Now that Donald Trump is reportedly talking about refusing to leave the White House after Biden is inaugurated - not gonna lie, I’d cash in my RRSPs to watch that on pay-per-view - it’s worth revisiting Jane Mayer’s New Yorker article from November about the lawsuits and even criminal prosecutions awaiting Trump once he’s out of office:
Two of the investigations into Trump are being led by powerful state and city law-enforcement officials in New York. Cyrus Vance, Jr., the Manhattan District Attorney, and Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, are independently pursuing potential criminal charges related to Trump’s business practices before he became President. Because their jurisdictions lie outside the federal realm, any indictments or convictions resulting from their actions would be beyond the reach of a Presidential pardon. Trump’s legal expenses alone are likely to be daunting. (By the time Bill Clinton left the White House, he’d racked up more than ten million dollars in legal fees.) And Trump’s finances are already under growing strain. During the next four years, according to a stunning recent Times report, Trump—whether reëlected or not—must meet payment deadlines for more than three hundred million dollars in loans that he has personally guaranteed; much of this debt is owed to such foreign creditors as Deutsche Bank. Unless he can refinance with the lenders, he will be on the hook. The Financial Times, meanwhile, estimates that, in all, about nine hundred million dollars’ worth of Trump’s real-estate debt will come due within the next four years. At the same time, he is locked in a dispute with the Internal Revenue Service over a deduction that he has claimed on his income-tax forms; an adverse ruling could cost him an additional hundred million dollars. To pay off such debts, the President, whose net worth is estimated by Forbes to be two and a half billion dollars, could sell some of his most valuable real-estate assets—or, as he has in the past, find ways to stiff his creditors. But, according to an analysis by the Washington Post, Trump’s properties—especially his hotels and resorts—have been hit hard by the pandemic and the fallout from his divisive political career. “It’s the office of the Presidency that’s keeping him from prison and the poorhouse,” Timothy Snyder, a history professor at Yale who studies authoritarianism, told me. [emphasis added and, yes, that’s all one paragraph - DP]
[…]
It’s hard to imagine a former U.S. President behind bars or being forced to perform community service, as the former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi was, after being convicted of tax fraud. Yet some of the legal threats aimed at Trump are serious. The case that Vance’s office, in Manhattan, is pursuing appears to be particularly strong. According to court documents from the prosecution of Cohen, he didn’t act alone. Cohen’s case centered on his payment of hush money to the porn star Stormy Daniels, with whom the President allegedly had a sexual liaison. The government claimed that Cohen’s scheme was assisted by an unindicted co-conspirator whom federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York referred to as “Individual-1,” and who ran “an ultimately successful campaign for President of the United States.”
Clearly, this was a reference to Trump. But, because in recent decades the Justice Department has held that a sitting President can’t be prosecuted, the U.S. Attorney’s office wrapped up its case after Cohen’s conviction. Vance appears to have picked up where the U.S. Attorney left off.
The direction of Vance’s inquiry can be gleaned from Cohen’s sentencing memo: it disclosed that, during the 2016 Presidential campaign, Cohen set up a shell company that paid a hundred and thirty thousand dollars to Daniels. The Trump Organization disguised the hush-money payment as “legal expenses.” But the government argued that the money, which bought her silence, was an illegal campaign contribution: it helped Trump’s candidacy, by suppressing damaging facts, and far exceeded the federal donation limit of twenty-seven hundred dollars. Moreover, because the payment was falsely described as legal expenses, New York laws prohibiting the falsification of business records may have been violated. Such crimes are usually misdemeanors, but if they are committed in furtherance of other offenses, such as tax fraud, they can become felonies. Court documents stated that Cohen “acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1”—an allegation that Trump has vehemently denied.
