Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Here we go - Trump and Deutsche Bank and Suspicious Activity Reports

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by nedezero1 View Post

    I'm referring to Trump. What money laundering charges have been levied against Trump?
    I understood Mister Badger to be speaking about the suspicions noted by the automated system and anti-money laundering specialists, not a criminal charge from government. From the opening of yesterday's article:

    Anti-money-laundering specialists at Deutsche Bank recommended in 2016 and 2017 that multiple transactions involving legal entities controlled by Donald J. Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, be reported to a federal financial-crimes watchdog.

    The transactions, some of which involved Mr. Trump’s now-defunct foundation, set off alerts in a computer system designed to detect illicit activity, according to five current and former bank employees. Compliance staff members who then reviewed the transactions prepared so-called suspicious activity reports that they believed should be sent to a unit of the Treasury Department that polices financial crimes.

    But executives at Deutsche Bank, which has lent billions of dollars to the Trump and Kushner companies, rejected their employees’ advice. The reports were never filed with the government.
    Didn't you say yesterday that it's common for cases to be removed from FinCEN after being reported? Since you understand this case so much better than the rest of us, could you explain how your comment was relevant to cases like this that were never reported to FinCEN?

    Originally posted by nedezero1 View Post

    Which to the uninformed..seems significant.

    In reality it's very common practice for obvious legal transactions that where flagged to be removed from Fincen logging upon final review.
    Seems to me that if suspicious activity is reported by the bank to the government and then cleared by the government, the activity has gone through two independent layers of scrutiny and then cleared. OTOH, if the suspicious activity is never reported to the government, as is the case here, then only one layer of scrutiny has occurred, and seniors at the bank can prevent outside scrutiny. That's what yesterday's article was about: seniors at the bank preventing specialists from reporting activity to the government. I'm far far far from an expert on this stuff, but it seemed yesterday that you weren't discussing the crux of the article.
    Last edited by arcadesonfire; 05-21-2019, 12:22 PM.
    For those who prefer to listen rather than read and who ask these questions: What underlying crimes were being investigated when Trump obstructed justice? Why wasn't he indicted? Why did Mueller discuss indicting a sitting president in Volume II but not Volume I?
    https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Muell...ook/B07PXN468K


    My (old dead) band!:
    www.steelphantoms.com/
    PM me if you want to give me a Deluxe US Strat with locking tuners and 22 frets for <$800. Fancy Strymon pedals welcome too!

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by nedezero1 View Post

      I'm referring to Trump. What money laundering charges have been levied against Trump?
      Trump Made Millions of Dollars From Drug Money Laundering in Panama: Report





      https://www.newsweek.com/trump-drugs...ndering-714891
      Trump’s Russian Laundromat





      https://newrepublic.com/article/1435...rime-syndicate
      Last edited by Vito Corleone; 05-21-2019, 12:35 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by arcadesonfire View Post

        I understood Mister Badger to be speaking about the suspicions noted by the automated system and anti-money laundering specialists, not a criminal charge from government. From the opening of yesterday's article:



        Didn't you say yesterday that it's common for cases to be removed from FinCEN after being reported? Since you understand this case so much better than the rest of us, could you explain how your comment was relevant to cases like this that were never reported to FinCEN?
        I said that the transactions that are spit out from the system are reviewed and many are removed as false positives before being transmitted to FinCEN.

        For instance, a familiar customer in the private bank LOB might let their banker know they're going to by transferring $800k out of their account via wire for real estate purchase. Banks capture all the wire information on a form and if everything checks out, they'll initiate the wire.

        The AML system would certainly flag that transaction on the core banking system because it's large debit, but it would likely not be reported if the bank understands the nature of the transaction and knows the customer.

        Conversely, if a relatively unknown customer suddenly makes 5 deposits for $2k each at different locations on the same day, the system would aggregate that, flag it, and it will likely be reported.





        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by guido61 View Post

          Trump Made Millions of Dollars From Drug Money Laundering in Panama: Report




          https://www.newsweek.com/trump-drugs...ndering-714891

          Trump’s Russian Laundromat




          https://newrepublic.com/article/1435...rime-syndicate


          Trump’s Russian Laundromat


          In-Peach!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by nedezero1 View Post

            I said that the transactions that are spit out from the system are reviewed and many are removed as false positives before being transmitted to FinCEN.

            For instance, a familiar customer in the private bank LOB might let their banker know they're going to by transferring $800k out of their account via wire for real estate purchase. Banks capture all the wire information on a form and if everything checks out, they'll initiate the wire.

            The AML system would certainly flag that transaction on the core banking system because it's large debit, but it would likely not be reported if the bank understands the nature of the transaction and knows the customer.

            Conversely, if a relatively unknown customer suddenly makes 5 deposits for $2k each at different locations on the same day, the system would aggregate that, flag it, and it will likely be reported.




            OK. I thought that by "FinCEN logging," you meant the report had already been logged with government.

            Does the scenario you describe above apply to Deutsche Bank executives preventing a report by its anti-money laundering specialists to our government? Is it common for bank executives to conduct a final review?

            Or are the executives more specialized and informed than the specialists hired for this role?
            Last edited by arcadesonfire; 05-21-2019, 12:30 PM.
            For those who prefer to listen rather than read and who ask these questions: What underlying crimes were being investigated when Trump obstructed justice? Why wasn't he indicted? Why did Mueller discuss indicting a sitting president in Volume II but not Volume I?
            https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Muell...ook/B07PXN468K


            My (old dead) band!:
            www.steelphantoms.com/
            PM me if you want to give me a Deluxe US Strat with locking tuners and 22 frets for <$800. Fancy Strymon pedals welcome too!

