tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC July 1, 2021 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
>> leona holmes lee? remember her she went to prison, she was a multibillion actual multi billionaire for real, she was president of the hotel line which was a high end luxury group of two or three dozen hotels including the park lane in new york city and the palace. she, herself, appeared in ads for some of her hotels. bragging about how rich she was and how exacting she was and how she needed absolutely the best service and all the most luxurious stuff, and so she
insisted on it in all of her hotels and that's why you should come and stay at her hotel. sort of a familiar stick, i know. but it worked for her in the 19 eighties. until it didn't. turns out, despite being a billionaire, despite not only the image of immense wealth, but the actuality of it, leona and her husband had engaged in a number of chiselling text cheats, including, having a whole bunch of renovations done at a vacation home in connecticut her private home it was renovations on that home including by putting it a dance floor, but she built the renovations to the hotel company she had the helmsley hotel company paid to do the renovation on her private home that had for her the double benefit of her not having to pay for those renovations herself and, also, her hotel
company got to deduct the payments as a business expense. even though they weren't. it was just stuff she wanted personally. she went to prison. the trial where she got convicted, probably made her even more famous than her hotels had. this was a headline in 1989 the new york times " made it testifies helmsley denies paying taxes ". she was sold a housekeeper that only the little people pay taxes, the housekeeper testified at helmsley trial. the witness elizabeth said that the conversation took place at the helmsley home in greenwich 46 weeks after she was hired in september of 1983. she said that she and mrs. helmsley we're in a back hall i said, you must pay a lot of taxes, she said, we don't pay taxes.
only the little people protects us. she testified that staff salaries were paid by helmsley businesses and that her pay cheque was issued by the hardly hotel chain which is based in cleveland. she said she ordered supplies from the parkland hotel in new york city. it was delivered in a hotel van, she said. she asked miss bomb if she ever purchase food locally. she said she did so only a few times. she said i bought something for the house that we ate, she testified that when she asked mrs. helmsley to reimburse her, she said, he bought it you pay for it. the real pea trait? leona, only the little people pay taxes, helmsley went to prison for that scheme and more. that scheme and which she used her business as a tool for
chiselling petty tax fraud, which is both a crazy thing for a super rich person to bother with, right? and it turns out that is exactly the kind of crime that superrich people think they can get away with and that they can't get caught for particularly if they are brazen about it. leona helmsley was having her business pay or provide for her personal living expenses including the salaries for her maids, her private vacation homes in the renovations, even the food there. she had the business pay for all of it instead of her paying for it that meant nothing came out of her pocket, and the business gets to deduct all of that for tax purposes. she was convicted on 33 counts, peoples séamus lee shouted at her on the courthouse steps, she went to prison in 1982. when she got out of prison she had community service hours to perform, she apparently tried
to get her employed he's doing for the community service for her. the court found out about it and then she got more hours. leona helmsley died in 2007. nearly every headline of or where we called the ex convict the " queen of mean " when she died. using a business to pay for your personal stuff as a way to avoid taxes, that's a tried and true way to go to prison, and being famous doesn't necessarily help you avoid that. being infamous or famous. remember on seinfeld there was a character called the soup nazi? we have a rule on this show don't talk about nazis unless you're talking about actual nazis, but only if you're talking about the soup nazi. he had all of these rules about how you are supposed to order soup at his restaurant, if you don't follow the rules he screamed at you, know soup for you. the soup nazi on seinfeld was based on a real guy, a
storefront -- run by a guy who really would scream at you if you didn't order fast enough, or if you didn't stand in exactly the right place. the cfo for the, soup nazi company went to prison. turns out for years, if god forgive you worked at the soup nazi place, you'd get paid through all sorts of little chiselling, off the book schemes designed to avoid taxes, and so, the dude went to prison. running your business in such a way that your business provides personal stuff to executives of the company at than writes it off like those of business expenses, compensating the employees at your business in ways that are designed to hide that compensation from tax authorities, these are tried and true paths to present. even if you're not a tax accountant, even if you're not someone who studies this, even if you're somebody who just watches seinfeld or read a single tabloid newspaper in the
