Herschel, Grifty Walker

Herschel Walker — Hey! Stop throwing stuff at me, this is real news! — appears to have been up to some some mind-blowingly grifty shenanigans during his failed 2022 run against Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Georgia) last year, according to reporting from the Daily Beast Wednesday. The Beast acquired a bunch of emails between Walker and a company owned by a longtime family friend of Walker’s, billionaire industrial mogul Dennis Washington, who made it big in molybdenum and copper mining in Montana in the ’70s and then expanded into industrialist stuff. (His novelty record, “Big In Molybdenum,” flopped, however.)

In March 2022, the Beast reports, Walker emailed an executive for one of Washington’s companies, conveniently named The Washington Corporations, to ask for money, which candidates do all the time, no big whoop. Except, as reporter Roger Sollenberger explains, candidates definitely don’t make the kind of ask Walker did, because it’s almost certainly illegal as fuck:

Walker wasn’t just asking for donations to his campaign; he was soliciting hundreds of thousands of dollars for his own personal company—a company that he never disclosed on his financial statements.

Emails obtained by The Daily Beast—and verified as authentic by a person with knowledge of the exchanges—show that Walker asked Washington to wire $535,200 directly to that undisclosed company, HR Talent, LLC.

And the emails reveal that not only did Washington complete Walker’s wire requests, he was under the impression that these were, in fact, political contributions

In the best possible circumstances, legal experts told The Daily Beast, the emails suggest violations of federal fundraising rules; in the worst case, they could be an indication of more serious crimes, such as wire fraud.

The story is very careful to point out that even though he’d never run for office before, Walker was very well briefed on campaign finance rules from the time he started running in 2021. In one of the emails to Washington, Walker even explained the limits that could be given to his campaign and to his super PAC, “34N22,” so he can’t very well claim he was just a simple country millionaire former football player who’d like to be a werewolf maybe.

While we do have to talk about donation amounts and such, we won’t be going into all the financial ins and outs, because 1) that’s already in the Daily Beast story, and also 2) that would be Math.


Sollenberger adds that after Washington’s people were informed by a third party that the money that had been wired to Walker’s company couldn’t actually be used for political purposes, an executive emailed Walker to ask if the money sent to HR Talent could be redirected to the super PAC instead, but that Walker “appears to have dismissed” those worries. The story now includes an update, noting that the day after it ran,

a spokesperson for Washington said Walker had refunded the money but did not respond to questions about when that happened.

Look, everything’s fine here, we’re fine. How are you?

When Walker was preparing for the runoff election against Raphael Warnock, a November 29 email from Tim McHugh, executive VP for the Washington Corporations, notes that after McHugh had spoken with Walker on the phone about a new $100,000 contribution to the campaign that Walker had requested, McHugh was informed that

“any funds sent to the HR Talent account cannot legally be used for political purposes. Political contributions must go to either the Team Herschel or 34N22 accounts. […] We will need your assistance to get the prior contributions made to the HR Talent account in March corrected.”

Sollenberger decodes that for us:

Walker was not allowed to solicit donations for the super PAC in excess of federal limits, which this amount of money explicitly was. But that was not McHugh’s concern; he was worried about the hundreds of thousands of dollars his boss had wired to HR Talent in March.

But instead of addressing those concerns, Walker wrote back with an email detailing how Washington and his two sons, Kyle and Kevin, could donate $10,800 to his campaign, his recount effort, and his super PAC, with the remainder to go to his company, HR Talent. Yes, again, right after McHugh said hey, I hear that can’t be used for your campaign.

As Sollenberger ‘splains,

The numbers suggest that Walker had worked out a $100,000 arrangement with each Washington, with 95 percent of their contributions going to Walker’s company instead of the super PAC. But while Dennis Washington’s $5,800 campaign donations from the time do appear in FEC records, the $95,400 never hit the super PAC’s account. Kyle and Kevin Washington did not donate any money after the November emails.

