If Weisselberg and his son were being paid off books ... what are the chances that Trump and his sons (and Ivanqa) were being paid off books?
Come to think of it, don't ALL the executives of Trump Org live in housing owned by Trump Org? It seems like that might be a tangible, taxable perquisite. businessinsider.com/donald-trump-p…
Just as I thought (now that I'm thinking about it) - housing is a taxable fringe benefit unless fairly strict exceptions apply. corporatehousing.com/blog/corporate…
OK, this indictment is SUPER FUN. They had a whole scheme to avoid federal, state and local taxes of which Weisselberg was "one of the" biggest beneficiaries. Reading now: documentcloud.org/documents/2098… h/t @clearing_fog
So typical of tax evaders - they won't even pay their own cable bill.
So typical of Trump - engage in a criminal scheme and it's not even a bonus to the employee - it's a deduction from his compensation, tracked on internal spreadsheets.
Dmbfx was engaged in a criminal scheme to avoid paying tax on $100,000 per year ... so the direct benefit to him was on $35,000 per year. I haven't seen what his full pay was, but I am sure it was over $1,000,000. So he's going down for pennies on the dollar.
For all those asking how Trump gets people to commit crimes for him, and then take the rap for him ... Weisselberg was engaged in a criminal conspiracy. I've said it before - Trump chooses to surround himself with criminals he can control.
Indictment moves on to payment for tuition for Weisselberg's grandkids. WHO PAID BARON'S TUITION?
One thing is clear, the NYAG has spreadsheets that Trump Org used to track internal, untaxed compensation for Weisselberg and his son. Betcha money that Ivanqa is on there.
"two other" Trump Org employees knowingly received off books housing and cars and also failed to pay NY City tax.
NYAG tags Wollman Rink, Mar a Lago, and other entities as engaging in a scheme to disguise regular income as (tax withheld) non-employee compensation (for which tax is not withheld).
Weisselberg's annual compensation was $940,000. That's pretty low for a CFO of a major developer based in NY. What a fool.
And there's at least one unindicted co-conspirator.
All accounts that I have ever heard of the Trump Org confirm that he tracked every dime that went in or out. Hopefully there is proof that he knew about this system and signed off it. Here's to that. Dirk out.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Dirk Schwenk (Esq) 🎵

Dirk Schwenk (Esq) 🎵 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DirkSchwenk

9 Jun
Here is my response to everyone's ridiculous takes about how the DoJ shouldn't defend the office of the POTUS from sex assault allegations. The evils are ALREADY teeing up sex assault allegations against Biden. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden…
And it's not even sex assault allegations that are being defended. It's the denial - the words - which every politician has to be entitled to do if someone makes an allegation against them.
Read 14 tweets
8 Jun
@BarbMcQuade is a formidable legal mind and this article is quite good. Nevertheless, here is DIRK'S HOT TAKE EXPLAINING WHY THE TWITTER MOB AND BARB ARE WRONG ON THIS POINT.
(I nevertheless take a moment to note I too am frustrated with the glacial pace of justice regarding the obvious trumpist crime wave of the past couple of years)
Key Point One: Ms. Carrol's suit is not about the attack she endured at Trump's hands back in the day. It alleges that Trump lied about the attack when she came forward about it in 2019. THE DOJ IS NOT DEFENDING A RAPE CASE.
Read 9 tweets
28 May
What Durham is doing is one of the great mysteries of the Barr era. I still think there's an above-zero chance he finds the opposite of Trumpists want, but I am less confident now that we know RR and O'Callaghan were turned. $1.5M is not a lot of money, really.
If you wanna don the Rose Coloreds ... we now know that Rosenstein and O'Callaghan ventured right up to the edge (and maybe beyond) of obstruction as Barr came aboard as AG. Durham is authorized to prosecute any crimes related to the Mueller investigation. Image
And we know that O'Callaghan was in the NATSEC division up until RR elevated him to supervise the Russia investigation. Durham is empowered to investigate "intelligence, counter-intelligence or law enforcement activities." justice.gov/file/1370931/d…
Read 7 tweets
25 May
Judge Jackson is about to lower the boom on the Rosenstein and O'Callaghan conspiracy to keep Trump from being prosecuted.
They spoon fed Barr their own choice: to ignore all DOJ policy and make an affirmative decision NOT to prosecute Trump.
These clips are from today's reporting in the Washington Post which you should read. washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
Read 14 tweets
25 May
Please take a moment before ripping the DOJ. This is not a wholesale appeal - it is tailored, see below.
As attorneys, we are trained from the beginning that attorney-client privilege is our most sacred trust. We should go to jail to protect it, we should NEVER violate that trust voluntarily.
The Court's decision was that there were portions of the memo that were after-the-fact cover for a decision already made, and that some was mere political advice -- those parts will be released.
Read 6 tweets
17 May
Roe v Wade is DOA. Some brief thoughts, some of which you won't like, so count to 10 before flaming me, please.
It's tempting, but a terrible mistake, to say "men should sit down and shut up" on this issue. At least 40% of US women are "pro-life" news.gallup.com/poll/244709/pr…
Combatting the pro-life movement therefore requires a coalition of liberal men and women. Telling a significant part of a coalition that their opinions don't matter is a mistake.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!