Trump funneling money thru a law firm in small increments to avoid detection would be legally catastrophic, according to a financial expert I just spoke to.
“If, according to Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Trump through his law firm structured payments to avoid reporting of disbursements $10,000 or greater, it would be against federal law, specifically the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA).”
“Financial institutions have a legal obligation to report such disbursements and have programs in place to identify such attempts to avoid the reporting."
The $10k figure is key. Payments above $10k are required to be reported to FinCEN by the banks. If it turns out that the Stormy payments were <$10k, it would show a deliberate attempt to subvert banking laws.
Oh boy, since the payment is over $100k they could be in huge trouble. FinCEN says structuring payments to avoid reporting requirements on payments above $100k, “can result in imprisonment for not more than” 10 years with a possible $500k fine. fincen.gov/sites/default/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hostile takeover + selective leaking + emotionally charged rhetoric with little substance. It’s the same, boring playbook. #twitterfiles
Musk and the people with whom he’s surrounded himself are copy-pasting the faux rage machine (see: WikiLeaks, the laptop, masks, etc etc etc etc)
This isn’t an adult discussion about the limitations of online speech. It’s just clickbait for the dying platform.
Make conservatives think it’s an existential crisis to the world, make liberals rage quote tweet = Engagement. It’s such an easy formula for bad actors. It’s tired.
I know people are tired of "collusion" talk, but it doesn't mean that this isn't a huge five-alarm fire still.
Trump received millions (I've heard 8 figures) from Saudi to host the LIV Golf nonsense and now a big real estate deal. He's running for President tomorrow.
All the while, Trump had top secret code word documents in his office at his house.
Operative questions I've yet to see asked of either the Trump or Saudi sides: When and where did the LIV Golf negotiations take place?
Democrats lead in 214 House races. They have to take the lead and win 4 of these for the majority.
CA13, AZ6 look plausible. Maybe CA41? Maybe OR5?
CA22 isn't out of the question either. I think the Democrats best chance is to sweep CA13, CA41, and CA22 and pick up maybe the AZ6 seat or a Boebert recount?
The House is going to be at MOST a 7-seat lead for the GOP. If *everything* goes right for the Democrats, they could hold the House with 219 seats.
Imagine a 218-217 House... It's going to be a long 2 years.