Apparently, Mr. Eric Trump invoked his fifth amendment rights (against self-incrimination) 500 times about fraud done by him or on behalf of other people with Trump Organization and other business entities.

https://www.businessinsider.in/politics ... 002743.cms

IIRC, the senior Trump doesn't like people invoking the fifth amendment but perhaps this time will make an exception.

Drain the swamp.

Look Self incrimination is one thing, but if you are truly innocent, don't you think you are going to give the facts?

Honestly not sure how he is going to go with this defense, when his father's weapon of choice is gaslighting. Eric may be getting set up to be the fall guy.

Before anyone goes crying "political witch-hunt!" I would like to remind everyone that before 2012, Trump was a completely apolitical sleaze. He was already hated by the entire city of New York for reasons completely unrelated to his presidency long before he decided to run, because he'd pretty much screwed over every investor, bank, and contractor in the tri-state area already.

I wonder what his father thinks about pleading the 5th Amendment

But no doubt his acolytes will agree that only certain people can claim the 5th, you know, the ones they deem as worthy...

einsteinboricua wrote:

I wonder what his father thinks about pleading the 5th Amendment

But no doubt his acolytes will agree that only certain people can claim the 5th, you know, the ones they deem as worthy...

I remember reading an article or hearing him speak and say something that taking the fifth is a criminal's choice. Those were his words, not mine. But then, this is a person who makes new post-truths every day.

Ms. Ivanka Trump is gonna be indicted in another can of worms, misleading financial statements but hey, everybody does fraud so why just catch me, that would be her catch-phrase or at least that's would be her father's.

https://www.econotimes.com/Ivanka-Trump ... nk-1625487

scbriml wrote:

Drain the swamp.

That rallying cry was always textbook projection from day one.

scbriml wrote:

Drain the swamp.

One T***p at a time!
Seriously, I kinda wish T***p still has a Twitter account, so we can all watch him cry

alex0easy wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Drain the swamp.

One T***p at a time!
Seriously, I kinda wish T***p still has a Twitter account, so we can all watch him cry

Just 2-3 days ago at a republican rally he said to his republican supporters,

you don't need the vaccine, you don't need the vaccine.

And in the second moment, even if you wanted and if you are a white American, you would not get it, again his words, not mine.

Now that kind of doublethink only Mr. Trump and his followers can do. The rest of us can't.

A.netters are usually not particularly naïve... does anyone reading this really believe that anyone in the Trump family inner circle is going to get any kind of non-trivial punishment ?

davidjohnson6 wrote:

A.netters are usually not particularly naïve... does anyone reading this really believe that anyone in the Trump family inner circle is going to get any kind of non-trivial punishment ?

Giuliani is in a world of hurt along with the kraken. I don't think they will go down without taking the Trump's with them. Especially as coercion and blackmail seem to be the underlying insinuation from most congress members.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

A.netters are usually not particularly naïve... does anyone reading this really believe that anyone in the Trump family inner circle is going to get any kind of non-trivial punishment ?

TDS doesn't work that way. It's ok it's something to latch on to so you don't have to accept what is coming this November.

Just to remind everyone about what is going on in this specific case. .

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politi ... -rcna12685

In financial statements, the value of the former president’s apartment in Trump Tower in New York City was based on an assertion that the space was 30,000 square feet, when documents show that the apartment was 10,996 square feet, the attorney general’s office said.

Former Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg conceded in a deposition that that resulted in an overstatement of around $200 million, the filing said.

By the definition below, Trump and co committed over 200 million in fraud at the very least, but I know of people in jail for writing a bad check.

Banks and other lenders need to know the precise financial condition of loan applicants before they make loans. If a company overstates its financial condition to get a loan, making its finances seem rosier than they really are, that can be considered fraud. The filing says Trump's financial statements "were generally inflated as part of a pattern to suggest that Mr. Trump’s net worth was higher than it otherwise would have appeared."

Maybe Eric is afraid he'll be made to take the heat for the rest of the family...
After all, Trump allegedly instructed Cohen to make sure Don Jr. would go to jail instead of Ivanka if it came to that.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 98983.html

I wonder why they would discuss this sort of things given this is a family that has never done anything wrong, ever?
Oh, right. Witch hunt.