eighties. even for comically high-profile people, this is a tried and true way to end up in the crowbar hotel. which is why, presumably, most people who try to commit those crimes know that they ought to be subtle about it. mostly. not all of. and what new york prosecutors spelled out in court was a variety of this a crime which was according to prosecutors not at all subtle. the word, we might use and not legal terms is brazen. the word the prosecutors used in court was audacious. prosecutor called it a sweeping and audacious, illegal payment scheme. we just got the transcript, ready? the judge, good afternoon please be seated. the clerk, calling from the 59 calendar. i don't know what that is. number one the trump corporation, the trump payroll
corporation and ali why sober. any reason why we cannot proceed with the arraignment? none. the judge a rain defendant. the clerk, island wide sober, the grand jury of the county of new york has filed an indictment -- of grand larceny in the second degree and other related charges. how do you plead, guilty or not guilty? the defendant, allen why sober, not guilty, your honour. the clerk, the trump corporation, the grand jury of the county of new york has filed an indictment charging you would scheme to defraud in the first degree, and other related charges, how do you plead? defence lawyer, corporation pleads not guilty. the clerk, the trump payroll corporation, the special grandeur has filed an indictment charging you with the scheme to defraud in the first degree and other related charges, how do you plead, guilty or not guilty. the defence lawyer, your lawyer the company pleads not guilty, thank you. the judge, very well. in a different prosecutor rises. your honour, in light of the many statements that have
already been made about this case, i would like to clarify for the court briefly what this case is and what it is not about. i spell that in the indictment, this was a 15 long tax fraud scheme involving off the book payments, which is a type of crime that is charge against companies and executives all the time. but contrary to today's assertion by the company's former ceo, former president donald trump, this is not a quote, standard practice in the business community, nor was it the arc of a road or isolated employee. instead, it was orchestrated by the most senior executives who were financially benefiting themselves and the company by getting secret pay raises at the expense of state and federal taxpayers. the chief financial officer himself avoided taxes on 1.7 million of his own inme which hardly amounts to an incidental, quote, fringe benefit, and the former ceo, former president donald trump, himself, signed many of the illegal compensation checks. to put it bluntly, this was a
sweeping and audacious illegal payment scheme. as noted in the indictment, the chief financial officer himself, allen why sober, directed that company records be deleted to consumers first patient boots -- even now there's been no attempt to pose discipline on people who are involved. instead, when confronted by our investigation the company at the highest level decided not to accept responsibility and cooperate which is what companies do if they want to be viewed as a good corporate citizen. instead, the company forces a litigation for a year and a half including to troops to the united states supreme court. and even after they lost those claims that have returned, they failed to comply with subpoenas before this court and have refused even to allow was to speak to any of their employees, except in the grand jury. to be clear, a company has a completeight to adopt this type of combative uncooperative
approach, but having done so, it doesn't have the right to turn around and demanded leniency and benefit that flows to a company that does cooperate. in short, contrary to the defence is assertion, there is no clear example of a company that should be held to criminal account. finally, to address what this case is not about, this case is not about politics. this investigation which is ongoing, has been pharaoh, careful improper has been limited to subject matters within our new york jurisdictions. politics has no role in the grandeur chamber and i can assure you that it played no role here. the charges were considered by an impartial grand jury and we look forward to this courts review of the grand jury minutes which will confirm that impartiality. thank you, your honour. >> the judge then not to the defence counsel for the trump organization and says council. the defence counsel rises, thank you your honour. your honour, i appreciate the press release and i don't think
at this point of ramadan service sponsors bit by bit, claimed by claim so i'm not gonna indulge in that at this time. thank you, your honour. the judge, anything else? the defence lawyer for alan why sober grazes. your honour on behalf of mr. why submerge, i don't have a microphone, should i stand? the judge, we will hand you a microphone. defence lawyer, thank you on. i would just like to say on behalf of mr. why sober we object to the characterizations of the fact that we just given to the extent that they relate to mr. why support. thank you. the judge, thank you. and that was the meat of it. there was a subsequent discussion after that about discovery which means the prosecutors have to get the defence lawyers the evidence that they've got in the case which they're gonna be basing their case on. at one point, during the whole discovery discussion, when they're talking about handing over the evidence that they've got, they note pointedly that