Long story short: There’s a lot of hinky stuff in the emails, and campaign finance experts told Sollenberger over and over that they’d never seen anything so insanely grifty:

Saurav Ghosh, director of federal reform at Campaign Legal Center, called the arrangement “jaw-dropping.” Jordan Libowitz, communications director at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said if Walker “used the campaign to funnel money into his own business, that’s one of the biggest campaign finance crimes I’ve ever heard of.” Brendan Fischer, a campaign finance lawyer and deputy executive director of Documented, remarked that the exchanges were “stunning and, to my knowledge, without parallel in recent history.”

“Campaign finance laws are designed to prevent massive under-the-table payments like those described here,” Fischer said. “While we don’t have all the facts, these emails point to highly illegal, potentially even criminal activity.”

Libowitz even went so far as to suggest that Walker’s scheme appears to have out-Trumped Donald Trump, because while Trump used campaign donations at his own businesses over and over, there were actual goods and services being purchased at the going market rates (though perhaps on the high side of the going rate, ahem). “Here, the money isn’t being spent by the campaign on Herschel’s businesses,” Libowitz told Sollenberger. “The money never even goes to the campaign. It just goes straight to him.”

But wait, there’s more!

Ghosh, of the Campaign Legal Center, agreed that Walker appears to have violated campaign finance laws, calling the scheme “$500,000 of grift.”

“It appears to be a fake campaign solicitation, designed to just profit personally from someone. That’s brazen in a way that’s off the charts,” he said.

On top of that, Ghosh pointed out that campaign law requires candidates to report all their sources of income, so Walker’s failure to list HR Talent LLC in his financial statements appears to violate the law too. Further, Ghosh said, if Walker had misled Washington about where the money was going — as certainly seems to be the case — “Then we’re in the world of just defrauding somebody.”

“Sounds a lot like wire fraud if the money didn’t make it to the campaign or super PAC,” Ghosh said. “And the fact they tried to do it again shows they’re trying to squeeze this billionaire.”

So what happens now? That would be up to federal prosecutors, who we assume pay attention to the news. And golly, wouldn’t it be something if more on this came out, like with all the stuff on Clarence Thomas that started turning up after ProPublica did some digging?

If this does turn into an investigation, and an investigation turns into an arrest, we have two words of advice for the federal agents assigned to bring Mr. Walker in: Silver bullets.

[Daily Beast]

Yr Wonkette is funded by reader donations. If you can, please give $5 or $10 a month so we can keep shocking you with these astonishing Republican grift antics.

Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons.



Source link

#Herschel #Grifty #Walker

Joe Tacopina: Trump’s Newest Bad Lawyer

It’s either because he’s a terrible client or never pays his bills or no one wants to be on the losing side, but Donald Trump has an uncanny ability to pick out the worst attorneys to ever pass the bar. His latest legal draft pick: Joseph Tacopina, who appeared on this Sunday’s “Meet The Press” with Chuck Todd.

Similar to an infamous appearance by Rudy Giuliani, Chuck Todd’s oft-suppressed journalistic instincts awakened when given such an incompetent target. The trouble for Tacopina began when Todd asked why Trump got the media and the right-wing into a lather about his impending arrest last week. Tacopina, because he couldn’t just say his client is a bullshit artist who is willing to incite dumbasses to protect his own hide, tried to blame others.

TACOPINA: No, he didn’t make it up, he was reacting towards a lot of leaks coming out of the district attorney’s office. There had been a leak, Chuck, that Monday, the day before that Tuesday, there was a law enforcement meeting, including Secret Service and NYPD, that was going to go through the logistics of the arraignment. […] So he just, I think he just assumed based on those leaks that that’s what was going to happen.

As
Lemony Snicket once wrote, “Assumptions are dangerous things to make, and like all dangerous things to make — bombs, for instance, or strawberry shortcake — if you make even the tiniest mistake you can find yourself in terrible trouble.” Neither Tacopina nor his client have ever learned this lesson, which is why the rest of Tacopina’s answers to Todd’s questions came off as a series of unfortunate events for his credibility. When Todd read some of Trump’s public statements on social media, specifically targeting Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, Tacopina attempted to change the subject.

