• 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!

Trump Could Be Investigated for Tax Fraud, D.A. Says for First Time

Did I read that right?

News reports are leading to investigations? " However, prosecutors listed news reports and public testimony that alleged misconduct by Mr. Trump and his businesses. The reports, prosecutors wrote, would justify a grand jury inquiry into a range of possible crimes, including tax and insurance fraud and falsification of business records. "

I mean, I get it one one hand, investigative journalism and all, but this just takes the cake.....how do you even present that, ladies and gentleman, our first exhibit is, Huffington? Like seriously? If they had enough for a grand jury, they should be able to get it without the media....that's just insane.

ProPublica did a great in depth piece going through public records on Trump owned property and showing evidence of fraud.

If public records can show fraud... imagine what bank records can show.
 
So the NYC DA, says that evidence of Trumps illegal tax activity related to NYC taxes, exists in Trumps Federal tax return,
but the only person who can legally release the tax return is Trump himself.
My first question is how does he know such evidence exists, unless he has seen an illegal copy?
My second question, is under what legal authority, can a person be forced to incriminate themselves?
(assuming the release of the tax returned contained any incriminating evidence.)
So we are stuck, if the DA knows from an illegal copy, there is evidence there, the evidence is now inadmissible.
If he is simply guessing and on a fishing expedition, then he has no grounds to request the tax return.
They have banking records provided by Deutsche bank.
Conehead is a proven liar. His words are garbage.
A liar that provided law enforcement shitloads of verified documentation.
yeah. but very publicly since at least the '80s.

now that we know he paid someone to take his college entrance exam i think it's safe to assume that he's one of those people that are dirty (probably) starting around 12-14yo. i'm sure his sister knows.
His followers sadly don't care that he paid someone to take his SATs, I'd wager that most of them somehow think that is a great thing.
 
Last edited:
His followers sadly don't care that he paid someone to take his SATs, I'd wager that most of them somehow think that is a great thing.

on another political board, when all the Stormy stuff and his affairs were being debated a lot, there were a few Republicans there that were bragging about how "Hot" his mistresses were.

i shit you not.
 
Trump has been dirty his whole life. He was taught by his father early on the ins and outs of tax fraud and money laundering.
You need to understand that when he calls this political hackery what he really means is that he doesn't care if Trump broke the law. He could care less. Trump could admit to it under oath and he still wouldn't give a flying ****.
 
Conehead is a proven liar. His words are garbage.
Lower level mafia racketeers rat on higher up mafia racketeers and juries believe them. What Cohen said under oath is prima facie evidence.
 
ProPublica did a great in depth piece going through public records on Trump owned property and showing evidence of fraud.

If public records can show fraud... imagine what bank records can show.

Got a link?
 
https://www.propublica.org/article/...rump-tax-documents-show-major-inconsistencies I believe this is what is being referred. One of Trumps long time MO's is keeping "two sets of books" That's reminiscent of how the Chicago outfit ran their speakeasies, whorehouses and gambling facilities back in the 20's and 30's.

Thanks, first quote,

" Lenders like to see a rising occupancy level as a sign of what they call “leasing momentum.” Sure enough, the company told a lender that 40 Wall Street had been 58.9% leased on Dec. 31, 2012, and then rose to 95% a few years later. The company told tax officials the building was 81% rented as of Jan. 5, 2013. "

They are acting like that's relevant? Difference of 5 days, the leasing went from 58.9 to 81%....and ?

" A dozen real estate professionals told ProPublica they saw no clear explanation for multiple inconsistencies in the documents. The discrepancies are “versions of fraud,” said Nancy Wallace, a professor of finance and real estate at the Haas School of Business at the University of California-Berkeley. “This kind of stuff is not OK.” Yet no example of discrepancies yet......

" There can be legitimate reasons for numbers to diverge between tax and loan documents, the experts noted, but some of the gaps seemed to have no reasonable justification. “It really feels like there’s two sets of books — it feels like a set of books for the tax guy and a set for the lender,” said Kevin Riordan, a financing expert and real estate professor at Montclair State University who reviewed the records. “It’s hard to argue numbers. That’s black and white.” Again no examples

" Documents submitted to city property tax officials show no such run-up. Trump representatives reported to the tax authorities that the building was already 81% leased in 2012. " It conflicts itself here,

" “What is bizarre is that you have these tax filings that are totally different,” Riordan said. A gap of at least 10 percentage points between the two occupancy reports persisted for the next two years, before the figures in the tax and loan reports synced in January 2016. " No examples, no numbers

First example of anything " For example, insurance costs in 2017 were listed as $744,521 in tax documents and $457,414 in loan records. " Then no explanation no theory, nothing.

Second example "

Then there was the underlying lease. Trump technically doesn’t own 40 Wall Street. He pays the wealthy German family that owns the property for the right to rent the building to tenants. In 2015, both Trump’s report to tax authorities and a key loan disclosure document asserted that Trump’s company paid $1.65 million for these rights that year. But a line-by-line income and expense statement, which Trepp gathered from what the company reported to the loan servicer, reported the company paid about $1.24 million that year.

“I don’t know why that would be off,” said Jason Hoffman, who is chair of the real estate committee for a professional association of certified public accountants in New York state. Like other experts, he said there are legitimate reasons why tax and loan filings might not line up perfectly. But Hoffman said the firm where he works makes sure the numbers match when it prepares both tax and loan documents for a client — or that it can explain why if they don’t." saying in that quote, that there are legitmate reasons etc,

" Financial information for the Trump International Hotel and Tower raises similar questions. Trump owns only a small portion of the building, which is located on Columbus Circle: two commercial spaces, which he rents out to a restaurant and a parking garage. Trump’s company told New York City tax officials it made about $822,000 renting space to commercial tenants there in 2017, records show. The company told loan officials it took in $1.67 million that year — more than twice as much. " I guess they expect people to not understand the difference between gross and net.

If that's the crack piece of reporting thats gonna bring Trump down....it leaves a lot to be desired.
 
By who Breitbart?
No. The widow of the guy who Mary Trump said took the SATs for Trump:

In the new book from Mary Trump, the niece of President Donald Trump, one of the most explosive allegations is that the president hired a friend of his named Joe Shapiro to take the SAT exam so that he would have a better shot at transferring from college at Fordham University to the more prestigious Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

Now, the widow of a man named Joe Shapiro said if the book is referencing her late husband, who was a friend of Trump, she is confident the accusation is false.

-skip-

"To hedge his bets he enlisted Joe Shapiro, a smart kid with a reputation for being a good test taker, to take his SATs for him. That was much easier to pull off in the days before photo IDs and computerized records. Donald, who never lacked for funds, paid his buddy well," Mary Trump writes, offering no proof or attribution for the accusation.

 
No. The widow of the guy who Mary Trump said took the SATs for Trump:
Well if Trump wanted to debunk it he'd release his school records right? Trump bashed Obama for his grades but Trumps lawyers threatened to sue his Alma Mater if they released his. My money is on Trump is a liar and his family knows him better than a bunch of ass lickers and hanger-ons. If I took someones SAT tests for them, I'd never admit it to anyone as that would make me complicit in fraud and no better than the person that I was cheating for.
 
Last edited:
No. The widow of the guy who Mary Trump said took the SATs for Trump:
I am sure she is confident. That doesn't mean she is right, because she wasn't there.
 
Back
Top Bottom