this is, as the defence -- sorry as the prosecutor said in his opening statement this is an ongoing investigation, and so they asked for a protective order, but that means that whatever they have to hand over to the defence lawyers in discovery, so the defence lawyer can get a good look at all the evidence and everyone has a fair shot at defending the case on its merits. the protective order means that the defence can show that material either to the public or to anybody who's not directly involved in the case. so the defence agrees to that protective order, the judge agrees to that and there's a protective order we will never see the discovery in this case. the only other thing that happened was a sad moment for alan why sober. prosecutor, says to the judge, while these charges are eligible for bell, we believe there is a flight risk associated with this defendant, so surrender of the passport is necessary to reasonably ashore
his return to court. this defendant has been and apparently will remain the cfo of a company with international tentacles and the evidence on this would demonstrate ample record of travel by private jet and defendant has significant means and connections to support himself outside the jurisdiction including in places beyond our powers of extradition. the surrender of the passport is the least restrictive alternative conditions that would reasonably assure his return to court. it's our understanding that defendant why sober can sense to this condition and is prepared to surrender his passport. the judge, do you in fact consent? defence lawyer answer for him, yes your honour. the judges has bluntly, turnover passport but turn it over, allen. but the arraignment was today, in fact there was no bail, mr. why so byrd did release his passport. they set up a conference so the next time there will be in courts will be mid september.
the indictment was unsealed so an addition to the transcript we have written account of the charges there are 15 felony charges its four counts of criminal tax frauds first degree scheme to defraud. first degree scheme to defraud, we'll get more clarity on that from somebody who knows these things in just a moment. there is a conspiracy count, four counts of falsified business records. four counts of offering a false instrument for filing. that's a charge against allen weisselberg, cfo. another charge, then allen weisselberg faces alone which is grand larceny in the second degree, ran larceny of course is theft. they're accusing him of essentially stealing in effect from the irs by knowingly obtaining a tax refund that he was not supposed to get. but the... venues here, they genuinely interesting i think surprising news is, number one,
this is a lot of charges. 15 felony charges is a serious and extensive indictment that the trump organization lawyers have been trying to spin to the public for the past week or so for sure. this is a heftier indictment and they prepared people for. it is therefore a heftier indictment that most people were expecting. number two, in statements today from the da's office and from the new york attorney generals office, remember this is essentially been in a joint investigation by those two conference into entities. statements from both of those entities released, and in that exchanged that in court that i described it why they need a protective order, because the case is still going on -- it was made clear by prosecutor speaking in court, by statements from the da and from the attorney general, made more clear than i expected it to be today that this indictment today is not it. that it is likely that more is coming now that the investigation proceeds.
of course, we believe that the special grand jury that they first learned about in the last month of the gradually that's been sitting apparently three days a week to consider the evidence in this case to consider potential charges in this case, we believe that that jury will continue to meet for the next six months. the new york times in fact reports tonight about what is coming next year. actually, in very blunt terms. this is what it says tonight in the new york times is reporting on the case. quote, the charges against the trump organization of mr. weisselberg... ushered in a new phase of the district attorney's sweeping inquiry into the business practices of mr. trump and his company. while the indictment was narrowly focused on the tax scheme, the charges could lay the groundwork for the next steps in the water investigation, which will focus on mr. trump. again, that's being reported tonight in those terms about the new york times. the next steps in the wider investigation will focus on mr. trump, quote, in the next phase
of the broader investigation into mr. trump and his company, the prosecutors are expected to continue scrutinizing whether the trump organization manipulated property values to obtain a loan taxes and benefits among other potential financial crimes. so, there had been some, i think, discussion is speculation that because bank fraud and insurance fraud manipulating the valuation of various assets to defraud banks to index authorities, that had been reported as a focus of the investigators but it was not included in the indictments -- maybe that wasn't going anywhere, maybe you never be charged. the way that the times is reporting this tonight, it sounds like that that is what his hat next. with a focus on mr. trump himself. we will see. but number one, the initial indictment is a lot of charges, 15 charges as a lot, 15 felonies. number two, there is more coming in the investigation that is produced these 15 felony charges.