TACOPINA: So Chuck, as his lawyer, I want to dissect this case, because it’s a case that shouldn’t be brought and wouldn’t be brought if it were anyone other than Donald Trump, let’s be clear about that. Does anyone actually think […] that anyone else would be prosecuted for making a civil settlement in a hush money case with personal funds? Of course not.

Literally that was what Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, was prosecuted for and served federal prison time for. The crime, mind you, that was at the direction of and reimbursed by Donald Trump through his businesses and he’s currently being investigated for.

Todd, again, pressed Tacopina about Trump’s attacks on Bragg through social media and Tacopina deflected poorly.

TACOPINA: […] Again, I’m not his social media consultant. I don’t — I think that was an ill-advised post that one of his social media people put up, and he quickly took down when he realized the rhetoric in the photo that was attached to it. But that being said —

TODD: You’re only referring to the baseball bat.

TACOPINA: … I’m not here to defend or support —
TODD: He didn’t take down the other rhetoric. […]

Tacopina then reverted back to his only defense of Trump, mainly that this was “personal funds” and “would have been made payment irrespective of the candidacy or campaign,” which he views as bulletproof for his client. But when Todd pulled his best
Inigo Montoya impression about this “personal funds” argument, Tacopina made a colossal legal mistake that even Todd couldn’t ignore.

TODD: […] So you call it personal funds. It is, in a court of law, it’s been proven —
TACOPINA: It is personal funds.

TODD: — that it was Trump Organization funds.

TACOPINA: It’s personal funds. It was not funds related to the campaign. That’s the distinction —
TODD: But he used a Trump Organization check.

TACOPINA: It’s not campaign finance laws. But Chuck, that’s personal, that’s personal. It has nothing to do with the campaign —

TODD: So everything with the Trump Organization is Donald Trump the person?

TACOPINA: Let’s focus this —

TODD: I mean, you realize the door you’re opening there.

I don’t think Tacopina realized what he did there, Chuck, as his continued answer dug the hole deeper.

TACOPINA: […] These were personal funds. By all accounts, these were personal funds, not campaign funds. It’s personal or campaign – whether Trump Organization, Donald Trump the person, you know, Mar-A-Lago Corporation, whatever it is – they’re personal and not campaign funds. And that’s the key distinction here. If they were campaign funds, we’d be having a different discussion. […]

But, as Todd then pointed out, Tacopina’s client might not be facing campaign finance charges.

Tacopina basically admitted what everyone knows: The Trump family uses his organizations and corporations as their own personal piggy banks, much like they did with the Trump “charities.”

This makes DA Bragg’s case much easier … not that he needs help since he’s done this type of case many times before despite what Trump’s surrogates say.

TODD: But again, what this investigation may end up being is about the, essentially the falsifying business records. Which by the way, this prosecutor has brought over 60 – this one and the previous one – has brought over 60 times over the last four years. This is not an unusual crime to charge somebody with […]

When Todd brought up falsifying business records and ledgers to say the payments were “legal fees,” Tacopina outlined how somehow that was ok in what will probably be what he’s remembered for after all this.

TACOPINA: […] Seriously, what would he personal ledger? “Payment for hush money to quiet an affair that I claim I never had so my family doesn’t get embarrassed.” Is that what he should put in his ledger? There’s no, nothing wrong with putting whatever you want in your ledger […] You’re being petty. […]

Todd ended the segment these clips of a very familiar lawyer saying how this was crime when it was first reported in 2018.

We bet Tacopina wishes his reality show dreams hadn’t flamed out 5 years ago.

Have a week.

Click the widget to keep your Wonkette ad-free and feisty.



Source link

#Joe #Tacopina #Trumps #Newest #Bad #Lawyer