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by nedezero1 View Post



              In-Peach!
              Why do you always spell "impeach" with an n?
              For those who prefer to listen rather than read and who ask these questions: What underlying crimes were being investigated when Trump obstructed justice? Why wasn't he indicted? Why did Mueller discuss indicting a sitting president in Volume II but not Volume I?
              https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Muell...ook/B07PXN468K


              My (old dead) band!:
              www.steelphantoms.com/
              PM me if you want to give me a Deluxe US Strat with locking tuners and 22 frets for <$800. Fancy Strymon pedals welcome too!

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by arcadesonfire View Post

                Why do you always spell "impeach" with an n?
                It's in his heavy rotation.
                You pull the string on his back and you get:
                in-peach
                or TDS
                or grassy knoll
                or mkay
                To you I'm an atheist; but to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition.

                Originally posted by -NPC-;n32500008

                Trump is not creepy. He is lovable and charming.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by nedezero1 View Post

                  Three things are apparent....

                  1. You don't understand the subject matter of the article.

                  2. You didn't thoroughly read the article.

                  3. You were reflexively triggered by the words "Trump", "Deutsche Bank", and "anti-money laundering".

                  I see your blinders are firmly affixed as usual. TDS is rampant.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by nedezero1 View Post

                    Which to the uninformed..seems significant.

                    In reality it's very common practice for obvious legal transactions that where flagged to be removed from Fincen logging upon final review.
                    And Deutsche Bank is so well known for their honesty and integrity.

                    It’s not as if they along with the Bank of Cyprus are documented faciitators of money laundering for the Russians, Saudis, Cartels etc. /s
                    Last edited by powbob01; 05-21-2019, 01:05 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Tom Hicks View Post

                      I just saw reports of that ruling elsewhere. The reporter suggested that other judges in other cases will be looking to this in terms of their own rulings on matters where the Trump Administration is refusing to supply information.

                      clearly the authority of the judicial branch undercuts the overly broad unitary executive Theory.
                      Which is why the GOP has been feverishly rigging the Judiciary through appointments of activist hard right unqualified judges

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by guido61 View Post

                        Trump, --- for whatever reasons -- maybe the con-man in him is simply taking advantage of an easy target, maybe he believes it himself, most likely a combination of both -- easily became the 'leader' they needed for their movement. Rich Archie Bunker to the rescue who understood their frustrations and willing to the make the promises to vanquish their enemies and could believably sell to them that he was capable of doing do.
                        I remember Trump on Howard Stern. Perfect fit. Trump always wanted to be worshipped by many. He found his flock.

                        Oh, and Ned? We know you think Trump is a shining star of innocence, virtue, and sincerity. I really doubt you're going to change anybody's mind with your one sentence posts. Let me ask you a speculative question: How much money do you think Trump has spent to keep himself out of the hot seat? We know about the payments to the porn stars. He bragged that he teams of the best lawyers. I'm sure they earn their money. In the case of Cohen, that guy (the fixer who would take a bullet for his boss) got directly nailed and Trump tossed him overboard. So while your guy may not be in jail, he is not clean.

                        Zip
                        665 - Neighbor of the Beast

                        Originally Posted by RobRoy: I believe that the only way Obama will remain in power is if he suspends elections. And at that point he is no longer president. He is dictator. But I don't believe he will even survive that long. It could be suicide, impeachment by BOTH parties, you name it.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Hoot Owl View Post
                          You Trumpies are scared, real scared. You know you've got a treasonous lout for president and you don't want to be held accountable for it. He's got you by the balls, this Trump. Got 'em hard, because you voted for him and can't reconcile his behavior with your ethics. I feel your internal conflict. But, alas, you side with the orange creep.
                          Politics over country, huh?

                          You far overstated what I put in the OP.
                          Trump Delusional Syndrome can do that to you.

                          Did I say "fishy"?
                          No. But now that you mention it, yes.
                          In my experience trumps ethics mesh quite well with what most upper level bankers laughingly refer to as ethics.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by powbob01 View Post

                            In my experience trumps ethics mesh quite well with what most upper level bankers laughingly refer to as ethics.
                            Like this?

                            Zip

                            665 - Neighbor of the Beast

                            Originally Posted by RobRoy: I believe that the only way Obama will remain in power is if he suspends elections. And at that point he is no longer president. He is dictator. But I don't believe he will even survive that long. It could be suicide, impeachment by BOTH parties, you name it.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by arcadesonfire View Post

                              Right. He is acting like he has a lot to hide. Like I say above, when Dems were in power, Reps saw opacity as a clue to covering something up; this was a basis for investigating Clinton's email server. Now though, when Trump is opaque, they judge him as doing the right thing because they believe Democrats (and Republicans who investigate Trump) are all scheming to conduct a "coup."

                              I cannot escape the thought that this sudden flip in viewpoints about opacity vs transparency is a product of blind, subconscious partisanship (tribalism as I think of it). This means that people whose views have flipped can't recognize that their views have flipped. I suspect that they do this and wholly believe they are in the right; they believe they are in the right because defending Trump is an undetected manner of self defense; in other words, it's a psychological defense mechanism.
                              While I agree that trump’s actions are purely self serving the reason the Republicans are sheltering him is quite different.
                              The Republicans, and most especially the so called Conservatives have been trying to normalize the concept of the Unitary Executive for years. whenever a Republican has been POTUS that has been their objective.
                              They also shamelessly denigrated Obama and every other Democratic POTUS as acting ‘like a king’ whenever said Democrat tried to get anything accomplished.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by guido61 View Post

                                Well, you have to cut them some slack. It’s not like they could have seen it coming that Donald Trump was going to turn out to be involved in financial crimes or be a liar, cheat and a con-man.
                                They knew he was the ideal convenient idiot that would allow them to push their most unpopular plans through. He’s just a tool.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X