number three, there's been a lot of discussion today about an unindicted coconspirator, described in the indictment. as far as we could fill the unindicted -- it is not trump himself. jessica understand what i'm talking about here, this is one of the places that this unindicted coconspirator phase happens in the indictment. it says quote, operation of the conspiracy from at least 2005 through the date of this indictment, the name to defendants and others, including unindicted coconspirator number one, agreed to and implemented a compensation scheme with the object of enabling defendant allen weisselberg to underreport is income to federal authorities, and thereby they taxes, and falsely claim federal tax refunds to which he is not entitled. that does not appear to be former president trump, we'll explain exactly why i believe that that is the case in just a moment. i will tell you it would seem that there is a better chance that that unindicted coconspirator is more likely to be somebody like the controller of the trump organization.
the controller is an employee of the trump organization at a lower level employee actually who reported talent weisselberg -- i mention the controller because he has been reported already he appeared before the grand jury, but we are not sure if the unindicted coconspirator is him. we don't know for sure there's a reason that this person is not named in the indictment. if he's left is employment at the trump organization or not but as far as we can tell, he's still there. there's always a possibility that when an unindicted coconspirator is pointed to an indictment that that person is cooperating. prosecutors said that they have not been allowed to talk to any employees outside of the greenery process. we know that the controller spoke with prosecutors within the granary process. it remains to be seen. the reason that i say the unindicted coconspirator does not mean to be former president trump is that he's described otherwise several times in the indictment. for example, he is describe lonely as a person who signed
checks that were used to make allegedly illegal payments to pay private school tuition for some weisselberg family members. he has described bluntly as the president of the organization who rented an apartment for weisselberg on the west side of manhattan. both of those expenses are described as part of the alleged illegal tax evasion scheme at the heart of the indictment. there is no effort by prosecutors to hide donald trump's identity when it comes to his involvement in those acts, so logically would not make that much sense that they would describe him bluntly in those parts of the indictment and described him as the unindicted coconspirator elsewhere. but that brings me to the next point which is that as i mentioned earlier the what's described here is not subtle. particularly well hidden either. at least, it's no longer hidden from prosecutors. if you feel like we are waiting too much into the legal niceties here, we will bring it back to brass tacks. did you see the wire? did you can see that scene on
the wire where idris elba's calendar is saying, are you taking notes on a criminal conspiracy? what are you thinking? we are in that scene, classic scene. >> are you taking notes on a criminal conspiracy? what are you thinking, man? >> that's how it worked on the wire. here's how prosecutors say it worked at the trump organization. pretty parallel, quote, beginning in 2005 in as part of the scheme to defraud, weisselberg signed rental checks drawn on the trump corporations bank account, and the checks which it sent to the managing agent for the apartment building on riverside boulevard where he and his wife lived. similarly, weisselberg and others directed the trump corporation to issue checks to pay for weisselberg's utility bills for the reversible of our department, including payments for electricity, telephone services, internet and a cable television service. during this period of time, the trump corporation also paid for weisselberg's monthly garage expenses, and all revolution
times at the payments of weisselberg's rent, utilities, and garage expenses constituted employee compensation, constituted taxable income to weisselberg. but these payments were not booked in the trump corporations general ledger as employee conversation. that said, quote, for certain years the trump organization maintained internal spreadsheets that tracked the amounts it paid for weisselberg rent utility anchorage expenses. the indirect compensation to weisselberg was not included, and why suckers debris to forms or otherwise reported to text authorities. so, he's effectively getting paid, actually, deducted from his salary with they paid him in rent, utilities, his garage expenses and all of this stuff, it is definitely part of his compensation. they did not reported to the tax authorities, and they did not listed in the company's books. but they did apparently describe it to the penny in an internal spreadsheet that track every cent of it. are you taking notes on a
