• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Eric Trump spent six hours pleading the Fifth Amendment more than 500 times (1 Viewer)

gdgyva said:
okay

then people shouldnt get upset at someone who follows his rights

and if a case can be made that he or any member of the Trump family were in on a conspiracy then by all means, lock them up

but lets actually have the evidence and trial first, shall we?
Click to expand...
The rights are with the House having the right to do oversight of the Executive Branch of Government & with witnesses not to incriminate themselves. One can not take the 5th for matters they couldn't be implicated in. Who knew how busy Eric was?
 
CaughtInThe said:
Come on. The ex-president and his kids are straight shooters. They would never even think about breaking laws, cheating on their taxes or trying to use eminent domain to throw old people out of their houses so they can build parking lots.
Click to expand...
I find ;) to be invaluable, when using Sarcasm.
 
gdgyva said:
okay

then people shouldnt get upset at someone who follows his rights

and if a case can be made that he or any member of the Trump family were in on a conspiracy then by all means, lock them up

but lets actually have the evidence and trial first, shall we?
Click to expand...

No one is “upset” that Trump is exercising his rights.

That was to be expected.

But 500 5th pleas In one session does suggest that the witness either has a lot to hide, or a lot to be accounted for.
 
TomFitz said:
No one is “upset” that Trump is exercising his rights.

That was to be expected.

But 500 5th pleas In one session does suggest that the witness either has a lot to hide, or a lot to be accounted for.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that this is a civil case about property valuation brought by the NYAG with the goal of finding evidence of a crime (really for finding a crime) . It's about property valuation for tax purposes, in New York. Eric Trump's position was that he shouldn't have to testify because he didn't prepare the underlying documents. The judge said that since he was the custodian of the records for one property , he could answer specific questions about that property and what he knew about the records.

The fact that they deposed him for 5 hours and 500 questions on how the records for a property were maintained, in a state case about property valuation, after he answered foundational questions and was advised by his attorney to stop answering, says more about the AG's quest to make a political statement than Eric Trump.
 
dcsports said:
Keep in mind that this is a civil case about property valuation brought by the NYAG with the goal of finding evidence of a crime (really for finding a crime) . It's about property valuation for tax purposes, in New York. Eric Trump's position was that he shouldn't have to testify because he didn't prepare the underlying documents. The judge said that since he was the custodian of the records for one property , he could answer specific questions about that property and what he knew about the records.

The fact that they deposed him for 5 hours and 500 questions on how the records for a property were maintained, in a state case about property valuation, after he answered foundational questions and was advised by his attorney to stop answering, says more about the AG's quest to make a political statement than Eric Trump.
Click to expand...

That depends.

When Trump became President, he made a noisy and very dishonest show of placing his assets in the hands of his adult children (just about all of whom were gathered around him in the White House).

To demonstrate his sincerity, he appeared on television next to a stack of random papers that he tried to pass off as the agreement itself.

In reality, the trump kids were functionally in charge of the Trump real estate concerns, but 100% of the earning went straight to Donald Trump. Thus making the kids figureheads.

Trump put his kids on the hook for the conduct of his businesses.

I’m not sure that the NY case is going to go anywhere.

Overvaluing assets for the bank and undervaluing them for the tax man isn’t unususal at all in commercial real estate.

Trump exercised taht tendancy to a ridiculous extreme, which is what invited scrutiny.

His bet, of course, is that no one would care of the asset performed and everyone got paid.

Unfortunately, with Trump’s well known tendancy to mismanage projects, over spend, screw his partners and subcontrators, and his generally poor business skills, his assets rarely performed as advertised, and often not at all.

This was the trajectory of just about every Trump deal after Trump Tower.

Whether this case goes anywhere remains to be seen. But it is yet another example of the buzzards coming home to roost on a shaky empire built in fraud.
 
TomFitz said:
That depends.

When Trump became President, he made a noisy and very dishonest show of placing his assets in the hands of his adult children (just about all of whom were gathered around him in the White House).

To demonstrate his sincerity, he appeared on television next to a stack of random papers that he tried to pass off as the agreement itself.

In reality, the trump kids were functionally in charge of the Trump real estate concerns, but 100% of the earning went straight to Donald Trump. Thus making the kids figureheads.

Trump put his kids on the hook for the conduct of his businesses.

I’m not sure that the NY case is going to go anywhere.

Overvaluing assets for the bank and undervaluing them for the tax man isn’t unususal at all in commercial real estate.

Trump exercised taht tendancy to a ridiculous extreme, which is what invited scrutiny.

His bet, of course, is that no one would care of the asset performed and everyone got paid.

Unfortunately, with Trump’s well known tendancy to mismanage projects, over spend, screw his partners and subcontrators, and his generally poor business skills, his assets rarely performed as advertised, and often not at all.

This was the trajectory of just about every Trump deal after Trump Tower.

Whether this case goes anywhere remains to be seen. But it is yet another example of the buzzards coming home to roost on a shaky empire built in fraud.
Click to expand...
Not sure what 'depends' there, but you went down a long and winding tangent.

If Donald Trump (this is Eric) improperly valued his properties, he should bear the consequences for that - but no more or less than others that have done the same thing. Worth noting that he's been audited to the extreme on all of this.

But what we're seeing is a targeted prosecution for political reasons, and an attempt to do a lot of unethical - borderline illegal - things in the process. And an abuse of the civil system to try to get criminal leverage and/or 'find' crimes. In this case, badgering his son - a manager of a property in this case - to try to make headlines. That's wrong.
 
gdgyva said:
hey...they can give 100% immunity to witnesses and then they might get a few questions answered
but the democrats dont want answers....they want the story
surprised you havent figured that out yet.....
Click to expand...
Unsubstantiated opinion noted.
 
gdgyva said:
okay

then people shouldnt get upset at someone who follows his rights

and if a case can be made that he or any member of the Trump family were in on a conspiracy then by all means, lock them up

but lets actually have the evidence and trial first, shall we?
Click to expand...
Says someone who doesn't even think there should be an investigation.
 
I'm shocked that the guy who robbed a child's cancer charity is concerned he might have been involved in something illegal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom