TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2023
Scarborough cuts him off: "Back out of all this now too much for us?"
Long before Norman O. Brown came along, Robert Frost had fashioned that opening line for his difficult poem, Directive.
He imagined that we had somehow reached a place, or had reached a state, which was "now too much for us." By the end of the poem, he had imagined a way that we could find our way back out of all that.
As poems go, Directive is hard. So is the part of Brown's Phi Beta Kappa address which described a similar cultural conundrum:
BROWN (May 1960): I sometimes think I see that societies originate in the discovery of some secret, some mystery; and end in exhaustion when there is no longer any secret, when the mystery has been divulged, that is to say profaned...And so there comes a time—I believe we are in such a time—when civilization has to be renewed by the discovery of some new mysteries, by the undemocratic but sovereign power of the imagination, by the undemocratic power which makes poets the unacknowledged legislators of all mankind, the power which makes all things new.
On the strength of two major books, Brown was very big in the late 1960s. He's completely forgotten today.
We don't know how we ever came to know about that 1960 address. But there you see the same formulation:
According to Brown, our society—our civilization—had begun to "end in exhaustion." We had to discover new mysteries—some new secret—to allow us to get "back out of this" state.
At the time, we had no idea what Brown was talking about, but neither did anyone else. Also, Directive is a difficult poem. We're equally puzzled by it.
That said, it's impossible to flip between two early morning "cable news" programs—Morning Joe and Fox & Friends—without suspecting that we've moved well beyond the societal state which will eventually prove-—indeed, which has already proved—to be "too much for us."
On one program, we blues are served our curated Storylines. On the other program, the reds are supplied with theirs.
Almost surely, a giant modern nation can't possibly function this way. But last Friday morning, in the 6 o'clock hour, a brief break in the scripting occurred.
In New York City, Donald J. Trump would soon be going on trial in a major financial fraud action. On Fox, the friends were discussing Elon Musk's visit to the southern border as Friday's program began.
But at the same time, on our own cable show, we blues were hearing this about the legal pursuit of Trump:
SCARBOROUGH (9/29/23): By the way, some idiot—idiot; idiot—said, "This happens in Stalinist nations." No. This actually happens in nations where there's rule of law.
In Stalinist nations, you say, "This is a Stalinist nation," and they take you out back and they shoot you. Here, we have a rule of law. And everybody—
Let's just, for people that aren't from Manhattan, that haven't lived in Manhattan—
Everybody, for years, have known that Donald Trump has lied about his net worth, has lied about his buildings, has lied on his loans.
This is—this is no shock to anybody. If this is a Stalinist nation, then Stalin has been deaf, dumb and blind for like forty years, because this is not a surprise.
You know, when he was running in '16, I would say, "Don't do business with him. He lies, he cheats, he doesn't pay his bills."
You hear that from everybody. And also, he exaggerates how much he's worth. You can't trust this guy in any business deal.
LEMIRE: Yeah. This is the Trump that's always been.
SCARBOROUGH: Right!
Thus spoke Joe and Lemire. By way of background, the triple "idiot" to whom Joe referred was almost surely "The Great One," the Fox News Channel's Mark Levin, whose angry screed about Stalinism you can read about here.
(Joe didn't mention Levin by name. In our amazingly primitive "news culture," our blue stars still don't do things like that!)
At any rate:
Trump has always been a fraudster, and everyone has always known this, Scarborough convincingly said. We don't dispute the general accuracy of this scathing portrait of Trump.
That said. a question popped into Mike Barnicle's head. Moments later, he said this:
BARNICLE: Right. They laughed at him for over three decades concerning his business acumen. What's happening Monday in New York raises this question: Why didn't it begin sooner?
Why didn't anyone in public office, in power, in public office, over these twenty or thirty years in the past, why didn't they take—
At this point, Scarborough broke in and changed the subject. For whatever reason, Barnicle's emerging question went unanswered, unexplored.
Here at this site, we've asked that very same question several times in the past! Here's what Barnicle was attempting to ask:
If Trump has been a fraudster for all these years, why is he only being pursued for his fraudulent conduct now? Where was our "rule of law" back then?
We think that's an excellent question. Rightly or wrongly, every red tribe viewer of Fox & Friends would know how to answer the question. This is what they'd say:
He's being pursued now because these legal actions are politically motivated. They're political attacks from within the Deep State, designed to keep Trump from reaching the White House again.
That's (part of) what red tribe observers would say. Most likely, they'd also be inclined to deny the claim that Trump has ever engaged in fraud at all.
For ourselves, we don't know why no one pursued the fraudster Trump down through the many long years. According to Scarborough, everyone knew what Trump was doing—but as Barnicle noted, nobody acted against him!
Why is he being pursued now? We'd call that an obvious question, one which got deep-sixed on last Friday's Morning Joe show.
Depending on which channel you watch, you're living in one of two different worlds. Red and blue tribunes never meet to debate their dueling claims. In a system which is great for salaries and for corporate profits, their various claims never get tested by any such interactions.
Later in that very same show, we heard an even more striking remark, this time by Walter Isaacson. Tomorrow, we'll show you what Isaacson said.
In our view, it's very hard to picture a way that we the people can get "back of out of all this."
When we watch cable news these mornings, we feel like we're watching dueling bands playing dueling tunes on the deck of the Titanic. More accurately, we feel we're seeing the scattered detritus on the sea where a large ship has already gone down.
Such as it is, our nation is deeply sunk in a silent civil war. It's very hard to picture the way we'll be able to find our way back.
Tomorrow: Did he just defend Trump voters?
These things were known to anyone who cared to look. Unfortunately, people etither didn't care or were to lazy to look.
ReplyDeleteJoe Scarborough saw thru Trump, he says. He was warning people about Trump’s shady business practices in the pristine world of global real estate. Joe was sounding the alarm about Trump to his unaware and cloistered colleagues in that arena. Joe knew.
DeleteWhat pols, business tycoons, and media people would have been so ignorant as to party with Trump back in the day? Didn’t happen. They knew too much. They were too astute. Too cautious. Too above board. Too aghast at Trump’s antics.These people know the NYC business world never brooks a hint of corruption, of mob influence, of sleight of hand businesses practices. The belly of any such imaginary beast would shock and alarm these pros. Right down to their pedicures.
Yet all those parties and benefits. The smiling photos. The golf dates.
Why, why…they really aren’t even on the same planet with Trump. Different worlds altogether. But they knew that guy…that character. They knew he was bad. They knew…but then, well, they didn’t know.
Everybody else was doing it -- is not a defense for any crime.
DeleteMary Trump describes in her book about Trump that he was bitter because he was not included in New York high society. Trump crashed celebrity weddings for God's sake.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/when-donald-trump-tried-to-crash-chelsea-clintons-wedding
Trump was snubbed and not included among those who counted. A lot of those photos and parties were things he threw himself, paid to attend, or barged his way in. He was not highly regarded, which is why he left New York and went to Florida, where money counts for lots more than in New York society.
Look at the way Trump was treated by world leaders, who laughed at him behind his back. The same thing happned in the US, except among climbers and those who wanted something from him (like Stormy Daniels -- no one's idea of a girlfriend) or didn't know any better. He was a joke.
So you think Trump was snubbed by the very highest of NY elite society simply because he’s a player and therefore too corrupt for them? And that bs is the same as govt leaders laughing at him because he went from zero political experience to president of the USA?
DeleteHe was snubbed by NY society and by foreign leaders because they are immune to his charms, let’s enumerate some of them:
DeleteCharm 1 - openly racist
Charm 2 - openly misogynistic
Charm 3 - sexually abusive
Charm 4 - boasts that his corrupt manner indicates how smart he is
Charm 5 - openly xenophobic
Charm 6 - puts his own interests above all others including his own country
Charm 7 - openly endorses authoritarian world leaders
Charm 8 - deeply ignorant on any subject one can think of
Charm 9 - has a chip on his shoulder, a wounded tortured soul, so that every interaction with him is a battle for dominance
on and on.
Nobody actually likes Trump, due to his nature, borne from an unsettling childhood, he has become inherently unlikable, thus his bullying class clown act. People sidle up to him because he has no integrity, therefore potentially useful to those looking for immoral shortcuts to gain personal power and wealth.
He is also lacking in taste. Gold toilets! High society socializes at charity events -- Trump is totally selfish and self-involved. People are instinctively self-protective about befriending people who show traits of being vindictive, vengeful, petty, disloyal to others while expecting loyalty, lacking in warmth (no dogs, mean to kids). Money cannot substitute for a lack of personal traits that connect people to each other.
DeleteAnonymouse 4:07pm, you should read some history.
Delete4:07,
DeleteTake Cecelia's advice. You'll soon find yourself supporting reparations for black Americans.
4:58 I have read some history (I do support reparations, which in some ways is merely supporting the notion that work should be compensated), history does not in any way negate my comment, which suggests you may have some unfamiliarity with historical context, as well as the context of our contemporary circumstances; this is not likely the notion behind your comment, which has more to do with your own personal bitterness and not with history.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:43pm, there isn’t a “charm” on that list that would have kept the elite of the elite of NYC from embracing Trump other than his high profile private life scandals and public fights that Trump played off for more publicity.
DeleteThere are a slew of past presidents and other famous politicians who meet most of the criteria on that list, the exception being that they were a lot more subtle.
You don’t know how snobbish the upper crust is in major Eastern cities. They snubbed the Clintons in DC after Clinton was elected president.
DeleteTrump was regarded as a boorish peasant no matter what he did to curry favor. Much easier to belong in FL.
"If Trump has been a fraudster for all these years, why is he only being pursued for his fraudulent conduct now? Where was our "rule of law" back then?"
ReplyDeleteSeveral of the prosecutors now bringing cases against Trump are female. Is it possible that women are bringing such cases because they are not part of the old boy network that protects men? Or perhaps it is that women take rules and laws more seriously than men do? Or it could be that Trump's wrongdoing against women has offended so many women that they have little motive to let him slide?
Why now? Because it has taken this long for women to attain positions of power that enable prosecution of Trump for his crimes.
Trump's MAGA movement is largely one that appeals to men. His followers are described as angry, aggrieved, aggressive men. Especially educated women have been abandoning Trump as voters. They are also best suited to recognize that the law is a vehicle for righting wrongs. Trump represents an abuse of power that other men have also displayed. It is not just Trump but his entire cadre of entitled crooks and con artists who may fall when Trump does, after enabling Trump for his time in office and in his business shenanigans before that. They identify with Trump. One consequence of women acquiring power in our society may be a more general housecleaning, just as the me-too movement swept out the sexual predators, the application of the rule of law to everyone may clean house by tossing out the rest of the grifters.
The turmoil may be more general than Somerby anticipates as the cronies are prosecuted along with dear leader.
This is a female prosecution. Trump is innocent.
DeleteIf Trump continues to decline cognitively, he may forget what he's done, but we won't.
DeleteHave compassion for the disabled.
DeleteLike Trump does?
Delete10:55, you're a goddamn liar.
Delete"More accurately, we feel we're seeing the scattered detritus on the sea where a large ship has already gone down."
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like Somerby is unhappy that Trump is finally getting what he deserves. Why is the hope that comes from a major wrongdoer being finally held to account? Why does Somerby not feel any sense of renewal? Many of us liberals are happy about what is happening -- not out of a sense of retribution but because it is reassuring that the rule of law reaches even the buffoons like Trump, no longer protected by his money.
Yay yay yay yay yay! Why is Somerby not cheering too?
This idea that a large ship has gone down is bizarre. In the last election, Biden and the Democrats saved the ship of state by winning the election, prosecuting the insurrectionists, and now they are stepping into the mess of right wing House Republican in-fighting to keep the government functioning. Those things are successes, not failures, so why does Somerby see detritus from a ship that has sunk? Biden's ship of state is steaming ahead. He has real accomplishments and the American people are doing better post-pandemic that most other developed countries. We tossed Trump out of office and are now mopping up after him. That should be good news but Somerby mopes. Just like a Republican.
DeleteRoger Stone insists hatred is more
Deletepowerful than love. Bob’s hatred of
MSNBC is all that really matters.
"Such as it is, our nation is deeply sunk in a silent civil war."
ReplyDeleteWhen has the attack on our institutions been silent?
One hallmark of Trumpism is that it cannot keep its mouth shut, ever. Nor can the gloating beasts in his party. Imagine a silent MTG or Lauren Boebert, a silent Matt Gaetz. A silent Ted Cruz or Abbott or any of the other rude crude assholes on the right. The right is truly a noise machine.
In public places, it is the Trump supporters who are boisterous and loud, while the left stands by hoping to cool the situation by not provoking the bullies. The left has tried to stay focused on issues and progress, doing the best we can to move forward, while the right is an anchor around our necks. A force of destruction as we tried to deal with the pandemic and its financial aftermath.
And the violence! It has come from the right, aimed at the left and at vulnerable people, including immigrants, minorities, women and children. The right has truly acted as domestic terrorists, attacking schools, hospitals, and our democratic system via its poll workers and public officials. There is nothing silent about such violence -- it works by creating fear. Mass shootings are a right wing phenomenon, as our police killings of unarmed people.
If Somerby is standing on our side of this divide, why doesn't he see what we see when he looks at the right? Why does the right's blatant call for Civil War 2.0 seem silent to Somerby? The insurrection was far from silent. The threats are not silent. Look at what the Republicans did to their own leader, McCarthy.
I suspect that Somerby has his fingers in his ears. Or he is claiming a bothsiderism that doesn't exist. The left has not been calling for civil war -- we have been calling for the rule of law, respect for democracy, an end to corruption. Perhaps the silence Somerby hears is his own failure to listen. But neither side has been silent, and we are not saying the same things. As in the 1860s, we liberals do not want war with Republicans, but they do not want peace with us. They want power in a system built on shared governance. They can't have it. Meanwhile, Somerby would rather chastise us than them when they are the obvious wrongdoers.
History shows us that appeasing fascists is a bad idea.
Who the fuck is Norman O. Brown and why should anyone care what he said at a commencement in the early 1960s?
ReplyDeleteWhen Robert Frost wrote his difficult poem, these times had not happened yet. He is not saying anything about today.
Somerby doesn't quote the difficult part or the meaningful parts of Frost's poem. Just the first line. That's because he never seems to get past the beginning of anything he reads or uses as "rhetorical devices" here. When ideas don't make sense, the writer is either similarly confused, or he is just filling his essay with chaff, to round out the assigned 500 words, to make it long enough to look like a real essay without having to write anything effortful, revealing, sensible or helpful to readers.
Look for the piece of buried disinformation that is the actual point of each day's post.
Today, Somerby implies that Morning Joe is too gleeful about Trump's prosecution. He undermines the idea that the prosecution may be justified, long overdue, by asking why Trump hasn't been caught before now, as if this is just a Democratic vendetta -- and ignoring that this prosecution has been in the works since Michael Cohen first rolled over on Trump. In this way, Somerby supports the right wing claim that this is all political and that Trump is being targeted by the Democrats for political reasons, but is actually a great man who is innocent. Somerby helps the right preserve its faith in Trump. Morning Joe cannot be right about anything -- he is just the lefty equivalent of Fox and Friends. That is Somerby's message today.
Those who see Trump with clearer eyes understand why he is being prosecuted and why he has already lost his case. Why it takes time to build such a case (we've been following the legal fights over access to records). Trump has been declared guilty already and this is just about sentencing. Because Trump is a crook. It doesn't take Morning Joe to know this -- but it does take Fox and Friends to deny it, since reality is not on their side.
There can only be renewal when the right wing's goons are rooted out of their gerrymandered districts and replaced by honest brokers on the right. That process is only just starting. Somerby should be thanking Joe for his service.
As someone posted yesterday. Norman O Brown was never a big deal or “hot.” That doesn’t mean he couldn’t have said something wise or relevant to our moment, but, we are reading Bob here.
Delete10:57, agree, there’s always buried disinformation.
DeleteNorman O Brown’s assessment that “societies originate in the discovery of some secret, some mystery” is poppycock, utter nonsense. Societies form because humans are communal, get value from community, but also from specialization, which involves the understanding of something, basically the opposite of having “some secret, some mystery”.
Worse, Brown says to avoid society ending, we need to embrace an “undemocratic but sovereign power”. Yikes!
Being charitable, Brown seems more like a Chauncey Gardiner than a scholarly sage. Ignorant people like Brown become popular due to the alienating nature of right wing dominance, and it is to society’s detriment.
"If Trump has been a fraudster for all these years, why is he only being pursued for his fraudulent conduct now? "
ReplyDeleteBecause he's not a 'fraudster' (in the legal sense). He's a businessman. Ordinary businessman, doing stuff that ordinary businessmen do.
He lost a civil suit, not criminal. A civil case where there is no damage done to anyone. So, it's a clear political persecution. 'Stalinist', 'mccarthyist', whatever. It doesn't matter.
Sam Bankman-Fried is innocent, too.
Delete"He's a businessman. Ordinary businessman, doing stuff that ordinary businessmen do."
DeleteWhat naive person is arguing that ordinary businessmen don't commit fraud?
When Trump failed to pay his taxes by undervaluing his properties, he defrauded taxpayers by failing to pay what he owed. That hurts everyone else who must take up the slack to fund government operations. Trump thinks that is clever and perhaps anti-tax people agree with him, but that is defined as fraud and it does hurt those who pay bills in his place. If there were no damages to anyone, he wouldn't have been convicted. It is not legal to do what he did, so he is in fact a "fraudster" because he committed fraud.
DeleteTrump's prosecution partly arises from Michael Cohen's testimony against him. Cohen was his associate and is a Republican, not a Democrat. That Trump has disloyal employees arises from the way he has treated them. There are many Republican former-Trump associates coming forward to testify against him in various venues. That is because he has harmed them, not just our country, with his illegal acts, civil and criminal. It is difficult to call this political prosecution when so many of his Republican supporters are testifying against him.
