By Curt_Anderson November 1, 2023 10:14 pm Category: Law (0.0 from 0 votes) Rules of the Post Write A New Article How To Post Here Rate this article (5=best, 0=poor)

Junior is the first of the Trump offspring to testify. He blamed Allen Weisselberg and other number crunchers for the fraudulently inflated valuations of Trump properties. I suspect that when the rest of the Trump family testifies it will be obvious that they are all ignoramuses who know next to nothing about their own family business.

Donald Trump Jr. testified Wednesday that he never worked on his father's financial statements, the documents at the heart of the civil fraud trial that threatens former President Donald Trump’s real estate empire.

The ex-president's eldest son is an executive vice president of the family's Trump Organization and has been a trustee of a trust set up to hold its assets when his father was in the White House. But when the son was asked whether he had ever worked on his father's “statement of financial condition” in any year, the scion said: “Not that I recall.”

Donald Trump Jr. testified about his scant knowledge of the accounting standards known as Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. He said he’d learned about them "probably in Accounting 101 at Wharton" but didn’t remember much other than that they were "generally accepted."

Cited and related links:

1. kxlh.com
2. fortune.com

Comments Start Below

by Curt_Anderson on November 2, 2023 10:36 am It is Eric's turn on the stand. Eric Trump reiterates that he was not aware of and did not work on the annual financial statements and again points a finger at others. As expected (by me at least) the Trump family members are blaming underlings for their financial fraud. I predict that the prosecutor's final question to the last family member to take the stand, Donald Trump, will be if CFO Allen Weisselberg was the person ultimately responsible for all the errors in their financial reports, why is Weisselberg still on the Trump Org. payroll? by HatetheSwamp on November 2, 2023 11:09 am Has it been established beyond a preponderance of the evidence that that's the case? Otherwise, the judge should have to uphold an objection. Ain't? by Curt_Anderson on November 2, 2023 11:36 am That what is the case? That Weisselberg still works for Trump? As far as I can tell by what's been reported. Uphold what objection? by HatetheSwamp on November 2, 2023 12:22 pm An objection that the claim is not established in evidence. Isn't that what the plaintiff is alleging?...attempting to establish in evidence? by Curt_Anderson on November 2, 2023 12:33 pm I still don't know what claim you are referring to. Are you referring to this? "...Trump submitted "fraudulent valuations" for assets that were then used by himself, his eldest sons and his business to obtain better loan and insurance terms, a judge in New York decided..." That claim has already been decided. abcnews.go.com by HatetheSwamp on November 2, 2023 1:23 pm What I understand is that that ruling is one issue that will be central to a Trump appeal. Understand, I'm not po...a legal scholar...so I may be misunderstanding but I believe that Trump's team is already arguing the case to win on appeal. I think that they will be challenging the partial summary judgment, which is merely a judge's decree that, in a civil case, the defendant is liable. Understanding that I am a layman, I think that Trump’s gang won't ask your question because it still rejects the argument that errors were made...by anyone. by Curt_Anderson on November 2, 2023 1:35 pm "Understanding that I am a layman, I think that Trump’s gang won't ask your question because it still rejects the argument that errors were made...by anyone." ---HtS Do you mean answer the question I suggested they ask? If the prosecutor asks why Weisselberg is still on the payroll despite approving and submitting fraudulent financial forms, Trump will have have to answer in some manner. Even if Trump pleads the Fifth, the judge can draw an adverse inference from that response. by HatetheSwamp on November 2, 2023 1:42 pm Fraudulent on what authority? by Curt_Anderson on November 2, 2023 1:55 pm Fraudulent by the authority of the judge who rendered the decision. I know you will say that the judge's decision will be appealed. Did you know that it cannot be appealed simply because defendant disagrees with the decision? It has to be appealed because of some legal mistake by the court. by HatetheSwamp on November 2, 2023 2:12 pm You're referring to the partial summary judgment? by Curt_Anderson on November 2, 2023 2:32 pm Yes. And the fact that Trumps are not disputing that the financial documents are wrong (aka fraudulent). They are blaming their accountants and other employees for the mistakes. by HatetheSwamp on November 2, 2023 2:39 pm If you say so. Go To Top

Find old posts & articles

Show Most Recent Articles Articles by category: Politics+ Religion+ Law & Crime Military News Media History Health Sports+ Humor Entertainment Misc.

Report spam & abuse SelectSmart.com home page