New York Attorney General is smacking down the Trump Criminal Family and their phony “charitable foundation”
President Donald Trump faces a new round of possible tax trouble after the New York Times bombshell report that documented decades worth of shady dealings and fraud by the Trump family, including the president.
But Trump and his children, including Donald Jr. and Ivanka, are also facing a lawsuit over their family foundation. And, on Thursday, the New York Attorney General’s office filed new documents that allege “willful and intentional conduct” that violated the law, including by using the Foundation for his political campaign.
“For more than a decade, the Foundation operated in persistent violation of state and federal law governing charities,” the filings say. “The Board abdicated its fiduciary duties entirely, leaving the Foundation to operate without any oversight, and permitted Mr. Trump to use the Foundation’s assets to satisfy his and his for-profit companies’ legal obligations, to promote Trump hotels, to purchase personal items, and, in 2016 – at the direction of Mr. Trump and his presidential campaign- to promote Mr. Trump’s candidacy for political office.”
The New York attorney general says that the Trumps knew what they were doing was illegal, and did it anyway.
“Mr. Trump was aware of the limitations on political activity by not-for-profits: he signed documents under the penalty of perjury attesting that Foundation assets would not be used for the benefit of any Foundation officer or director or for political purposes, and he even campaigned for the repeal of one prohibition on using charitable assets to intervene in a political campaign,” the document says.
The state of New York is seeking to dissolve the foundation because it “carried on, conducted or transacted its business in a persistently fraudulent or illegal manner, or by the abuse of its powers contrary to public policy of the state has become liable to be dissolved.”
Another interesting aspect is the fact that Trump and his lawyers have sought to claim that he can’t be pursued by a state attorney general because of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The New York AG is pushing back hard against that, pointing out that there is no precedent for such a claim.
Trump was “unable to cite a single case in which a court has dismissed a civil suit against a sitting U.S. president for unofficial acts on the ground that the court’s jurisdiction would be unconstitutional.”
If the Trump team ends up losing that claim and appealing it, the the subject of whether Trump can be brought into a trial while in office will be settled sooner rather than later.
Read the complete filing here.
Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Stevens — Kavanaugh supporter — says Kavanaugh does not have the temperament to be on the Supreme Court
Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens was all for Brett Kavanaugh’s appointment to the highest court in the land, but that was until he saw the appellate court judge throw a fit during his hearing.
He once thought Kavanaugh “had the qualifications,” said Stevens, who was appointed by President Gerald Ford. “His performance in the hearings changed my mind.”
The life-long Republican urged Senators to “pay attention” to what happened.
Southern Palm Beach County reporter for The Palm Beach Post, Lulu Ramadan, recalled that Stevens was the dissenting vote in Bush v. Gore.
“The endorsement of that position by the majority of this Court can only lend credence to the most cynical appraisal of the work of judges throughout the land,” he said in the 2000 case that determined the election. “It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today’s decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.”
Kavanaugh is panicked — he writes Wall Street Journal op-ed to apologize — because he knows he’s in trouble for lying and acting like the privileged thug he is
Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee was an unmitigated trainwreck that saw him devolve into rank partisanship, bitter sniping, and aggressive attacks on the Democratic lawmakers in attendance — none of which befits a Supreme Court justice.
The nominee appears to have realized that he completely disgraced himself before the country while trying to defend against allegations of sexual assault because on Thursday, he published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that was apparently supposed to serve as some sort of walk back or apology.
If it’s supposed to be an apology, however, it’s a pretty pitiful attempt.
He begins the op-ed with a headline that is just another clear lie and something he obviously wouldn’t have to say if it were true: “I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge.”
He acknowledges that he was “emotional” at the hearings, saying: “I hope everyone can understand that I was there as a son, husband and dad. I testified with five people foremost in my mind: my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters.”
But, of course, he wasn’t there for them. He was there as a part of the proceedings to see if he should be a Supreme Court justice, one of the most powerful positions in the country. A few nights before, he had appeared on Fox News, and if he wants, he can say he was a “son, husband and dad” on that network. But it’s complete nonsense to say he wasn’t first and foremost a judge and Supreme Court nominee when he testified under oath before the Senate.
The closest he comes to an apology is this: “I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said.”
However, this is far from sufficient — and isn’t even an apology at all.
He doesn’t acknowledge anywhere in the op-ed that among the things he should not have said was his demanding to know whether a Democratic senator who admitted to having an alcoholic father drinks to excess herself. He doesn’t admit that he yelled at and interrupted senators repeatedly, especially Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), in an apparent show of misogynistic rage. He doesn’t admit that he blamed the accusations against him on “Democrats,” the “left,” “revenge for the Clintons,” and “pent-up anger about President Trump.”
This conspiratorial theorizing not only insulted and condemned the portion of the country that identifies with the Democratic Party, but it disparages the women who brought the allegations against him by implicating them in some untoward plot.
Kavanaugh also doesn’t address the fact that he outright threatened Democrats for opposing him, saying, “What goes around, comes around.”
And he doesn’t apologize for the voluminous lies and misleading claims he told the Senate, damaging his own reputation and — if he gets there — that of the Supreme Court.
In this hateful diatribe before the Senate, he dropped the veil of being an impartial judge and revealed himself to be an unabashed partisan Republican.
His attempt to now paper over his outrageous display and act like he can play the part of the independent adjudicator is laughable. It’s also a transparent play for the support of the wavering lawmakers, Sens. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Susan Collins (R-ME) who still hold his fate in their hands.
Whether the gambit will work or not is unclear. But regardless of his success, there’s no turning back from what Kavanaugh has shown himself to be: Someone who should be more comfortable wearing a MAGA hat than a black robe.