"When Trump failed to pay his taxes by undervaluing his properties, he defrauded taxpayers"
DeleteIf you work hard doing your trolling, one day you may be able to move to the United States and become a house owner. And then you will find out that in the US properties are assessed by local governments, not by the owners.
It takes willfull self-imposed ignorance to support Trump after all that's been revealed about his business and personal dealings.
DeleteAnd it makes the local bitter new establishment left commenters seem quite rational in comparison.
And this is the bridge that cannot be crossed. How could it? It's like two separate and distinct wards at the mental asylum.
Thanks to both groups for ruining our chance at a sane national discourse.
Mental illness is not a useful metaphor for describing real life. It reflects cynicism and nihilism, whether Somerby does it or someone else.
DeleteI love Russian trolls who know more about New York State business fraud laws than the judge.
DeleteTHE judge! Your new God and Savior?
DeleteI think this is Mao.
DeleteThe Adolph Hitler of the Left, if you will.
DeleteHitler was an immigrant to Germany and a homeless person. When he first moved there, he gave speeches on the street for coins in order to feed himself. He had no regular place to sleep. Doing that helped him learn what appeals to crowds, to speak to the prejudices and instincts of the man on the street. He eventually acquired followers who helped him find an apt and bankrolled him while he continued as a rabble rouser. This was a kind of low level grift that he expanded into a political con. There is some irony that Hitler admirers in the US hate indigent immigrant homeless people without recognizing that it taught Germany's leader how to appeal to the masses, as he sang for his supper each day.
DeleteA good movie about immigrant farmworkers in A Million Miles Away, about how a migrant farmworker became an astronaut -- a true story. You never know which person crossing our border will make a major contribution to history, so how do you know which to let in and which to shut out? They aren't all worthless freeloaders like Melania.
https://www.alternet.org/trump-chaos-2665765510/
ReplyDeleteToday's problems are not coming from the left.
Biden's speech was important because it welcomes non-Trump Republicans to embrace order not chaos. Stoehr said:
Delete"By setting John McCain (and himself) against the chaos, dysfunction and disorder of the House Republicans – many are rebelling because, let me see, they got what they wanted – Biden seems to be expanding the meaning of “democratic principles and institutions.” The president seems to be making additional space for those who may not care about principles and institutions one way or the other but who nevertheless react instinctively and aggressively to chaos, dysfunction and disorder with a fierce desire for peace and the restoration of the regular order."
Perhaps Somerby's reaction to current events similarly reflects this desire for peace. If so, he needs to support those working toward that goal, including Biden, who is not the aged dolt Somerby pretends he is. Peace cannot be gained by indulging troublemakers on the right who thrive on chaos. Their goal is not peace but personal power. But at what cost? We ALL need to put our foot down and stop this dysfunction. Perhaps the fanboys and trolls here will set aside their own disruptive activities to write a letter to their Republican representatives in Congress? Somerby too.
"Today's problems are not coming from the left."
DeleteBinary thinking.
Truth, facts, reality -- none of that is "thinking"
DeleteIncreasingly our world enjoys the benefit of things being digital, binary thinking.
DeleteOther similar so called binary thinking that seemed beneficial: slavers are bad, Nazis are bad….etc.
Get a grip.
Aren't Nazis good now? Receive standing ovations at the Canadian parliament.
DeleteYes Nazis have always been popular among right wingers; even so, it's reasonable to assess Nazis as a danger to society.
DeleteThe Canada incident was an unwitting error from a lack of knowledge about the individual, the speaker of the House resigned, the PM apologized, etc.
That aside, Canada is filled with right wingers whose world views align with Nazis; America too, this is nothing new.
The binary struggle of left vs right has been the fundamental struggle in society for thousands of years.
Binary thinking is beneficial and/or appropriate in some circumstances, and not in others, it depends on the context.
Context is a concept that, notably, right wingers struggle with.
Yup, we’ve come full circle, now’s let’s see if you can put 2 and 2 together. No? What a shock.
"Yes Nazis have always been popular among right wingers"
DeleteYes, among right wingers, your paymasters. Politico Europe, most recently.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/germany-bans-neo-nazi-group-raids-members-homes-2023-09-27/
DeletePart of the answer to Barnicle's question lies in Trump's ties to organized crime in New York City, where he operated his real estate business. He also had strong ties to Russian oligarchs going back to his marriage to Ivana. NYC has had a long-standing battle with organized crime which Giuliani made a name opposing before being elected mayor.
ReplyDeletehttps://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helped-save-trumps-business/
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-mob-organized-crime-213910/
Interesting. So how did Giuliani deal with the perceived conflict here, with regard to organized crime, when he chose to support Trump? I suppose it would have been just a way to establishment his name and he never cared about cleaning it up from a morale point of view? So no conflict?
DeleteDecades had passed.
DeleteCorrect, Giuliani never had an issue with Italian based organized crime per se, his work served two purposes, to gain political power, and to appease Russian organized crime that, not coincidently, was able to fill the void left by criminalizing the Italian mob.
DeleteProgressives have been out of power for decades, nearly a hundred years, their more recent growth in power is resulting in more white collar crimes being prosecuted.
Barnicle’s question would be dumb on its face, it was more likely meant as a rhetorical question, like “hey, when people like Reagan were in power, corruption like that perpetrated by the Trump Crime Family was ignored”.
Appeasement of right wingers is always a disaster.
Barnicle is not the only one to raise this
ReplyDeleteobvious point. Even the fey Frank Rich did
a piece on the way Trump was treated that
had some mild criticism for his home
paper the New York Times.
Obviously, Trump was treated as an
Deleteamusing dolt by people who should
have known better. He was sent up
by Spy Magazine and the movie
“Gremlins II” (alas, a box office failure)
but generally treated with amused
tolerance at worst. Yes, the Clintons
should have know better too.
Does this excuse the years Bob
has now been crafted stupid
excuses for him? No, of course
not. And the tiresome claim that
the hateful sins of the Right are
the responsibility of Left is now
all the likes of Bob have.
I suspect Trump confessing to his many crimes in public has something to do with why he's finally being charged as a criminal.
ReplyDeleteAs I understand, the basis for this civil prosecution against Trump is that Trump applied for loans and submitted financial statements that fraudulently exaggerated his net worth; and that there are specific statutes that make doing this illegal. Trump and his defenders say, among other things, that he didn't default on any of the loans. The banks weren't harmed. If someone applies for a loan, and fills out a form in which he lies about his net worth, gets the loan but pays it back according to its terms, the bank isn't harmed at all; however, I believe that submitting the false financial claims could subject the person to criminal or civil penalties. One question is - how often in these circumstances is a person prosecuted? Look at Hunter Biden, he didn't report income of over $1,000,000 and we're told in these situations there is no jail sentence. Not that the two situations are necessarily that comparable. In evaluating whether, as Trump's defenders contend, that this is a "political" prosecution, I think you would want to know how this type of situation is typically handled in New York (or elsewhere). And to make myself plain, my point isn't that people shouldn't be sanctioned for using false financial statements on the basis that they paid the loan. But that surely is a factor in the penalty part of it. (this is not addressing Trump's claims that his statements weren't fraudulent). My question is more that, to use the Hunter Biden example, is the prosecution motivated by who Trump is, that if it were someone else would the AG go after them in the same manner?.
ReplyDeleteMr Trump needed a loan. The bank wanted to loan him money and was satisfied with the collateral.
DeleteIn the ideal world, in this situation a simple handshake would suffice. But in this world, there are probably thousands of state regulations and dozens (if not hundreds) of useless forms to fill out.
Under normal circumstances, no one will ever look at these forms. Ever. But in a political witch hunt situation they will, of course, examine every useless line of every useless form under a microscope, looking for something they could declare "fraudulent".
That's what it looks like to me.
AC/MA -- you left out that Trump also undervalued his properties for tax purposes.
DeleteWhether Trump defaulted on any loans is immaterial. It is the excuse the Republicans have given but it is irrelevant to the law. Further, Trump has inflated his net worth in order to represent himself as a successful mogul for purposes of negotiating deals, brand promotion, and even to promote his Apprentice show. That too is fraud. The prosecutor claims Trump made over $100 million via his fraudulent claims.
That Trump has gone so long without prosecution is more likely than that he is being prosecuted for political reasons. $100 million is a lot of gain from fraud. He was more likely NOT prosecuted sooner because of who he is.
Madoff was prosecuted for fraud too. Here is what happened to him:
"Madoff, a prominent New York financier, pleaded guilty in 2009 to running a Ponzi scheme that resulted in as much as $20 billion in cash losses and $65 billion in paper losses. He was sentenced to 150 years in prison and died in April 2021 at age 82."
When Trump inflates the value of a property in order to get a larger loan (or any loan) and then uses that to cover other liabilities coming due, in an ongoing series of loans and deals that are like juggling, that is a fraud much like the Ponzi scheme Madoff ran with investors. In Trump's case, he ultimately was unable to get any US banks to loan to him, so he got money from Russian oligarchs, Saudis and other foreign investors (who bought at inflated prices, didn't require payback on schedule or forgave loans, and who exerted influence on Trump when he became president). That is financial kompromat.
Raising Hunter Biden's name is an obvious attempt to deflect attention from Trump's massive financial wrongdoing. I think it is possible now to bring these charges because Trump moved his operations to FL and now has much less leverage over anyone in New York.
Hunter Biden did nothing like what Trump did. He had different tax problems which he resolved with the IRS and paid off. He didn't fail to pay his taxes because he was committing fraud, but because he was a drug addict. So, you are right that the situations are not comparable.
A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that pays existing investors with funds collected from new investors. Ponzi scheme organizers often promise to invest your money and generate high returns with little or no risk. But in many Ponzi schemes, the fraudsters do not invest the money.
A Ponzi scheme cannot be continued forever. It collapses because the person running it keeps the money instead of paying investors, but in Trump's case, his financial fraud is collapsing because he became president and was no longer able to keep it going with new money, because his other crimes revealed the details (via Michael Cohen when his payoff to Stormy Daniels was revealed) and because he is old, less cognitive competent, drunk on the power of being president, and expected to coast on that for the rest of his life. Instead, due to the insurrection and his increasingly outrageous behavior, the chickens are coming home to roost.
They prosecutors caught up with Trump's father, Fred, at the end of his life and Trump had to deal with the fallout from his slumlord activities that build his fortune. This is the same thing, except that Trump's children will bear the brunt of his fraud.
Trump also negotiated loans on casinos, then declared bankruptcy and had the loans written off as debts in the bankruptcy. He used those bankruptcies as losses on his taxes in order to offset capital gains on new deals going forward. Strategic bankruptcy is one of his business strategies that have been investigated in the context of tax fraud, which was part of the audits going on in 2015 when he said he wasn't allowed to release his tax filings.
DeleteNote that Trump also makes a practice of engaging contractors and other services and then refuses to pay on the pretext of some substandard performance. This is much like his failure to pay for security services in the cities where he holds his rallies, his stiffing his lawyers, and his making promises to charities, campaign supporters, and others and then never following through. When people sue him on such contracts, he uses a long series of delaying tactics to run them out of money for their own lawyer fees, and never pays, much as he has used outrageous delaying tactics in his recent legal troubles.
Trump is not an honest man.
ANON 2:45 - I'm not claiming to know all that much about the case, but I'm not aware of any Ponzi schemes involved. Madoff was sent to jail for a very long sentence. this is a civil suit against Trump. Also, is he being charged for undervaluing his property as you allege to avoid taxes? That''s a different category than fraudulently overvaluing property on a financial statement to get a loan. I don't know if this undervaluing real estate values is part of this case - is that true? I would point out that when it comes to real estate taxes, the municipalities assess the properties, not the tax payers. Seems that you are bringing up a lot of claims against the ex-POTUS, valid as they may be, that are unrelated to this NY case, where the thing I always see in the news is his overvaluing property for loans. My question was - does the AG typically go after perpetrators of this fraud (where the lenders haven't been harmed) with the vigor they are exercising in this Trump case? I don't know and I don't think you do either.
Deleteanon 2:52, you are giving all sorts of examples that have nothing to do with the NY case brought by the NY AG.
DeleteYou said no one ever gets charged with fraud.
DeleteFrom a few minutes on Google, it appears the main issue in the civil suit has to do with fraudulently inflating the value of properties, entities, not just to obtain loans and insurance, but to get better terms, so in fact the loan and insurance companies were harmed, which is aside from the fact that it is illegal to do such activity.
DeleteIt also appears to be a common charge, in the last year alone NY prosecutors have filed 117 felony counts of the same type of charges.
It's possible for both to be true:
Delete1. Trump might not be honest.
2. He might be facing legal prosecution because of political motives.
Most of those testifying against Trump are Republicans. Do they have political motives too?
DeleteConsidering the financial charges Trump is facing are routinely prosecuted, there’s no credible basis for claiming its political.
Delete6:28 Financial charges like this are commonly prosecuted, still it's important to remember that political motivations could be playing a role as well.
DeleteOr maybe the prosecutor is prejudiced against old men with orange hair? As Somerby says, anything is possible.
Delete“He's being pursued now because these legal actions are politically motivated. They're political attacks from within the Deep State, designed to keep Trump from reaching the White House again.”
ReplyDeleteThe timing isn’t relevant to whether he’s guilty or not.
Trump was charged by Eric Schneiderman in 2013 for fraud re: Trump University. He was found liable.
FinCEN Fines Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort $10 Million for Significant and Long Standing Anti-Money Laundering Violations. This was in 2015.