criminal conspiracy? what are you thinking? they kept internal written records of the stuff they were otherwise very carefully keeping off of the books. really? and a prosecutors apparently now have that. audacious and sweeping. that's how the prosecutors described it. here is just one last point, this is what we're gonna talk about tonight with somebody who knows these things. the scheme to have trump's company to pay for personal stuff for trump organization executives as described in the indictment as a scheme, so not lonely to those executives not have to pay for those things that a, pocket there dodge taxes on that, both from the company said in the employee said. the indictment says that that scheme was not limited to allen weisselberg and his family members who were compensated in that way. they describe other people who work for the trump organization who benefited from this
allegedly illegal taxation scheme. similarly, the indictment says, there were other trump organization executives who worked for the company, but they were regularly paid in ways that were designed to disguise their payment from tax authorities. they were regularly paid in ways to make it look like they were not getting compensated as trump organization employees. they were getting paid as, consultants, or something. it has important tax consequences both for company and for the executive getting paid that way. that is all spelled out in the indictment. it is spelled out in the indictment as a further part of the scheme to defraud. no other executives besides allen weisselberg were described as the beneficiaries of that fraud, but it is explicitly spelled out that he was not the only one who benefited from that kind of a scheme. i will also tell you that is exactly the kind of scheme described by new york times reporters in september.
in their pulitzer prize-winning exposé of trump's financial adventurers, they specifically describe a scheme like that, a scheme like the one outlined in today's indictment as it relates to ivanka trump, the president's daughter. the times described in detail, financial records that they discovered that showed ivanka trump being paid both as an employee of the trump organization, and as a consultant to the trump organization. in a way that seem to custom designed to try to evade taxes, both for the company, and for her. that's the executive scheme described at the end of the indictment. prosecutors say that weisselberg benefited from such a scheme, and that other executives did to. they are not named in this indictment, but that is the ivanka scheme described last fall in the new york times. and, like i said apparently there is more to come from this investigation. we have much more on that in a second. hold that thought.
with bounce pet hair & lint guard, your clothes can repel pet hair. one bounce mega sheet has 3x the hair fighting ingredients of the leading dryer sheet. simply toss into the dryer to bounce out hair & lint. look how the shirt on the left attracts pet hair like a magnet! pet hair is no match for bounce. it's available in fresh scent & unscented. with bounce, you can love your pets, and lint roll less. (upbeat pop music in background throughout)
remarkable indictment against the company of former president donald trump and the company's longtime chief financial officer, new york prosecutors had to battle all the way to the supreme court twice, to get access to trump tax and financial documents that the president had fought to keep secret. he lost that fight and in february, prosecutors finally get access to millions of pages of trump taxes. it was february when they got access by may they had a grand jury to meet three days a week to consider the evidence and to consider charges. today's indictment and the 15th felony charges that were until today, that's the first public facing product of that process. it may not be the last. as far as we know that grand jury's still sitting and is expected to sit until the end of the year. right now there's only two known entities and have access to millions of pages of trump financial and tax documents to review. one of them is that prosecutors office which today unveiled these 15 felony charges against
the former president's business. the other entity, it's a small reporting team at the new york times which obtain more than decades worth tax documents and want to pull it surprise for the riding on it since 2019, they've been chronicling how the former presidents had spent years, among other things, aggressively avoiding paying taxes. joining us now is a member of the reporting team suzanne craig investigative reporter for the new york times, i'm looking for talking to you about this, thank you so much. >> thank you for having me. >> reading the indictment today and knowing would prosecutor said today in court, do you feel like you saw some of this coming, with what you were able to report about on trump's practices and business practices? >> yeah, we've been looking at his finances for five or six years and we got a hold of his taxes and publish a story that came out in 2020. there are a number of issues
that we saw that we think still need to be surfaced. i'm not surprised about today. it seemed interesting that it was built more around allen wives who broke that around donald trump's taxes. there are still working their way through the investigations continuing and we saw when we were going through our work, four to five discreet issues that, and i heard they are of interest to the mat handy a, the investigators. >> one of the things that caught my eyes your reporting from last fall about a scheme that you uncovered by comparing different financial documents, which show that the president's daughter, even could trump was paid as a consultant in a way that seem designed to avoid paying taxes on some of her and calm. that would've been advantageous to her and the trump administration. i wonder if you saw any reflections of that scheme that you described, particularly in
