate with the government. Trump famously does not send text messages or emails, leaving little in the way of a paper trail in a case that would largely hinge upon criminal intent. That would leave Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen as the key witness against his former boss, and a seasoned defense attorney would likely bring up Cohen’s conviction for lying under oath during cross examination, among others.

Perhaps nodding to such critics, Bragg said that prosecutors cannot only bring cases that are “slam dunks.”

“To the contrary, every case must be brought for the right reason – namely that justice demands it,” he wrote.””[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics