Thinking about the Schneiderman-Trump situation

I've always wondered why Trump wasn't busted for money laundering in New York in all the years he was dealing in real estate adventures with mobsters.  Maybe this is a clue...

A New York attorney is asking a judge to seal records pertaining to any discussions he had with Trump attorney Michael Cohen about two women claiming that former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman had been "sexually inappropriate" with them.

  CBS

This comes about from the FBI raid on Cohen.

Peter Gleason told U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood in a letter that he had been contacted by the two women a year apart with claims that were "almost identical." Gleason said that he advised the first alleged victim that "invariably the very entities that were established to protect her would ultimately turn on her to protect the power elite that includes Scheinderman [SIC]."

After the second woman approached him in 2013 with her story, Gleason said that he wanted to make sure that their stories weren't "brushed under the rug," so he spoke with Stephen Dunleavy, a former New York Post columnist and reporter on "A Current Affair." Dunleavy proposed raising the matter with Donald Trump.

Why??? In 2013, why?  (I think I'd take any article by Dunleavy with a bushel of salt, knowing this.)

Gleason assumed he had done so, given that he then received a call from Cohen, to whom he divulged "certain details of Scheinderman's [SIC] vile attacks on these two women."

In an interview with the New York Times, Gleason said that Cohen had told him that if Mr. Trump were to be elected New York governor, he would reveal the abuse accusations against Schneiderman.

Why not print the story? Or take it to the actual governor? Why take it to Trump and wait for him to possibly become governor? Let's take a minute to think about this.  And while we're at it, let's remember that it has just been revealed that Trump had people connected with the Iran deal personally and secretly investigated to try to gain dirt he could use to smear them.  Could Cohen have been the organizer and paymaster for all these unethical (at best) activities?  Does Mueller have all the confirming documentation?

Mr. Trump has not yet said said whether he was apprised by Cohen of the abuse accusations, but he did tweet this about Schneiderman in 2013: "Weiner is gone, Spitzer is gone - next will be lightweight A.G. Eric Schneiderman. Is he a crook? Wait and see, worse than Spitzer or Weiner."

So I think we can safely assume that Cohen told him. And he held the information to use as blackmail. Do you have another explanation for that tweet?

There's been no love lost between Mr. Trump and Schneiderman over the past several years, since Schneiderman filed a $40 million lawsuit against Trump University in August 2013.

So, now what will Trump do for leverage against money laundering investigations in New York?  Who replaces Schneiderman?

A wide pool of potential contenders quickly emerged following Schneiderman’s surprise resignation Monday night amid abuse allegations, ranging from three members of the state’s congressional delegation to the temporary holder of the post. Schneiderman had played a key role among Democratic state attorneys general in challenging the Trump administration, and the question of who succeeds him will have implications for future mayoral races in the City — and possibly even this year’s gubernatorial primary.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo has appointed an interim successor, Barbara Underwood.

  Politico

I assume Trump has no blackmail material on her.

While not endorsing her outright, Cuomo signaled Thursday afternoon that it might make sense to leave Underwood in the post until the new term begins.

[...]

New York City Public Advocate Tish James, who had appeared to quickly gain momentum early this week, took herself out of contention on Friday afternoon. “After thoughtful and careful deliberation, I have decided not to participate in the ongoing legislative process regarding the Attorney General's office,“ she said in a tweet. “More to come next week...“

Hmmmmmmm.

Naming James as AG could have removed her name from the shortlist of mayoral candidates in 2021 and clear the way for Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr. and Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, both of whom are interested in the post.

[...]

Three members of the congressional delegation have been floated as potential attorney general candidates when the state holds its election later this year: Democratic Reps. Kathleen Rice, Sean Patrick Maloney and Hakeem Jeffries.

[...]

Under New York state law, the next attorney general will be picked by the combined houses of the state Legislature — 150 members of the Assembly and 63 in the state Senate. Democrats have a comfortable majority in that combined body.

Could Trump finally face justice in New York?

UPDATE:

Avenatti has filed a paper asking for Gleason's request to be denied.

The question of pardons

The question on everybody's mind from way back is whether Trump will pardon any or all of his criminal cronies.  I read early on that if he did, they would be ineligible to take the Fifth in a trial.  Apparently, and sadly, that's not necessarily so.  It seems that if there's a possibility of their crimes also being state offenses, they can still use the excuse to not incriminate themselves.

These defendants, if pardoned by the president, do not lose their Fifth Amendment privileges, precisely because presidential pardons affect only federal criminal liability but not state prosecution. Based on what we know now, all of these defendants could face state prosecution for many of the same alleged acts. Individuals pardoned by Trump may thus still claim they cannot be forced to say anything to incriminate themselves and that they remain exposed to criminal prosecutions at the state level.