NIKV69 wrote:

TDS doesn't work that way. It's ok it's something to latch on to so you don't have to accept what is coming this November.

If Republicans wanted people to talk about something else besides Trump, why haven't they taken any of the dozens of perfectly reasonable opportunities to put him behind them? As it is, handing over the party to an incompetent egomaniac who tried to fix an election after it was over remains their choice.

In the USA, the '5th Amendment' is the right to not have to incriminate ones self, to not admit to a criminal act. This puts the burden on the government to present evidence to a Grand Jury or in a criminal prosecution to prove you are guilty of a crime, not on extracting a confession. I have worked on civil liability cases with possible criminal referrals where key corporate officers like Eric Trump in his father's companies repeated endlessly to any and all questions 'plead the 5th'. Some of those corporate officers did face criminal and government prosecuted civil penalties from our cases.

NIKV69 wrote:

davidjohnson6 wrote:

A.netters are usually not particularly naïve... does anyone reading this really believe that anyone in the Trump family inner circle is going to get any kind of non-trivial punishment ?

TDS doesn't work that way. It's ok it's something to latch on to so you don't have to accept what is coming this November.

People can walk and chew gum at the same time. The Dems can be idiots screwing themselves out of a golden opportunity at the same time the Trumps are a legally compromised family with their luck about to run out. TDS was never about party - it has always been staying behind a known charlatan so toxic he has been unable to get loans from major US banks for over 20 years.

scbriml wrote:

Drain the swamp.

Trumpers are so ignorant they bought that hook, line, and sinker. They don't even care to analyze and rid themselves of their own ignorance and maladaptive behaviors.

I'm not so sure about these Trumps though. I am not naive enough to believe we have seen the last of them in politics, or their ability to weasel their way out of situations.

Aaron747 wrote:

People can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Whom are you referring to? The Dem party can't do anything right lately so two things at once is a stretch.

Aaron747 wrote:

The Dems can be idiots screwing themselves out of a golden opportunity

Again need clarity here.They won the white house and control of congress and haven't been able to do anything and are staring a loss worse than 2010 in the face soon so I don't get what the golden opportunity is.

Aaron747 wrote:

at the same time the Trumps are a legally compromised family with their luck about to run out. TDS was never about party - it has always been staying behind a known charlatan so toxic he has been unable to get loans from major US banks for over 20 years.

Yes I have been hearing this for months now. He was supposed to be arrested for tax crimes but never seems to be. Oh yea it takes time to gather evidence. Ok call me when he is arrested. The rest is just feeding TDS and wanting payback for Hillary losing.

NIKV69 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

People can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Whom are you referring to? The Dem party can't do anything right lately so two things at once is a stretch.

This might be new do you, but prosecution is not done by political parties. Hence getting to the bottom of things and serving justice has nothing to do whatsoever with democrats chances during the midterms.

best regards
Thomas

Why yes, let's use election results as a proxy for whether one influential man is guilty or innocent. Surely there is no way this can go wrong.

It approaches an outright admission that, as long as the Republican party is in power, Donald Trump is above the law.

NIKV69 wrote:

Whom are you referring to? The Dem party can't do anything right lately so two things at once is a stretch.

I'm referring to anyone who can criticize both the Dems and the Trump family - like me.

NIKV69 wrote:

Yes I have been hearing this for months now. He was supposed to be arrested for tax crimes but never seems to be. Oh yea it takes time to gather evidence. Ok call me when he is arrested. The rest is just feeding TDS and wanting payback for Hillary losing.

Nah, you still don't get it. As I said, TDS has and always will be backing the toxic outsider and his fake family. You can go on about Hillary Revenge Syndrome, but HRS is a miniscule thing and everyone knows it. The only one still talking about HRC is HRC.

As for indictments, you're well aware T.O.'s legal team has been suing to block investigatory access every step of the way. In the last six months courts have cleared several of those potential blocks.

tommy1808 wrote:

This might be new do you, but prosecution is not done by political parties.
Thomas

Could have fooled me.

Aaron747 wrote:

but HRS is a miniscule thing and everyone knows it. The only one still talking about HRC is HRC.

Either you don't follow the news cycle or you are in denial but she is emerging as the front runner in 2024.

Aaron747 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Drain the swamp.

That rallying cry was always textbook projection from day one.

Hoe about 'Stop the Steal' ? In Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Pennsylvania.

NIKV69 wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

This might be new do you, but prosecution is not done by political parties.
Thomas

Could have fooled me.

But prosecutions can be not done by political parties. IIRC 5 departments had reports recommending criminal investigation sent to the DoJ by their respective Inspector-Generals. None were,including one spiked by Bill Barr, into DoT .headed by Elaine Chao - aka Mrs Mitch McConnell.

Out of 15 Cabinet appointments, this is quite a strike rate, especially if you add in the 10 or so members of Trump's election or inauguration committees either convicted or under indictment. If nothing else, this shows what an appalling judge of character he is.

NIKV69 wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

This might be new do you, but prosecution is not done by political parties.
Thomas

Could have fooled me.

You'll note the House committees investigating Jan. 6th and the Trump tax records are bipartisan, and the conservative-leaning SCOTUS ruled two weeks ago that Trump claims to executive privilege are invalid. The party claim is bunk.

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

This might be new do you, but prosecution is not done by political parties.
Thomas

Could have fooled me.

and the conservative-leaning SCOTUS .

those are just RINOs, not really conservatives....

casinterest wrote:

Look Self incrimination is one thing, but if you are truly innocent, don't you think you are going to give the facts?

Honestly not sure how he is going to go with this defense, when his father's weapon of choice is gaslighting. Eric may be getting set up to be the fall guy.

Innocent or guilty, if you are under investigation, you should never talk to the cops.

bpatus297 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Look Self incrimination is one thing, but if you are truly innocent, don't you think you are going to give the facts?

Honestly not sure how he is going to go with this defense, when his father's weapon of choice is gaslighting. Eric may be getting set up to be the fall guy.

Innocent or guilty, if you are under investigation, you should never talk to the cops.

This isn't the cops. This is a criminal investigation, and while he has the right to remain silent, the narrative will be drawn up against him in a court of law based on tangible evidence of fraud.

casinterest wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Look Self incrimination is one thing, but if you are truly innocent, don't you think you are going to give the facts?

Honestly not sure how he is going to go with this defense, when his father's weapon of choice is gaslighting. Eric may be getting set up to be the fall guy.

Innocent or guilty, if you are under investigation, you should never talk to the cops.

This isn't the cops. This is a criminal investigation, and while he has the right to remain silent, the narrative will be drawn up against him in a court of law based on tangible evidence of fraud.

Okay, let me rephrase....never talk to the investigator.

bpatus297 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Look Self incrimination is one thing, but if you are truly innocent, don't you think you are going to give the facts?

Honestly not sure how he is going to go with this defense, when his father's weapon of choice is gaslighting. Eric may be getting set up to be the fall guy.

Innocent or guilty, if you are under investigation, you should never talk to the cops.

Generally that maxim holds true, but this is a family that literally can't shut up.

bpatus297 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Innocent or guilty, if you are under investigation, you should never talk to the cops.

This isn't the cops. This is a criminal investigation, and while he has the right to remain silent, the narrative will be drawn up against him in a court of law based on tangible evidence of fraud.

Okay, let me rephrase....never talk to the investigator.

If you don't talk, you don't control the investigation. The fifth is fine when there is a lot of circumstantial charges. When there are filed appraisals and loan data, you better be able to explain it.

casinterest wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

This isn't the cops. This is a criminal investigation, and while he has the right to remain silent, the narrative will be drawn up against him in a court of law based on tangible evidence of fraud.

Okay, let me rephrase....never talk to the investigator.

If you don't talk, you don't control the investigation. The fifth is fine when there is a lot of circumstantial charges. When there are filed appraisals and loan data, you better be able to explain it.