It has become clear that the Manhattan D.A.’s investigation involves more than the Stormy Daniels case. Secrecy surrounds Vance’s grand-jury probe, but a well-informed source told me that it now includes a hard-hitting exploration of potentially illegal self-dealing in Trump’s financial practices. In an August court filing, the D.A.’s office argued that it should be allowed to subpoena Trump’s personal and corporate tax records, explaining that it is now investigating “possibly extensive and protracted criminal conduct at the Trump Organization.” The prosecutors didn’t specify what the grand jury was looking into, but they cited news stories detailing possible tax fraud, insurance fraud, and “schemes to defraud,” which is how New York penal law addresses bank fraud. …
Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen - now shilling a book which is probably terrible but which I’m nevertheless dying to read - might be pretty sleazy in his own right, but he did nail it with this prediction (about Trump, not the Supreme Court):
Cohen is so certain that Trump will lose that he recently placed a ten-thousand-dollar bet on it. “He’ll blame everyone except for himself,” Cohen said. “Every day, he’ll rant and rave and yell and scream about how they stole the Presidency from him. He’ll say he won by millions and millions of ballots, and they cheated with votes from dead people and people who weren’t born yet. He’ll tell all sorts of lies and activate his militias. It’s going to be a pathetic show. But, by stacking the Supreme Court, he’ll think he can get an injunction. Trump repeats his lies over and over with the belief that the more he tells them the more people will believe them. We all wish he’d just shut up, but the problem is he won’t.”
Mayer quotes some commentators, including historian Tim Snyder, who speculate that Trump might flee the country once he’s finally evicted. I’m not sure he’ll go that far, but a man can dream. Shannon Gormley of Maclean’s actually goes further and looks into several possible landing spots that don’t have extradition treaties with the United States:
The country must of course receive Trump in the style to which he has grown accustomed: golf courses are worth five points; very garish, very tall buildings another five. Other attractions would include being Russia-friendly (11 points), hosting Trump-owned pieces of real estate or businesses (five points), and offering a tax environment for billionaires who prefer to pay in the $750 range (five points). A country may earn a maximum of 41 points.
Slovenia: Melania Trump is from Slovenia; however, our methodology does not recognize a connection to Trump’s wife as indicative of a travel preference. This is not a flaw in our methodology. 0/41
[…]
Russia: There are few places in the world more Russia-friendly than Russia itself, and few world leaders more Russia-friendly than Trump. In the 1980s, it built golf courses near Moscow specifically to attract American investors; Trump is one of the American investors who obliged. Russia, in turn, appears to have invested in Trump. Granted, Moscow and St. Petersburg don’t have many of the 58-storey mirrors that are Trump’s preferred building type, but Putin would probably let him build one eventually that the American president could be safely locked up in, so half points for phallic architecture. Moscow has a long tradition of offering its Western assets involuntary sanctuary. As for taxes, Putin associates get a rebate. It’s almost perfect—but not quite. 38.5/41
U.A.E.: Another Muslim country excused from Trump’s Muslim ban; another country with no extradition treaty with the United States; another tax haven. But it is only the U.A.E. with which Trump recently signed a multi-billion-dollar weapons deal, just as he was losing a presidential election. The U.A.E. is also becoming a closer strategic partner of Russia in the Middle East, as both generally share a similar assessment of the region’s popular democratic movements: they don’t like them.
Regarding lifestyle, the U.A.E. is not known for flowing champagne, but Trump doesn’t drink anyway, for fear it would impair his very sound judgment. The U.A.E. has nice golf courses: it built them the way it built its islands—by stacking piles of cash on top of each other. Compared to New York, Dubai may have all the glitz with little of the glamour, but that is extremely on-brand for Trump. And Dubai not only has taller buildings than any country on this list, it has the tallest building in the world. For the first time in his life, Trump could boast about the size of something and be right. For Trump, the U.A.E. earns a perfect score.
Prediction: If the President of the United States becomes an international fugitive, he will seek sanctuary in Dubai, U.A.E. Of course, that assumes he responds to defeat by actually leaving office. Which would require that he follow the law. Which, you know…
Jeff Bezos is worth over $200 billion dollars, including a substantial increase in his wealth since the pandemic started, and…I honestly can’t get too worked up about it.
Wealth is not a fixed commodity, where one person having a dollar means one dollar less for everyone else. And it’s not like he has an Uncle Scrooge money bin filled with coins and gold bars. Most of Bezos’ wealth is in Amazon stock, the value of which would instantly crash to zero - taking down many small investors and pension funds - if it was somehow seized by the revolutionary government people on the streets of Portland insist is coming any day now.
I’m fine with raising billionaires’ taxes and adopting regulations that will make Amazon treat its employees better. (The vaunted Scandinavian model, often called “socialism” by supporters and detractors alike, actually involves using the market to generate tremendous wealth and then taxing the heck out of it to fund a generous welfare state.) But the mere fact that Bezos is so wealthy doesn’t offend me in the slightest.