those later parts of the indictment worth described ongoing schemes involving multiple executives around the way their compensation was described to authorities? >> it sure did feel of a peace woke we saw when we were doing our work with the payments, some of which went to even could trump. you know, we are seeing money that's coming out of the accountant being allocated -- and with even could trump what we saw is that there was 26 million dollars that we found in consulting fees that were being paid from entities that donald trump controls outward. we couldn't see who they were going to, but we saw them going out and it was like wow, when we saw that we said where are these going? and what we found as we went along is that they were comparing taxes to other documents that we've had and we
saw some of it actually went to a company that is controlled by even could trump's -- and why that is a red flag is because she's an officer of the trump organization and has -- she's paid more than 2 million dollars and she's also getting consulting fees, that is something that right away that the irs would be looking at it and saying that the payment should be ordinary necessary and you should question why somebody who's making 2 million dollars at the trump organization is also getting consulting fees. what's going on. in our reporting we suspected and we reported about was this in attempt by donald trump to reduce his taxable income into transfer money to his kids? that may also have had the effect of reducing, or of him avoiding the gift tax. it's a way to transmit wealth.
we didn't have access to other peoples tax information to see if potentially eric trump is getting some of these payments, if donald trump payment was getting some of these payments but they're also a member part of that company that was getting the money that was going to be beilanca. >> briefly, to the point, the kinds of documents that would show that if that's the case, is it your understanding from where we can see publicly about this court case that those are the kinds of documents that the prosecutors half? >> i think i can't imagine that they don't have them by now. the new york attorney general had gone after the information from the company that receive those payments. they have those records and i don't know how much further they've gone, if they have tax returns of other members of the trump family. but that's a follow the money case. we saw it and we started to work through and we dead ended in the tax returns but then because of even could trump,
she had gone into the administration she had other filings and we were able to match them up. i have worked with two great reporters and it was a great effort. it took us a long time to put alof that together. it's there. it's one of the things that the man handy is looking at. >> suzanne craig, investigative reporter for the new york times, suzanne, thank you for your time is always for your complex stuff. i really appreciated. >> great, thank you. >> all right, i want to bring into the conversation dental on so. mister alone so, previously served as the number two in manhattan district attorney's office. it was in the role that he wrote the memo which governs the offices current policies upon how and went to file criminal charges against corporations. mister alone so it's very nice for you to make time, thank you so much for being here. thank you for having me rachel. i am not a lawyer and i am a
non-seasoned observer of new york state criminal prosecutions. there are a number of things that spoke to me in surprised me about this indictment today, and part that it was 15 charges and that the prosecutors used bold language in describing what they said was an ongoing, unrepentant scheme that the company to do this in a systematic way with significant financial and legal consequences. that is stood out to me as seen heftier than expected to be. i just wanted to get your reaction and maybe you can set me straight if i -- if my expectations are in the wrong place. >> it's totally acceptable, it's 15 towns. i would focus more on the hefty language in the facts that are allege they, seem a credibly him -- new york requires you to separate counts and not lump multiple things and one count. it might have been a more streamlined than in federal court. either way, it does tell a
story and it is that story that we should be focused on. that story is very powerful, more powerful than we thought, yesterday, based on what we had heard from the lawyers for trump in the organization. >> let me raise a point that was raised by the defence lawyers, by the trump organization defence lawyer and that was referenced by suzanne prosecution described which may have essentially been an ongoing seeking to pay executives that was designed to evade taxes from all the perspectives. suzanne describe the reporting of the new york times as something that should've popped for the irs. looking at the way that the executives are paid and then to see them get paid in this other way that didn't make much sense given what their jobs were, including the president's daughter, ivan could trump, that resonated for me alongside what we heard today from trump defence lawyers saying that if