The allegations in the Letitia James deal with violations from 2011-2021, in other words, some of them took place while he was President. She brought the case 9/21/2022. Coincidentally, Trump filed his candidacy on November 15, 2022. Hmmm.
The criminal charges in the top secret documents case and the election fraud case deal with actions he took while he was President.
It’s hard to argue that all of these are simply politically motivated.
Also, two Republican presidential candidates (Hutchinson and Christie) are not accusing the DOJ of corrupt politics.
Trump was also found liable for fraud concerning his New York charity foundation:
Deletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/10/nyregion/trump-foundation-lawsuit-attorney-general.html
"Under a settlement, the president admitted he had used his charity to bolster his campaign and settle business debts."
mh, Trump settled the Trump University class action case for $25,000,000. I don't think he was found "liable" by the court ,i.e., that the court issued a decision that he was liable on the complaint that was brought. Correct me if I'm wrong. However, just so you know, I find it profoundly disheeartening that Trump was ever elected, and the whole Trump thing - yuk.
DeletePart of settling is pleading guilty.
Deleteanon 6:18, when one settles a civil case, one is not "convicted>" Did you know that most civil cases, contract cases or tort cases, get settled? One side agrees to pay something to the other side, and usually the other side agrees to take less than he, she, it demanded. The settlements usually are private, the parties sign a settlement agreement, but the agreement isn't filed in the court - the case just gets dismissed.
DeletePart of the settlement involved Trump admitting wrongdoing in misusing his charity.
Delete
ReplyDelete“He's being pursued now because these legal actions are politically motivated. They're political attacks from within the Deep State, designed to keep Trump from reaching the White House again.”
As far as the civil cases are concerned, Trump will not go to jail. That is a criminal penalty. How exactly would civil penalties prevent Trump from reaching the White House?
mh, apparently, even if he's found guilty on any of the criminal charges against him, he could still reach the Whitehouse. I think the argument is that the cases will result in people not voting for him in sufficient numbers for him to be elected. Isn't that what you hope for? (I hope he doesn't get elected fyi)
DeleteHe has already been convicted of fraud. The trial is now about sentencing him.
DeleteTrump is solely responsible for his charges, he committed those criminals acts.
DeleteFacing personal responsibility is a supposed value of Republicans, yet they want to reframe the narrative to falsely accuse Dems of political persecution.
In reality the argument from the Dems is that Trump has engaged in corruption and illegality, and should face the same consequences as anyone else would, ie Trump is not above the law.
Broadly speaking Dems encourage democracy, encourage easy access to voting to those so qualified; Repubs seek to limit democracy, engaging in voter suppression. This is in part due to Dems outnumbering Repubs nationally by a significant portion, which is why the strategy for Dems is not to suppress votes or attempt persuasion of Republicans, but to motivate their own voters by endorsing policies of social progress.
The quote isn't referring to "civil penalties".
Delete7:39:
DeleteIt’s Somerby’s answer to this question that he formulated:
“If Trump has been a fraudster for all these years, why is he only being pursued for his fraudulent conduct now? Where was our "rule of law" back then?”
Which was prompted by Barnicle saying “What's happening Monday in New York raises this question: Why didn't it begin sooner? “
anon 6:17, it's a civil case. One gets "convicted" only if he or she or them is found guilty in a criminal case.
DeleteNitpicking aside, it’s clear that Trump engaged in serious criminality, and those crimes are routinely prosecuted; there’s no basis to credibly claim Trump’s legal troubles are politically motivated.
Delete"those crimes are routinely prosecuted" how many of those prosecuted had all their business licenses taken away and all their property dissolved?
DeleteALL of Trump's properties were not taken away. Two were. The remainder of the trial is to determine what additional penalties may be imposed.
DeleteOne wonders how those Fox News viewers who know the deep state is trying to prevent Trump’s re-election deal with the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
DeleteUh, gee, I don’t know, maybe because they think the deep state is only out to get Trump.
DeleteYou don't understand, I guess, the machinations that led up to the appointment of the special council and who was appointed special council. Once you take those into account you may find that the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden reinforces their beliefs about a 2 tiered justice system.
DeleteAnd of course, as always, if "one" is wondering how Fox New people are dealing with it, "one" could always, take one to lunch and ask them.
Somerby has it backwards.
ReplyDeleteTrump’s numerous indictments and charges, etc, are not a result of political persecution, though his defenders make valiant efforts at pushing that false narrative in the hopes of saving their hero.
It’s obvious Trump is running to gain political power as a means to avoid personal responsibility for his crimes.
Duh.