Some legal experts have doubted that states have jurisdiction over crimes committed in a federal presidential campaign, but they miss the bigger and longer-term picture of the Russia investigation, and they overlook the details of how that collusion likely happened.

  Slate

I don't like to hear that and I hope this analysis is not good, or if it is, that Mueller is taking all that into account. And if it is, why is Flynn cooperating with Mueller? Unless he was already aware he wasn't going to get a pardon.

Or, if Mueller allows state trials to go first?  It's all very complex.  I probably don't understand the half of it.

If Trump fires Mueller and his team, state attorneys general and state prosecutors can hire them. If Trump succeeds in pardoning the defendants or himself, state prosecutors can step in without violating the rule against double jeopardy because of the legal concept of “dual sovereignty”: States and the federal government have overlapping but separate sovereignty.

[...]

Some states (including New York) have a special statute that can occasionally prevent a state from bringing its own prosecution after a federal prosecution has advanced to trial. In New York, a state statute prohibits separate prosecutions for “two offenses based on the same act or criminal transaction” in many cases, and the statute appears to apply to separate state and federal prosecutions, even though there are several exceptions.

[...]

In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court held that jeopardy attaches once a jury is sworn in (or for a bench trial, when the judge swears in the first witness).

[...]

These state statutes raise the possibility that Trump might, intentionally or unintentionally, issue pardons only after federal prosecutions have advanced to a certain stage. It is not hard to imagine his doing so with the defendants in those cases well aware in advance that he plans to pardon them (so they need not plea bargain or cooperate). Such scenarios can be eliminated if Mueller coordinates with Schneiderman, and if New York prosecutors go first.

And he is coordinating with [New York AG Eric] Schneiderman at least in Manafort's case. And that's the case where Trump's money laundering may come in.  Manafort has not made a plea bargain nor is there any indication he's cooperating with Mueller.  And I wouldn't be surprised if Trump has already indicated his intention to pardon him.  Because I still think this is where Trump's real trouble lies: money laundering.  I guess we'll see.

What are the strongest kinds of cases that state prosecutors could bring against Trump’s circle?

1. Tax fraud.

Shades of Elliott Ness and Al Capone. In fact, every time I look at pictures of Robert Mueller, I think of Elliott Ness. Not because he looks so much like Ness, but because he kind of looks like Robert Stack, who portrayed Ness on TV, and I keep thinking he's going to nail Trump on money laundering.  Tax fraud is a good possibility, too.

Ness

d

Stack

Mueller

But I digress.

1. Tax fraud. Considering how many Trump campaign figures may have hidden foreign income, tax fraud cases may be relatively strong and straightforward. The key point here is that if they violate federal tax laws by not reporting income, then they have most likely violated state tax laws as well.

[...]

2. Money laundering. Trump entities have been fined repeatedly for failing to abide rules to prevent money laundering and for their involvement in money laundering.There are serious concerns that the Trump Organization may have used real estate deals with Russian oligarchs to launder their assets, and the Trump Justice Department’s recent low-ball settlement in a case of Russian money laundering raises additional questions. Deutsche Bank, the only Western bank that continued to loan Trump money, is infamous for its own money laundering links to Russia and former Soviet states.

[...]

3. Conspiracy in computer hacking (and stolen property). Did any members or affiliates of the Trump campaign solicit or conspire with Russians to hack the Democratic National Committee’s computers and John Podesta’s emails?

In June 2016 in Trump Tower, Donald Trump Jr., Manafort, and Jared Kushner met with Russians, who allegedly brought opposition research material that may have been acquired through illegal hacking. One of these Russians has already testified before a grand jury.

There’s also a wild card: States criminalize the solicitation, possession, receipt, and aiding in the concealment of stolen property, so there may be a basis for treating the theft of valuable personal information and company documents as a kind of stolen property.

4. Conspiracy to violate privacy. There is already a strong civil lawsuit against the Trump campaign for allegedly conspiring in the violation of privacy rights through the Russian computer hacking and dissemination of emails. There’s also an immediate question of criminal liability.

That one seems kind of far out to me. At least it seems like it's not something anyone would actually file a case on. But I don't know, and at least they could put it on the list of possible charges to urge some of these criminals to make deals.

5. Loan fraud and mortgage fraud. New York criminalizes loan fraud and mortgage fraud. Jared Kushner’s disastrous purchase of 666 Fifth Ave. for $1.6 billion in 2008 and his desperate effort to refinance it has generated many questions. One of them: How did Kushner manage to secure a $1.6 billion deal with only $50 million down?

[...]

6. Quo warranto powers. [...] Delaware and New York can investigate the Trump Organization for emoluments, as the Trump Organization is incorporated in those states. Other states like California have the power to investigate other entities like Trump hotels. [...] This power does not itself involve criminal enforcement, but it does empower the states to investigate any fraud, which may turn into criminal prosecutions.

