Casual Observation

7 Comments

1. 

   TarheelDem on July 9, 2017 at 10:36 am

   It does put a vague article by the New York Times in its proper context.

   Your post needs this connection:

   One of Ms. Veselnitskaya’s clients is Denis Katsyv, the Russian owner of a Cyprus-based investment company called Prevezon Holdings. He is the son of Petr Katsyv, the vice president of the state-owned Russian Railways and a former deputy governor of the Moscow region. In a civil forfeiture case prosecuted by Mr. Bharara’s office, the Justice Department alleged that Prevezon had helped launder money tied to a $230 million corruption scheme exposed by Mr. Magnitsky by parking it in New York real estate and bank accounts. As a result, the government froze $14 million of its assets. Prevezon recently settled the case for $6 million without admitting wrongdoing.

   Because it shows how corrupt that US corporate law has become when a corporation that got the equivalent of $230 million through fraud can get clean of US law by putting up $6 million and admitting no wrongdoing.

   Therefore, any connection of Trump with the lawyer who bailed them out seems to point to a connection with an effective corporate lawyer.  Guilt by association of lawyers with clients, even when justified, sets up situations in which that guilt by association is not justified and is merely and attempt to steamroll a prosecution.  There really is no proven second-hop connection in the article and the indictment.  For politically, not to mention legally, exposing Trump’s corruption, that is a huge problem.  And that problem is what makes white-collar crime so lucrative and unpunished.  Good shady lawyers and attorney-client privilege.  A catch-22 of American justice.  Would you really want it to disappear under all circumstances?

   Seizure of property through a case like the one here seems to be what is pointed to by the vague news term “economic sanctions”.  So when Trump is said to be interested in lifting economics sanctions on Russia, part of that is Russian government assets; another part of it is outstanding cases like this one.  But they got to keep their property for a measly payment of $6 million to the US Government.

   And Preet Bharara, who generally has not been aggressive in prosecuting white-collar crime successfully got canned for his efforts.

   There is more to this story than just the connections between Trump and Russian shysters, although that (and like not just with Trump in the New York real estate world) is not insignificant.  Because US mortgage holders were defrauded by major banks in a similar illegal scheme and the Southern District of New York failed to impose more than a “cost of doing business” punishment on them.

   Trump’s corruption is not unique either in New York or America.  You are correct that his purpose seems to be to make it legally much easier than it already is.  And to extend that protection globally to others in the same racket.  I suspect that it doesn’t stop with Russia.  Rackets and oligarchs in other nations will benefit from Trump’s policies.  It would be good to not have tunnel-vision on Russia but examine all of Trump’s international friends.  And Sheldon Adelson’s too, for that money now gets shunted directly into GOP politics.  

   Some rich folks fund foundations.  Some endow universities.  Corrupting politics is Trump’s and Adelson’s end-of-life legacy for their billions.

   • 

     centerfielddj on July 9, 2017 at 2:11 pm

     Preet Bharara was aggressive enough in prosecuting white-collar crime that he successfully got canned for his efforts, per your own admission.

     You’re simultaneously smearing him with the broad claim that he was not aggressive in prosecuting these crimes.

     It’s bizarre that you are lowering your rhetorical standards in ways like this.

     • 

       ishmael2 on July 9, 2017 at 2:43 pm

       He equated Mark Penn and Robby Mook the other day so this kind of smearing is nothing new.

       • 

         centerfielddj on July 9, 2017 at 2:55 pm

         Yeah, I saw that.

         One could say that since me and AG are members of the BooMan community, the same broad claims could be laid against us. But it’s even worse than that.

         Mark Penn has not been a campaign consultant for prominent Democratic Party candidate campaigns for many, many years. Yet the Party is eternally linked to him by some, even when the Party and its candidates have retreated from him.

       • 

         TarheelDem on July 9, 2017 at 7:07 pm

         Mook lost the most well-funded and expensive campaign in history, expensive enough that it sucked resources out of other races so as to create a state race disasters.

     • 

       TarheelDem on July 9, 2017 at 6:51 pm

       He likely got canned for this specific case.

       • 

         TarheelDem on July 9, 2017 at 7:08 pm

         I believe that’s called obstruction of justice.