That said, it’s very amusing to see his ex-wife making him look bad by giving away so much of the money she won in their divorce settlement:
Mackenzie Scott, the ex-wife of the world's richest man, Jeff Bezos, has made headlines after she announced donating $4.2 billion of her fortune to 384 organizations working to make a difference during the coronavirus pandemic.
This news came after Scott drew headlines in July for contributing some $1.7 billion to historically Black universities and colleges as well as women's rights, LGBTQ and climate change groups.
Meanwhile, Scott's ex-husband continues to draw the ire of activists and lawmakers because of his immense (and rapidly expanding) wealth, coupled with significant concerns over his company Amazon's treatment of workers, particularly amid the pandemic.
Bezos has previously been criticized for being notably less generous than other prominent billionaires. He has declined to sign the Giving Pledge, an initiative spearheaded by billionaires Warren Buffett and Bill Gates to encourage other wealthy individuals to commit to donating the bulk of their wealth to charitable causes by the end of their lives.
[…]
Organizations such as Goodwill, the United Way, the NAACP, the YMCA and the YWCA are among those who received contributions from Scott. The billionaire, whose net worth is estimated to be just north of $60 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaire Index, also contributed to food banks and programs like Meals on Wheels that are at the forefront of feeding hungry Americans—a severe problem that has been exacerbated for millions during the pandemic.
"This woman is extraordinary. Wish her former husband would follow her lead," NBC News anchor Maria Shriver tweeted on Tuesday evening, sharing the news of Scott's donations.
There are many forms of petty revenge you can deploy against your ex. But there’s something truly special about petty revenge that makes your ex look like a cheapskate while also helping people who need it. You could even say the feeling is priceless.
We’re not talking about Bezos levels of wealth here, but if you’re a Canadian who bought a Windows PC between 1998 and 2010, step right up to collect your free money:
One of the largest class-action settlements in Canada could be worth money in your pocket. And depending on the size of your claim, you may not need to provide proof of purchase. Unlike some other class-action lawsuits that require reams of paperwork, the application process is easy.
"We did our best to make it really simple," said Naomi Kovak, a Vancouver lawyer with Camp Fiorante Matthews Morgerman LLP, one of the firms administering the settlement stemming from a lawsuit alleging anti-competitive behaviour against Microsoft.
The settlement, which is capped at $517 million, amounts to an estimated $400 million for consumers after legal fees and expenses are deducted.
Since the application period opened on Nov. 23, Kovak said, more than 100,000 people in Canada have filed claims. Claims can be filed via a website, ThatSuiteMoney.ca.
The agreement allows consumers in Canada, without receipts, to claim up to $250 for their Microsoft PC software, such as Windows, Office, Word, Excel or MS-DOS, purchased between Dec. 23, 1998 and March 11, 2010.
[…]
The class-action lawsuit alleged that Microsoft and Microsoft Canada were involved in a conspiracy to illegally increase prices for the company's products. Microsoft agreed to the settlement but denies any wrongdoing and has not admitted liability.
Enter your claim here. Between this and the money that Nigerian prince promised to send me, it’s going to be a very Merry Christmas.
Whatever Trump does next, it’s going to be interesting. He’ll have to make choices that aren’t quite within his realm of experience: it must be new to him to not feel in control. Like the bully that he is, he reacts by blaming others. I’m expecting his choices in the next couple of months to be pitiful, and hoping no one gets hurt as a result of them.
Speaking of Bezos, I think it’s a matter of proportionality. Extremely rich employers should be able to provide their employees with basic security - food and shelter security, safety at work, a decent living wage, the means to stay healthy. It’s not too much to ask in return for the work on which his wealth depends, and would probably make people more productive, as well.
What people often seem to forget as they get into revenge games with their ex is that they are effectively continuing the relationship. As long as their ex gets under their skin, they’re still entangled. The first step in freeing one’s mind from an ex’s control is to stop being influenced by what they think. An arm’s-length perspective is helpful: how would I handle this if it were a random stranger? This frees us to think for ourselves and react appropriately when an ex tries to cross boundaries. What we do with our minds, bodies and lives is not our ex’s decision, but our own. Being mentally ready to defend that right changes everything.
And with the internet, even in mid-pandemic, we’re free to talk to the people who really interest us, which is both freeing and allows us to grow into who we really want to be. Thank God for that.