I’m thinking of current events and investigations, obviously. Feel free to move this thread wherever it needs to be.
In what way would this work, using our president as an example?
For instance he sold his Florida home for a 60 million dollar profit, after owning it for two years, to a russian oligarch (who proceeded to tear it down.) It was a 150% profit and the highest single home sale record for the US.
Donald has denied ever meeting this man, but FAA records say that their planes have been in the same airports many times etc.
In the case of russian oligarchs, what is their motive for these transactions? What is it accomplishing in terms of financial and legal aims?
I will stay out of politics in GQ. Money laundering is simply taking illegally gotten money and creating a clean, legal trail for it.
One example is taking a lot of illegally gotten cash to a casino, playing conservatively for a few hours and then cashing out. You don’t even care if you lose a little. What you do care about is being able to show all the money you “won” come tax time.
Another common way to do it is to operate a cash business like a laundromat or car wash. You just report illegal money as legal cash income from your business.
Fortunately or unfortunately, the feds also know about these tactics so they aren’t guaranteed to work.
What is your real question? Your post doesn’t say anything about money laundering. Trump sold a house to a guy who tore it down and broke even selling off three subdivided parcels of land. Trump bought it in a distressed bankruptcy sale and the pool of buyers for $40 million homes isn’t that big. He saw an opportunity and took it.
This has nothing to do with money laundering, which is taking profits from illegal activities and making them appear legitimate, such as depositing cash into a business bank account and claiming it as cash receipts for the business.
Why would we use the president as an example? He bought a house and sold it later at a profit. In what manner is that money laundering? I’ll grant that it was a great opportunity for a snarky cheapshot at him, but he was a bad example to use in terms of the question asked.
The real estate sale that you reference and that Trump did has nothing whatsoever to do with money laundering.
Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stick. When are you liberal Nanny Staters gonna quit whining about a hugely-successful capitalist being your new POTUS?
I am sure that if a socialist prez did the same deal but then dumped his profits into a welfare fund for, say, illegal immigrants or unwed mothers, you would have no complaints. Right?
You might want to take a look at exactly what it is about somebody making huge profits in a very legal way that so disturbs you. Doing so might serve as a positive motivational factor for you.
I think the OP’s point was, if a Russian wanted to bribe the president, he can’t openly hand the guy a briefcase full of cash without raising a lot of questions – but if he buys something for a lot more than its market price, then he would in effect be handing the guy money in what looks like a legitimate transaction, complete with a paper trail and everything, such that the income can be openly reported as if it were unremarkable.
Sounds right. It’s a form of bribery still, but using the same technique that may be used in money laundering to inflate the value of an otherwise legitimate transaction. Money laundering more often is based on non-existent transactions, the car wash posting income based on hundreds of more cars per week than were actually washed as an example. But the car wash could also wash 100 cars a week at $10 a wash and record $20 per wash as the payment. Either way, the car wash owner has an explanation for where the money came from, and he’ll pay taxes on the inflated amount. It’s the IRS at all levels of government that has the best opportunity to find financial irregularities and if they don’t find tax-avoidance they’re unlikely to investigate any further or notify other areas of law enforcement.
I’m OK with this going into Barbecue Pit or Elections, but there is nothing “right” about donalds conections with lots of big money coming from russia. I don’t agree that this is what capitalism looks like when it’s done right. Sorry.
Now if these putative things fall into other categories than “money laundering” that is also the subject of the OP: To clarify the motives and methods and definitions, of what donalds connections with plutocrats, criminals, oligarchs and authoritarian leaders are exactly. Other related acts such as bribery, and corruption, exist in a continuum with money laundering too. Since we are in the middle of an investigation into this it seems timely to ask. Unless you have a problem with this. Money laundering is most certainly a part of the investigative picture now, except on only one cable network, which is increasingly isolated.
I’m trying to assess the motives of the counterparties to transactions like this.
The one line definition of money laundering is not what I’m looking for. I’m trying to see how it works in the world we live in, now. Maybe it’s all bribery, or corruption, and ML is not in play. But money is fungible and fluid. That’s why you ask the questions.
Anyone else want this in the Pit? Speak up.
Want to change the OP to “What should we be investigating financially with the current administration?” I don’t have a problem with that. Sorry for any confusion. I didn’t know how sensitive this might be, actually, believe it or not. I’m usually on the other networks, but I do scan them all.
Who did he sell it to? Did he know this person. Where did this person get his money and what and why does he want to do this with it? How did he hook up with donald?
Donald couldn’t subdivide? I thought that was his business. He left 100 Million on the table cause he was too busy doing what?
You might think it’s a crummy thing to do to ask this. I think it’s normal day at the office for the FBI, and frankly for any taxpayer at this point.
Money laundering, as mentioned several times, is the art of converting proceeds from crime - often cash - to digits in the banking system that appear to be legitimate income. A million dollars a year from drug sales is useless if you get arrested for tax evasion and you money and assets are seized as soon as you try to buy a car or house.
Money launderers love cash-based businesses. As mentioned, car wash (Breaking Bad) or a bakery (Weeds) was a good way to try and pump those bills in as daily deposits from a legitimate business. Pizza parlors, bars, vending machines - all will allow you to deposit wads of cash and pretend it came from real business.
However, the IRS and DEA aren’t stupid. They come and look at the books - did you buy enough flour and cheese to sell that many pizzas? If they watch the business, will they see to foot traffic or listen to enough phone orders to justify the result? Did enough cars drive into the car wash? More sophisticated, is your cash vs. credit/debit receipts consistent with comparable businesses in the area?
If someone buys a house for $40M he may be trying to bribe or influence the seller; but if he turns around and sells the subdivided land to break even, odds are they are both just shrewd businessmen… unless the 3 lot buyers are also foreign buyers, which adds another level of suspicion. (Were they? Probably not.)
However, the question is where the $40M came from. Since it likely was a bank transfer from Russia or some such, it’s not proceeds of retail crime looking to get legit. It was and is already in the banking system. No money laundering necessary.
Let me phrase it in another question: What would a convergence of interests between a russian oligarch and donald be based on? Who’s doing what to whom and why? What does donald need from him and what does he need from donald?
I welcome a separate thread on this issue or a related one where you and I can debate this line of thought. That being: I claim that most of Trump’s detractors do so only in view of his wealth. If he was less wealthy, say, about that of the overage POTUS over the past three decades, his detractors and amount of negative press would be halved.
Using gross generalities to hide specifics, in a way that makes it clear what your bias is, sounds partisan to me.
In a way, though, it sort of serves as an example that fits the thread. In that it’s an excellent example of PROPAGANDA LAUNDERING, which is similar to money laundering. Taking something of value, which is tainted by illegality or by bias, and then “adjusting” it so that it can be passed off as valuable but NOT tainted, is certainly what this kind of “laundering” is all about.
From a non-partisan view point, Russian oligarchs need to get their money out of Russia so it can’t just be taken away from them in a system which doesn’t recognize the concepts of ownership the way we do. Whatever happens to him or his holdings in Russia he now owns a piece of property in the US, as rock solid an investment as you can find anywhere in the world. Any capitalist will want to make deals that enrich themselves, I’d sell my home to a Russian oligarch for a $60 million profit if it was legal, I’ll find some way to alleviate any feeling of guilt based on the source of the money. You could look for all sorts of political motivations in any particular case but profit alone can be the sole motivation.
You would need to ask in a different forum if you want to delve into the possible additional motivations.