Apparently one of the questions was that was he part of the Trump Organization, even to that he took the fifth. The more you close the walls around you, the harder it would be. Now if he makes a statement to the press he wasn't part of the Trump Organization and if they have evidence, he could be locked up simply for giving false statements. Of course, nobody in their right mind would believe that except those who feel everything their dear leader and his family says is nothing but the truth, damn whatever the evidence may be. It would have been great if we had all the 500 questions in public domain, that would also shed light on what sort of circumstantial or any other evidence they may have against Mr. Eric Trump. I am sure there are many papers that have his signature on them. That again would be harder to explain if any such papers were to land in court and show Mr. Eric Trump was in authority and he authorized x,y or z whatever the crimes may be.

pune wrote:

casinterest wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Okay, let me rephrase....never talk to the investigator.

If you don't talk, you don't control the investigation. The fifth is fine when there is a lot of circumstantial charges. When there are filed appraisals and loan data, you better be able to explain it.

Apparently one of the questions was that was he part of the Trump Organization, even to that he took the fifth. The more you close the walls around you, the harder it would be. Now if he makes a statement to the press he wasn't part of the Trump Organization and if they have evidence, he could be locked up simply for giving false statements. Of course, nobody in their right mind would believe that except those who feel everything their dear leader and his family says is nothing but the truth, damn whatever the evidence may be. It would have been great if we had all the 500 questions in public domain, that would also shed light on what sort of circumstantial or any other evidence they may have against Mr. Eric Trump. I am sure there are many papers that have his signature on them. That again would be harder to explain if any such papers were to land in court and show Mr. Eric Trump was in authority and he authorized x,y or z whatever the crimes may be.

If it was any regular person they would be in jail while pleading the fifth. I wonder if the investigators will go that route.

pune wrote:

Ms. Ivanka Trump is gonna be indicted in another can of worms, misleading financial statements but hey, everybody does fraud so why just catch me, that would be her catch-phrase or at least that's would be her father's.

It's also ironic that after going after Hunter Biden as a candidate for reelection, he's crying foul because of investigations into his 3 kids, particularly Ivanka (you know, the woman who was only gonna be first daughter before cashing in as "Special Advisor to the President"). Eric and Don Jr. have other things to worry about with the Trump Organization.

bpatus297 wrote:

Okay, let me rephrase....never talk to the investigator.

If you're guilty, then yes, it's probably best. Not that it will help you much, it just makes the investigator's job a bit harder.
It still has consequences in the sense that it certainly doesn't help make you innocent in the eyes of a judge/jury... or anyone else in this case.
Silence speaks volumes sometimes.

In the United Kingdom the Miranda rights go:

“ You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence”

Does the same apply in the USA?

I know the Miranda text is different in the USA. But what I want to know is, can withholding information by pleading the fifth be used against you?

petertenthije wrote:

In the United Kingdom the Miranda rights go:

“ You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence”

Does the same apply in the USA?

I know the Miranda text is different in the USA. But what I want to know is, can withholding information by pleading the fifth be used against you?

My favourite version of the US rights is at 2:46

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyXOPTNDiGc&ab_channel=VeeXXL

Virtual737 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

In the United Kingdom the Miranda rights go:

“ You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence”

Does the same apply in the USA?

I know the Miranda text is different in the USA. But what I want to know is, can withholding information by pleading the fifth be used against you?

My favourite version of the US rights is at 2:46

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyXOPTNDiGc&ab_channel=VeeXXL

That scene always makes me laugh. You can tell how old that movie is now.


Here is the US Miranda Right page and info on it.

http://www.mirandarights.org/

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have a right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.”

=========================================================

The wording of the Miranda rights may vary from the statement above, as long as they fully convey the message. The officer must also ensure that the suspect understands his or her rights. Should the suspect not speak English, these rights must be translated to make sure they are understood.

petertenthije wrote:

In the United Kingdom the Miranda rights go:

“ You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence”

Does the same apply in the USA?

I know the Miranda text is different in the USA. But what I want to know is, can withholding information by pleading the fifth be used against you?

Strictly speaking 'Miranda' dues not apply in the UK.

What you quote is the UK equivalent.

bennett123 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

In the United Kingdom the Miranda rights go:

“ You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence”

Does the same apply in the USA?

I know the Miranda text is different in the USA. But what I want to know is, can withholding information by pleading the fifth be used against you?

Strictly speaking 'Miranda' dues not apply in the UK.

What you quote is the UK equivalent.

Yes, here 'Miranda' was a 'comedy' the popularity of which escaped me.