7. Witness tampering and obstruction of justice.  Perhaps a state prosecution for firing James Comey is a stretch, but there may be other acts—like the destruction of evidence, witness tampering, or lying to investigators—that would be closer to obstruction in New York or in other states.

[...]

[I]f Trump is contemplating pardons to thwart justice, prosecutors in many states will have public opinion on their side, and many would find that the traditions of federalism and the rule of law more compelling than a tradition of deference to federal prosecutors.

Yeah, I don't know. I hope.

In these cases, if there is a question about Trump using federal pardons to impede the investigation, Mueller and Schneiderman (and perhaps other state prosecutors) have good reason to make exceptions here, and have justification for a very unusual step: a state prosecutor bringing the first charges involving the investigation of a U.S. president and his campaign.

So, we could see Manafort going up any time then.

Is all this complicated enough for you? Me, too. I just keep thinking that this is a huge racket that we're just beginning to see the tip of, and all these motherfuckers are going down.  Like Fox Mulder, I want to believe.

In the meantime, in the New York AG office...

Back before Trump was a politician, [Eric] Schneiderman, the attorney general of New York, sued Trump University for fraud in 2014 [ultimately winning] a $25 million settlement.

[...]

Schneiderman is still at it—investigating aspects of the president's dealings that fall outside the purview of the much-ballyhooed Mueller probe and the various Congressional investigations of Russian election-meddling. Schneiderman is quietly examining things like the president’s personal foundation (and that of Eric Trump), as well as Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.

[...]

[ES] ...as people are now witnessing, states are [...] the first line of defense when the federal government mounts attacks on our civil liberties, healthcare, or economic prosperity. I think state A.G.s on the left and right always appreciated that fact, but now we’re seeing more journalists and members of the public recognize that reality too.

[...]

We have a number of critical fights ahead. We pledged to sue over the first and second healthcare bills that sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act, slash Medicaid, and undermine women’s rights. We’ll continue to monitor the threat of a disastrous healthcare bill.

[...]

Our fight to protect Dreamers is a very important case right now.

[...]

We’re also very active on the environmental front, where we’ve seen the Trump administration mount attacks on public health on a weekly basis. Whether its undermining state-led efforts to move to renewable energy sources or rolling back regulations on toxic pesticides or methane, this administration consistently chooses polluters’ interests over the public’s. We’ve put a team of very talented attorneys in place to scrutinize each and every one of these dangerous policies—and policy reversals—coming out of the E.P.A.

[...]

[W]e just earned the support of a bipartisan group of A.G.s to push back on members of the student loan industry who are trying to take enforcement powers away from attorneys general. We’ve worked hard across party lines to hold that industry accountable, protect students, and return money to people who’ve been defrauded. We’re also working with a very large, bipartisan coalition to investigate the manufacturers and distributors of opioids to examine their role in the opioid epidemic across the country.

[...]

This is a president who doesn’t like checks on his power. I got a front row seat to that when I investigated him for fraud in the Trump University case. Now we see it in his executive orders, several of which we’ve fought successfully to overturn.

[...]

If we can’t get checks on the presidency from Congress, my office won’t hesitate to fill the space. I’m willing to bet on the rule of law.

  GQ

Good luck, sir.

Speaking of Schneiderman

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team is working with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman on its investigation into Paul Manafort and his financial transactions, according to several people familiar with the matter.

[...]

Schneiderman has a contentious history with Trump. The president has mocked him relentlessly on social media and TV, denouncing him as a “hack” and “lightweight.”

The attorney general won a $25 million settlement last November after a lengthy investigation into fraudulent practices at Trump University. The president said he settled just to have the matter behind him, though his previous mantra was to never settle cases.

The New York prosecutor’s office also is looking into some of Trump’s business transactions and could potentially share those records with Mueller’s team.

  Politico

Oh, I'm sure they will. And I bet it'll feel real good.  Lightweight.

Pardons Are Not on the Table for the Real Crimes

The presidential pardon only applies to federal crimes. As NBC reported last night, it is possible for state governments to press charges in some of the alleged crimes committed by Trump’s cronies. “You would have to find that one of those [election] crimes occurred in New York,” Jennifer Rodgers, a former federal prosecutor, told NBC. Of course, some of the alleged crimes almost certainly did take place in New York. And sure enough, Josh Dawsey reports, Mueller is teaming up with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. “One of the people familiar with progress on the case said both Mueller’s and Schneiderman’s teams have collected evidence on financial crimes, including potential money laundering,” he notes.

Trump can pardon anybody facing charges from Mueller, but not from Schneiderman. It is probably significant that Mueller is letting this fact be known to Trump’s inner circle. Trump’s biggest source of leverage over Mueller just disappeared.

  NY Magazine

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.