Was Man­hat­tan DA Bribed to Drop Crim­i­nal Case Against Trump Kids in 2012?

The Jewish Voice - - NEW YORK - By Re­becca Gold

Anew report has been re­leased that sug­gests money was the mo­ti­vat­ing fac­tor be­hind Man­hat­tan District At­tor­ney Cyrus Vance Jr. sud­denly drop­ping the crim­i­nal case against Don­ald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump in Au­gust 2012.

Ac­cord­ing to a joint report by ProPublica, the New Yorker and WNYC, the DA's of­fice was far into a crim­i­nal in­ves­ti­ga­tion of Trump Soho de­vel­op­ment, and had solid email ev­i­dence sup­port­ing that the Trump chil­dren lied to condo buy­ers to make their sales suc­cess seem greater than it was at the de­vel­op­ment. De­spite all the work put into the probe and sup­posed solid proof of de­ceit, DA Vance dropped the case on Au­gust 3, 2012, which was four months af­ter Trump's per­sonal at­tor­ney Marc Ka­sowitz had a pri­vate meet­ing with him.

Then in Septem­ber 2012, one month af­ter this de­ci­sion, Vance's cam­paign was con­tacts by Ka­sowitz re­gard­ing host­ing a re-elec­tion fundraiser in Jan­uary that would bring in $32,000. In Oc­to­ber 2013, an ad­di­tional $9,000 was raised at an­other fundraiser. In early 2012, Ka­sowitz had also do­nated $25,000 to the DA, but that some was re­turned be­fore their meet­ing.

Re­porters were told by Vance, “We did the right thing. An­other five and a half months go by. Marc Ka­sowitz has no mat­ter pend­ing be­fore the of­fice for the Trumps or any­body else. It's 2013 and it's an elec­tion—and I wel­come his sup­port.” De­spite all of that, Vance still said that he would re­turn the do­na­tions. He said, “I don't want the money to be a mill­stone around any­body's neck, in­clud­ing the of­fice's.”

The Trump Soho case goes back to 2008. Amid a tank­ing real es­tate mar­ket, the newly built Trump Soho at 246 Spring Street was strug­gling to find buy­ers for its ho­tel-condo units. Don­ald Jr. and Ivanka re­peat­edly claimed that more than 50 per­cent of units had been sold even though that fig­ure was widely in­flated.

Ac­cord­ing to The Real Deal re­cent and pre­vi­ous re­ports, “in­flat­ing sales num­bers can give buy­ers a false sense of what a unit is re­ally worth. It also vi­o­lates the Mar­tin Act, which reg­u­lates the sale of con­dos like se­cu­ri­ties. Trump's lawyers had long told pros­e­cu­tors that Don­ald Jr. and Ivanka's state-

“We did the right thing. An­other five and a half months go by. Marc Ka­sowitz has no mat­ter pend­ing be­fore the of­fice for the Trumps or any­body else.”

ments might have been ex­ag­ger­a­tions but did not rise to the level of crim­i­nal­ity. They also framed the sales dis­putes as sim­ple ‘buy­ers re­morse.' In Au­gust 2010, some buy­ers sued the Trump Or­ga­ni­za­tion, even­tu­ally win­ning a set­tle­ment. Un­der the terms of the deal, they agreed to state that no law was bro­ken and that they would only co­op­er­ate with a crim­i­nal in­ves­ti­ga­tion if sub­poe­naed. Still, the report claims pros­e­cu­tors were bullish on the case, largely be­cause they had email ev­i­dence clearly show­ing that Don­ald Jr. and oth­ers in the com­pany were aware they had lied to buy­ers.”

From left to right: Don­ald Trump, and his two el­dest chil­dren, Don­ald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.