these were serious tax evasions, if this was serious tax evasion the irs would've come after us. the irs would've been pursuing this, not some dossier in manhattan. what do you make of that charge? >> frankly, it seems a little silly. i will say that in terms of what suzanne said, i get it, why wouldn't the iris be doing it? i will tell you that the irs was an opaque entity, they pick up what they pick up, it takes them a long time and tax cases in federal court tend to be brought many years after the accident question. i wouldn't put any credence in not knowing whether or not the irs is investigating, they may be in the normal course of things. but in terms of this criminal investigation, that's not a defence. you can't say oh jeez, we shouldn't be convicted of this because some other entity really should have prosecuted us. jeez, if that's what -- they have a long tradition
doing great cases that could be brought in federal court, this is just one of them. it's just kind of silly defence. >> brief question, dan, scheme to defraud in the first degree it's a jumble of words that i've never necessarily heard before but obviously that texan clear the most serious charge the trump organization is facing. what should we understand, scheme to defraud to mean in terms of an alleged crime? >> when across the cutest perspective it's a great statue with weak penalties. it is basically to punish the devising of a scheme or artifice to defraud which means trying to get money from people, or companies, or properties, byline to them. by false and fraudulent pretentious. it punishes a scheme rather than just a one-time transaction which is why this case kind of legit a 15-year
scheme in one count. it requires more than one victim and i thought that it was brilliant to include the eye or else as a victim because it takes one might of been 1000 dollar case and turned it into a 900,000 dollar case, which is quite a big more difficult. hopefully, that answered your question about scheming defraud. >> former new york prosecutor, dan, i know it's been a long day with a lot to observe. thank you for being here. >> thank you, rachel. >> coming up next, i said -- as soon as i saw this indictment i knew that i wanted to talk to daniel a lanzhou and suzanne craig's, the other person i most want to talk to about this is mary trump, donald trump's niece and she agreed to do an interview with us, out here next, stay with us. y with us
- if you want a rockstar team like ours, you need grammarly business. (guitar strumming) grammarly business turned my marketing team into rock stars that amplify our bottom line. just ask maya, who started three weeks ago. - [announcer] maya swears by grammarly business, because it keeps her work on brand and error free, fast, and easy. and we know clear and concise marketing leads to a killer performance. - steady beat to rising revenues, right, maya? (microphone whooshing) - [announcer] learn more at grammarly.com/business. >> early on in the trump
family, and ultimately the times turn those documents into multiple several thousand word investigations, showing how four years trump and his family participated in tax schemes and some instances would appear to be outright fraud. schemes that saved them potentially hundreds of millions of dollars on tax bills over the years. it was kind of a mystery when the first part of that story broke, how the reporter from the times could've possibly gotten their hands on so many of those personal financial documents. it was a mystery. until this book came out. it was written by donald trump's niece, mary trump. and in the book, mary trump revealed that she was the one that had access to those documents. and she had turned them to reporters at the new york times and those were not just the source of award-winning journalism, but also they became the basis of a lawsuit that she launched against her uncle, donald trump in which she alleges he treated her out of tens of millions of dollars in trump family assets that
were otherwise rightfully hers. that lawsuit of course is now one item and a growing list of legal woes for the former president and his businesses including these new charges brought in the new york state court. police to join us now is mary trump, she's the author of too much and never enough, how my family created the world's most dangerous. michelle says a new book coming out on august 17th which is called the reckoning. our nations trauma in finding a way to heal. mary trump, is great to see you, it has been too long. thank you so much for coming back. >> that is great to be here rachel, i am so pleased that you asked me. >> let me ask on how you think your uncle and the people around him will react to this, the something that for all of the efforts to get the accountability that he is down, criminal charges brought against his business is something new that he has never
faced before, anything like it is never faced before. how do you think he will react? >> i'm sure he is quite angry. i would not want to be around him right now. but unlike other people close to him who are probably extremely nervous. i don't believe that donald will be. because he's been getting away with this sort of thing for so long. that he must feel immune. because he always has been. these are the kinds of charges that could have been leveled against him and other people and my family decades ago. he's also under i'm sure a quite confident in allen weisselberg's loyalty to him. he does not believe for a second that adam weisselberg will flip on him, so unless prosecutors can find somebody else who will flip or unless they can find something else in the many millions of pages of documents they have, donald is