Legally, staying silent in the US cannot be held against you.

johns624 wrote:

Legally, staying silent in the US cannot be held against you.

When people are judging you, your words and actions are just as important as your lack thereof. Especially in the face of compelling evidence. So if you are going to exercise this right in the face of an arrest( where you are going to jail) , you better have a great lawyer on speed dial.


Interesting Supreme court case on the issue. It says that you do need to invoke the fifth to avoid self incrimination , but Scalia and Thomas point out that silence can be used against you fifth or not.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/opin ... the-fifth/

Justice Alito’s opinion had only the support of two other members of the Court — Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. Justice Clarence Thomas, in a separate opinion joined by Justice Antonin Scalia, would have answered the constitutional question that the Court had agreed to hear in this case, and declare that prosecutors could have used the suspect’s silence against him at the trial even if he had specifically claimed a Fifth Amendment right.

So while Eric Trump can plead the fifth. He does so at his own risk should others start pointing the fingers directly at him through evidence on documents/transactions/verifiable statements.

A few years I was accused of "stalking" by a business competitor after we FOIA'd his proposal to a government office. His bid came in far beneath any possible price point and his terms were unsustainable over the 5 year agreement that he requested. He contested the FOIA request as "private and confidential" and then accused our firm, and me in particular, of stalking. In the state I resided any time someone accuses another of stalking or similar the courts automatically grant the request until a court hearing.

One evening after dinner at home two sheriff's deputies knocked on my door and I invited them in. I had no idea why they were there. They explained that I was under investigation for stalking, explained what my competitor had accused me of, and I was read my Miranda rights. My mind raced and I pictured myself in handcuffs and sitting in jail for something I hadn't done. I immediately invoked my rights (5th Amendment) and requested to speak with my attorney before asking questions. One deputy told me that the courts would look harshly upon me for invoking my rights and asked if I was sure I understood the risk. I reiterated my request for an attorney so they served the papers and left.

I had to appear before a judge and attend three hearings before the stalking charge was dismissed.

Even though I was completely innocent of any charges or accusations I knew well enough to invoke my right of self-incrimination and to let my attorneys handle the case. Better to be safe than sorry.

Pleading the 5th is not an admission of guilt.

Now, if you want to talk about a certain husband and wife who previously occupied the White House, and their lack of memory while undergoing depositions in a civil matter, that's another story. "I have no recollection", and "My memory isn't clear on that matter", is comical. Everyone knew they were lying.

casinterest wrote:

johns624 wrote:

Legally, staying silent in the US cannot be held against you.

When people are judging you, your words and actions are just as important as your lack thereof. Especially in the face of compelling evidence. So if you are going to exercise this right in the face of an arrest( where you are going to jail) , you better have a great lawyer on speed dial.

That's why I said "legally".

87GROUNDED wrote:

One deputy told me that the courts would look harshly upon me for invoking my rights and asked if I was sure I understood the risk.

There's a legal term for what that deputy did--it's called "lying".

johns624 wrote:

87GROUNDED wrote:

One deputy told me that the courts would look harshly upon me for invoking my rights and asked if I was sure I understood the risk.

There's a legal term for what that deputy did--it's called "lying".

There is no law that prohibits a police officer from lying to an individual as part of an investigation. It's part of the game.

I knew that he was doing his job and I had to do mine.

87GROUNDED wrote:

johns624 wrote:

87GROUNDED wrote:

One deputy told me that the courts would look harshly upon me for invoking my rights and asked if I was sure I understood the risk.

There's a legal term for what that deputy did--it's called "lying".

There is no law that prohibits a police officer from lying to an individual as part of an investigation. It's part of the game.

I knew that he was doing his job and I had to do mine.

Many don't know that and think that talking to the cop will "help" them. Talking can never help you, only hurt you. Cops have little to do with charging or punishment, so they can't help you, even if they wanted, which they don't. Call an attorney and don't talk to anyone until he is there.

87GROUNDED provides a more 'normal' if you like reading of this and likely the sort of thing it was intended for in the first place.

Still, the abiding image of it is old footage of mob bosses being questioned, better yet, the real person that DeNiro played in 'Casino' even invoked the 5th when he was asked his name!