Much of the material in the indictment came from the Mueller investigation.noblepa wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:29 pm
As for this investigation being at the behest of the Biden administration (they haven't specifically said that, but I think it is implied), can such an investigation go from beginning to indictment in six months? If not, that means that the investigation was begun under the Trump administration. Six months seems like a rather short period of time for an investigation of this sort.
USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
Re: New York State Investigations of Trump and Related
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
So we know everything T**** does is transactional. I was surprised that yesterday no pundit raised the question "What was in it for Trump?". Since T**** was taking direction from Barrack as early as the campaign, one has to wonder what the quid pro quo here was. I'm guessing it was a series of quids and quos. We may just find out.
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
Oh, for completeness in this thread : Barrack bought Neverland Ranch!
I didn't know this until yesterday.
![I'm Thinking :think:](./images/smilies/think.gif)
Re: New York State Investigations of Trump and Related
Not at all like "filing the wrong form."noblepa wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:29 pmMaybenaut wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 3:02 pmI'm sure that there are cases when someone simply fails to file the proper form, or does it wrong, but is otherwise not engaging in a nefarious activity. I'm also sure that these cases don't rise to the level of prosecution.
I think that the poots are arguing that Barrack's alleged transgressions fall into that category and that he is being targeted simply because he has been a long-time vocal Trump supporter.
I don't for a minute believe that is true. He operated at a very high level and dealt with enormous sums of money, This is far more than a case of a misplaced comma on a form.
@BarbMcQuade
This distinction is important. FARA focuses on failure to register as an agent. Section 951, with which Barrack was charged, prohibits acting under the direction and control of a foreign government, a far more serious crime, which is used against foreign spies.
@DavidLaufmanLaw
For the record, Tom Barrack was not charged with violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act; he was charged under 18 U.S.C. section 951 for acting as "an agent of a foreign government" -- a law typically used for espionage-like cases like Maria Butina
- noblepa
- Posts: 2592
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
- Location: Bay Village, Ohio
- Occupation: Retired IT Nerd
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
According to Wikipedia, a former Jackson family friend, Ron Burkle purchased Neverland Ranch, now named Sycamore Valley Ranch, as a "Land bank investment". He paid $22M, a far cry from the Jackson estate's original asking price of $100M.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neverland_Ranch
No mention of Barrack, but maybe no one has updated the page.
Did a little more research. Barrack's Colony Capital bought the mortgage in 2008, when Jackson defaulted. Colony finally sold it to Burkle.
https://www.tmz.com/2021/07/20/donald-t ... -arrested/
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
Interesting thread at the link.
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
So, the indictee bought Neverland Ranch?noblepa wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 6:25 pmAccording to Wikipedia, a former Jackson family friend, Ron Burkle purchased Neverland Ranch, now named Sycamore Valley Ranch, as a "Land bank investment". He paid $22M, a far cry from the Jackson estate's original asking price of $100M.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neverland_Ranch
No mention of Barrack, but maybe no one has updated the page.
Did a little more research. Barrack's Colony Capital bought the mortgage in 2008, when Jackson defaulted. Colony finally sold it to Burkle.
https://www.tmz.com/2021/07/20/donald-t ... -arrested/
- Gregg
- Posts: 5502
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
- Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
- Occupation: We build cars
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
He got it for Matt Geatz's campaign.
![rotflmao :rotflmao:](./images/smilies/rotflmao.gif)
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
![Dog :dog:](./images/smilies/dog.gif)
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
Re: New York State Investigations of Trump and Related
Apologies, I meant legal/illegal, but illegal/also illegal works as well.
![Image](https://thefogbow.com/forum/images/awards/boots_orly.png)
![Image](https://thefogbow.com/forum/images/awards/met_obot.png)
![Image](https://thefogbow.com/forum/images/awards/reporter.png)
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
Tom Barrack in November 2016 versus Tom Barrack in December 2017.
https://documentcloud.org/documents/676 ... 5/a2047249
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
The detention hearing for Trump inaugural chair Tom Barrack and co-defendant Matthew Grimes has been bumped up to… today.
It was previously scheduled for Monday.
Quote Tweet
- raison de arizona
- Posts: 20219
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
- Location: Nothing, Arizona
- Occupation: bit twiddler
- Verified: ✔️ he/him/his
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
Well this is an interesting development. I suppose this means they've come to terms?
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
- poplove
- Posts: 1395
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:20 pm
- Location: Las Vegas NV
- Occupation: ukulele ambassador
- Verified: ✅💚💙💜☮️💐🌈⚽️🥥🌴✅
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
$250,000,000 bail for Barrack.
- Volkonski
- Posts: 12176
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
- Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
- Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
- Verified: ✅
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
- MN-Skeptic
- Posts: 3658
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:03 pm
- Location: Twin Cities
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
So... does he flee the country immediately, or does he wait until closer to the trial?
Tim Walz’ Golden Rule: Mind your own damn business!
- Slim Cognito
- Posts: 7130
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:15 am
- Location: Too close to trump
- Occupation: Hats. I do hats.
- Verified: ✅
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
Will someone of authority accompany him back to NY so his plane doesn't take a detour?
![Image](https://thefogbow.com/forum/images/awards/boots.png)
![Image](https://thefogbow.com/forum/images/awards/meetup.gif)
![Image](https://thefogbow.com/forum/images/awards/met_obot.png)
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
According to a popehat thread, he put up only $5 million in cash.
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
And some property and securities worth ~$21 million
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/2 ... sed-500663
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/trump-a ... anged.htmlBarrack stepped down as Colony Capital's CEO last year and as executive chairman of the firm in April. However, Colony Capital's Chief Investment Officer Jonathan Grunzweig agreed to pledge his home as part of the bail package, as did Barrack's ex-wife Rachelle and his son Thomas Barrack III.
Little has been mentioned about his 27 year old assistant Matthew Grimes. His bail was set at $5 million, which has also been paid. I'm wondering how much of this was self-funded, if Barrack's company paid it, and/or if he's already flipped.The order requires the release bond — which is among the highest ever set in the world — to be secured by $5 million cash, another $21.23 million in securities and Barrack’s home in California.
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
Who is up to creating a poll. I bet he flies away somewhere.
- Foggy
- Dick Tater
- Posts: 10569
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
- Location: Fogbow HQ
- Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
- Verified: Inventor of flag baseball
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
The important thing is to remind everyone that the rich get a completely different type of justice than the rest of us do. Can't let people forget that. ![Black Eye :blackeye:](./images/smilies/blackeye.gif)
![Black Eye :blackeye:](./images/smilies/blackeye.gif)
Don't mind me, I just fell out of a coconut tree. ![🥥](//cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/twitter/twemoji@latest/assets/svg/1f965.svg)
![🌴](//cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/twitter/twemoji@latest/assets/svg/1f334.svg)
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
I am assuming he did not go through a regular old bail bond place, but could you imagine what would happen if he skipped out on a 10% down bail like that? A cut of that 200M will buy you some VERY motivated private entities.
That being said, I do not think he will bother fleeing. He is out, and I would be surprised if there was any real chance of him seeing the inside of a cell again.
That being said, I do not think he will bother fleeing. He is out, and I would be surprised if there was any real chance of him seeing the inside of a cell again.
- MN-Skeptic
- Posts: 3658
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:03 pm
- Location: Twin Cities
Re: USA v. Barrack, Grimes, etc.
I don't know if we've posted about it here, but some of the folks I follow on Twitter have tweeted about bail reform. It's basically unconscionable to hold poor people in jail for months after being arrested for non-violent crimes because they can't afford bail. They lose jobs, can't support their families, etc. while being held awaiting trial.
Tim Walz’ Golden Rule: Mind your own damn business!