going to be completely confident -- for sure. >> one of the things that is striking over the course of the day, is the sort of very bluntly worded reporting from the new york times which emerged after today's arraignment that the next phase of theinvestigation, not only is there a next phase but there will be further work from the gangrene potentially further indictments, but it focuses specifically on your uncle. and that it is going to be looking at some of the things that michael cohen testified about to congress, adjusting the valuation of various assets to defraud, allegedly to defraud banks, insurance companies, tax authorities. the prospect that charges wouldn't just to be targeting on weisselberg would not be targeting the company but would target him personally must feel, it must seem like a different level, though? >> yes, sure and it should not
surprise anybody except perhaps donald. because there are long-standing patterns here. my lawsuit will show just how consistent those patterns are and have been since the eighties. the other thing that people need to understand is that one my grandfather was alive, donald was involved ir's, nothid in the family or in my grandfathers business or without his explicit say-so. he was running the show, he is always the person who knows what's going on. and nobody does anything independently from him and that includes his siblings as well, so again he should be quite nervous, but i think that the fact that he has gotten away with so much for so long,
including over the past four years when he was in the oval office, will continue to give him a false sense of confidence. >> is that interrupted at all by the prospect that the other executives of the trump organization who are his children may be in the line of fire here? one of the, i think the important threats to pull from that pulitzer prize-winning reporting at the new york times based on trump's financial records, is that among others, it appears that ivanka trump benefited from the type of scheme that is described at the end of the indictment today, that trump executives or compensated in ways that were deliberately designed to help them evade taxes and help businesses evade taxes on their behalf. he was charged in benefiting from that scheme. the indictment says other than executives benefited from the same scheme. now we have solid reporting that the investigation continues and that raises the
prospect that further charges could be brought against his children. >> yeah it does, and again i think that they should be quite anxious, right now. donald on the other hand will expect the same kind of level of loyalty from them as he expects from alan. as far as donald is concerned, they have what they have because of him. and they should be willing to take whatever hit they are going to take. he does not understand, i guess how these things work. prosecutors won't stop at my cousins. they will be going for the bigger fish, which would be donald who has been running this organization for over 30 years now. so, i think he would be surprised to learn that i don't believe my cousins would exert that kind of exercise loyalty towards him, because his relationship with them and their relationship with him is entirely transactional. so, and conditional, i should
say. they are not going to risk anything for him just as he'd risk anything for them. it could get really interesting as these things unfold. because there are so many more documents that new york prosecutors have at their disposal. >> you have more confidence that allen weisselberg wouldn't cooperate then you do that the former president's children wouldn't cooperate? >> yeah, i think, as far as i understand it -- i'm not a lawyer, but it seems that as areas as these charges are, they may not end up with jail time or any significant amount of jail time. and the downside of cooperating with cooperators with allen weisselberg could be the downside of going to jail. if it is for a short period of time again, it'll be very
interesting to see just how -- the case that can be made, and the sentencing, if it comes to that. because i think that will factor in, for sure. but i am much less sanguine about my cousins loyalty to their father. >> mary trump, the needs of the former president, the author of the number one new york times bestseller, too much ever enough, how my family created the world's most dangerous man. again, the new book comes out august of 18th, it is called the reckoning. mary, it's really good to see you. thank you so much for being here, it's a pleasure to have you here. >> thank, it's good to see you too, rachel. >> all right, we'll be right back, they stay with us. ey stay with us.
night there's gonna be exciting news, i was right. i knew it was going to be like this, but while. and it just soon to the president's company being indicted we had the president today, the actual president of the united states in miami. tonight, just before we got on the air mare gore alone announced a pause on all federal execution. the democrats announced their points to the committee that it are going to investigate -- an end -- or if they'll punish liz cheney for accepting that appointment. and of course the day started with the supreme court taking a dole acts toward remains to the voting rights act and minority voting rights protection. that decision is one that is going to sting for a very long time, the entity that brought that suit in the first place as the democratic national committee,