- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Mueller subpoenaed Donald Trump's bank records from Deutsche Bank is fake news.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:22 pm to idlewatcher
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:22 pm to idlewatcher
quote:
Didn't Deutsche Bank release a statement saying they would comply?
They basically said they can neither confirm or deny.
Trump probably never had a bank account with Deutsche Bank. He probably floated the idea of Deutsche Bank because some people think Deutsche sounds Russian.
fricking Trump and his sense of humor.
This post was edited on 12/5/17 at 3:23 pm
1
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:23 pm to LSUnation78
quote:Fine.
Right Trump’s lawyer = noise Anonymous Hilldog shill lawyer = billowing smoke
Back on task. I'm not terribly familiar with criminal procedure in matters like this, but would Trump or his team even necessarily be privy to that kind of information during the course of an investigation? If so, at what point? When the request is received by the institution? When the records are provided? Ever?
And I think it's perfectly plausible that the "source" jumped the gun after hearing of an intention to subpoena financial records, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of clarity on that front.
For my information, would/will anyone really be surprised if and when that kind of information is subpoenaed as a part of this probe if it hasn't already?
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:23 pm to Decatur
I just read an article implying Deustch Bank was practically begging for a subpeona. Quotes from anonymous sources saying how helpful it was to receive the subpeona because they can finally send all of the financial records to muellers team.
Since anonymous sources are the only ones we are allowed to hold as truth, it must be true that deustch bank was begging for a subpeona.
Since anonymous sources are the only ones we are allowed to hold as truth, it must be true that deustch bank was begging for a subpeona.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:25 pm to LSUnation78
Right.
Because financial institutions ALWAYS work so hard to piss off their billionaire customers.
Because financial institutions ALWAYS work so hard to piss off their billionaire customers.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:25 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
Fine.
Back on task. I'm not terribly familiar with criminal procedure in matters like this, but would Trump or his team even necessarily be privy to that kind of information during the course of an investigation? If so, at what point? When the request is received by the institution? When the records are provided? Ever?
And I think it's perfectly plausible that the "source" jumped the gun after hearing of an intention to subpoena financial records, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of clarity on that front.
For my information, would/will anyone really be surprised if and when that kind of information is subpoenaed as a part of this probe if it hasn't already?
holy shitePosted on 12/5/17 at 3:27 pm to LSUnation78
quote:wow. a bank begging for a subpoena...no such bank exists.
I just read an article implying Deustch Bank was practically begging for a subpeona.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:28 pm to DelU249
Here’s the thing I keep saying about this stuff, there is shelf life on how long questions like this go unanswered. The investigation is ultimately going to confirm or disprove this as the investigation continues.
If Reuters and Bloomberg are wrong, and the conservativetreehouse is correct, time will answer the question. Just like it did with Seth Rich.
If Reuters and Bloomberg are wrong, and the conservativetreehouse is correct, time will answer the question. Just like it did with Seth Rich.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:30 pm to GumboPot
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:32 pm to GumboPot
Did he subpoena records from the bank
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:33 pm to Kickadawgitfeelsgood
quote:
Did he subpoena records from the bank
Fox and The Hill are now reporting, no. No subpoena.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:40 pm to GumboPot
I was expecting something a bit more than conservative treehouse
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:42 pm to TheMidasTouch
Theres several sources posted and linked throughout thread.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:42 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:when has a big outlet like that ever lied to me...oh wait.
If Reuters and Bloomberg are wrong
quote:you ever seen a movie with a conclusion that doesn't leave you satisfied or resolve any of the major plot lines? that's what you're going to get. only instead of wasting 2-3 hours, you're going to waste 2 or 3 years, and then trump is going to cap off the disappointment with a 2020 win because deranged democrats and the media were so intensely focused on this stupid shite
he investigation is ultimately going to confirm or disprove
and i'm not complaining
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:47 pm to TheMidasTouch
quote:
I was expecting something a bit more than conservative treehouse
There are other sources (Fox and The Hill) in this thread.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:48 pm to GumboPot
quote:
What the hell is happening?
rats jumping ship?
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:49 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
We know it hasn't happened up until this point
quote:This is not a very characteristic rebuttal from this admin
the media got ahead of their skis a little bit
Interestinger and Interestinger, this yarn
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:49 pm to GumboPot
quote:
He probably floated the idea of Deutsche Bank because some people think Deutsche sounds Russian
True that.Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:51 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
Sarah Sanders and Jay Sekelow denied that any subpoena had been issued and obviously reached out to the WH allies in the press. Deutsche Bank hasn't said anything other than that they cooperate in all legal investigations. Mueller's team, obviously, hasn't said anything publicly.
So it's the Trump team denying it and no one else coming out to confirm it really.
So we have an initial report that has no hard evidence to back it up just "a source close to the investigation." One side is publicly denying the substance of the story and the other side not commenting is not commenting and the bank is not commenting. That is not the exact definition of "fake news," but it is pretty damn close.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 3:52 pm to GumboPot
I got a few down votes for saying this was fake news in another thread lol.
Go figure. They get hurt.
Go figure. They get hurt.
Posted on 12/5/17 at 4:15 pm to WeeWee
quote:
So we have an initial report that has no hard evidence to back it up just "a source close to the investigation." One side is publicly denying the substance of the story and the other side not commenting is not commenting and the bank is not commenting. That is not the exact definition of "fake news," but it is pretty damn close.
AFP, Reuters, and the German paper that initially broke the story are now (as of just 20 min ago) saying their source "confirms" that the records were subpoenaed. Mueller's team specifically declined to comment (as expected), DB just generically said they cooperate in investigations of this nature.
So someone's boldly lying or boldly selling their flier as hard fact.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News