Accounting firm fires Trump

[Lesh]

So is the poster above gonna claim Enron did nothing wrong?

In this example...Enron is Trump and and Trump's accounting firm is Andersen

 

[AMart]

So is the poster above gonna claim Enron did nothing wrong?

In this example...Enron is Trump and and Trump's accounting firm is Andersen

Fuck off I said Anderson and not Enron. Oh and if you read the article the accounting firm found no issues or fraud in what they were given. More corrupt deep state government behavior.........work with Trump we come after you. Fucking commies all belong in gulags.

 

[AMart]

So is the poster above gonna claim Enron did nothing wrong?

In this example...Enron is Trump and and Trump's accounting firm is Andersen

You forgot to quote this crybaby.


On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

 

[Indeependent]

Accounting firm: Trump financial statements aren't reliable

The accounting firm that prepared former President Donald Trump’s annual financial statements says the documents, used to secure lucrative loans and burnish Trump’s image as a wealthy businessman, “should no longer be relied upon” after investigators said they found evidence he and his company regul

apnews.com

At what point will people finally realize that Trump is just a big con man?

Have you ever made it past a headline?

“While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate,” Mazars General Counsel William J. Kelly wrote to his Trump Organization counterpart, Alan Garten.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You made Obama a thing, and yet nobody is talking about him much these days.
idiot

But they sure still were 13 months after Trump took office.


More than 17 pages of threads with Obama in the title in the first 13 months of Trump's time in office

Google search results

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Lesh]

You forgot to quote this crybaby.


On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

On May 31, 2005, in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously reversed Andersen's conviction because of serious errors in the trial judge's jury instructions.[2] The Supreme Court held that the instructions were too vague to allow a jury to find that obstruction of justice had occurred. The court found that the instructions were worded in such a way that Andersen could have been convicted without any proof that the firm knew it had broken the law or that there had been a link to any official proceeding that prohibited the destruction of documents. The opinion, written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, also expressed skepticism of the government's concept of "corrupt persuasion"—persuading someone to engage in an act with an improper purpose without knowing that the act is unlawful.

No shit sherlock.

Trump's accounting firm doesn't want to become the next Arthur Andersen

 

[Lesh]

Have you ever made it past a headline?

“While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate,” Mazars General Counsel William J. Kelly wrote to his Trump Organization counterpart, Alan Garten.

They are trying to separate themselves from the bogus claims Trump made

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Accounting firm: Trump financial statements aren't reliable

The accounting firm that prepared former President Donald Trump’s annual financial statements says the documents, used to secure lucrative loans and burnish Trump’s image as a wealthy businessman, “should no longer be relied upon” after investigators said they found evidence he and his company regul

apnews.com

At what point will people finally realize that Trump is just a big con man?

Keep fighting magaturds. The fallout of what you just brought to the table will confuse and (further) frighten them.

They are gonna lash out now.

 

[Indeependent]

They are trying to separate themselves from the bogus claims Trump made

You mean they don't want to be George Floyded.

 

[Lesh]

You mean they don't want to be George Floyded.

Cops are gonna kill them?

 

[Indeependent]

Cops are gonna kill them?

Who racked up more kills of non-violent people...cops or thugs?

 

[Lesh]

Who racked up more kills of non-violent people...cops or thugs?

I neither know what you're trolling about nor care

 

[Indeependent]

I neither know what you're trolling about nor care

You are more than welcome not to read my posts which require an IQ above 100.

 

[toobfreak]

Oh yeah, there is no doubt that this is exactly what is happening.
Biden is being labeled the worst president in the history of the United States, even some
democrats are not arguing that, yet these buffoons just keep cranking out thread after thread
on Trump, as if he makes a difference these days.

Or maybe they are trying to keep Hillary off the front page? Gee, wouldn't you just love being a fly on the wall right now at the Clintons? But then, if Hillary had friends like herself, we wouldn't need to wonder, we'd already have their phone, internet and every other form of communication in and out of their house bugged!

But then, bugging the Clinton's house is not an act of treason and national defense as it was their bugging the Trump White House.

 

[Mac1958]

This actually a big deal. I have not seen that before, and it's saying Trump gave everyone fraudulent information.

Yeah, this wouldn't happen in a vacuum, and it's damn unusual. A financial services firm doesn't do this without something being on fire.

From the outside, he looks like a freakin' one-man crime wave. But we'll see.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I made him a thing?
You made Obama a thing, and yet nobody is talking about him much these days.
idiot

I'm guessing its because Obama didn't try to over-turn the election ...and went on to stage multiple "Please Tell Me You Love Me" rallies, whining about imaginary election fraud and such......

However, the first year or 2 into Trump's presidency, Obama's dick was very much in Trump's mouth....Since he kept mentioning Obama....from lying about crowd sizes at his inaugural being bigger than Obama's ...to everything else under the sun....in fact, he seemed to be very intimidated by size and Obama...hmmm....wonder what that was about

 

[Claudette]

Meister
Well they can't very well praise Bidung, the incompetent walking, talking disaster so of course all the threads are about Trump.

Trump is worth 10,000 Bidungs any day.

 

[Independent thinker]

Accounting firm: Trump financial statements aren't reliable

The accounting firm that prepared former President Donald Trump’s annual financial statements says the documents, used to secure lucrative loans and burnish Trump’s image as a wealthy businessman, “should no longer be relied upon” after investigators said they found evidence he and his company regul

apnews.com

At what point will people finally realize that Trump is just a big con man?

People are supposed to do their jobs. Bankers, accountants, etc should all be checking up on the figures presented to them. What idiot would give millions or billions in loans to a person who gives them their own set of facts? I mean when I go to buy a car or a house they don't just take my word on things. They check me out thoroughly. It's really these people who should be checking out Trump's figures before giving him large loans. If they just accept Trump at his word, that is on THEM.

 

[Mr Natural]

At what point will people finally realize that Trump is just a big con man?

Some time back in the 70s.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Accounting firm: Trump financial statements aren't reliable

The accounting firm that prepared former President Donald Trump’s annual financial statements says the documents, used to secure lucrative loans and burnish Trump’s image as a wealthy businessman, “should no longer be relied upon” after investigators said they found evidence he and his company regul

apnews.com

At what point will people finally realize that Trump is just a big con man?

Are you one of those LGBTQABCDEFGs? You seem to have a lot of Trumpy manlove......