Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was on to something. In her questioning of Michael Cohen, she asked if Donald Trump had ever provided “inflated assets to an insurance company.” He answered in the affirmative — and also testified to rampant tax fraud by Mr. Trump and allegedly by the Trump Organization officials Allen Weisselberg, Ron Lieberman and Matthew Calamari.
The questioning apparently caught the attention of New York State regulators, who issued a subpoena for the Trump Organization’s insurance policies.
State officials should not stop there. The allegations of criminal conduct by Donald Trump and Trump Organization officials are no longer mere speculation or reporting. The public record establishes probable cause for campaign finance felonies, and a potential case for criminal tax fraud, bank fraud, insurance fraud and suborning perjury to hide shady business dealings — a staggering mix of state and federal crimes implicating a range of Trump Organization officials.
State attorneys general — especially New York Attorney General Letitia James — should not wait for any Justice Department official to hold Trump accountable for potential crimes. They also do not need to wait to build a case for criminal indictments. The appropriate immediate path is a special state civil proceeding against the Trump Organization and its officials.
Legal status as a corporation endows businesses like the Trump Organization with great powers, and with those powers come specific responsibilities. To police these privileges, almost every state in the country has a statute that gives its attorney general the power to bring civil actions to investigate corporations for fraud and to go to court to dissolve the ones that persistently break the law. This statutory power descended from an old English proceeding called “quo warranto,” meaning “by what authority do you exercise legal power?” The question in this case is whether the Trump Organization has so abused its privileges that it has lost this legal authority.
The Trump Organization is incorporated only in New York and Delaware, so New York officials have a unique role and responsibility. New York attorneys general have not used their power to dissolve corporations often, but as recently as 1994, they brought a civil action leading to the dissolution of a fraudulent entity. New York’s highest court has described this remedy of civil dissolution as a “judgment of corporate death,” and for the state to invoke such a corporate death penalty, the corporation’s “transgressions” must not be merely incidental, but “material and serious; and such as to harm or menace the public welfare.”
In fact, the previous attorney general, Barbara Underwood, brought a similar action — to potentially dissolve fraudulent nonprofits — against the Trump Foundation. In June, Ms. Underwood filed a civil petition citing a long list of the Trump Foundation’s abuses of nonprofit privileges, including frauds to promote the Trump Organization and the Trump campaign. President Trump, his family members and Trump Organization officials like Mr. Weisselberg were frequently named in this petition — along with allegations of civil and potentially criminal wrongdoing. Six months later, the Trump Foundation agreed to its dissolution with judicial supervision, while the attorney general’s petition still seeks restitution and further judicial remedies).
The allegations against the Trump Organization in the petition against the Trump Foundation, in combination with flagrant and systematic Emoluments Clauses violations, Mr. Cohen’s allegations and other public allegations about persistent tax schemes establish enough of a basis for Attorney General James to file a similar civil petition against the Trump Organization. A petition would then open a civil investigation into these allegations with the state using discovery to access documents and depositions to interview witnesses under oath.
If the New York attorney general finds evidence of persistent fraud or abuse in the investigation, she can seek a court’s order to dissolve the organization. Like the petition in the Trump Foundation case, this petition could also ask the court to order the Trumps to “make restitution and pay all penalties” for their corporate fraud and abuse.
But that’s not the only meaningful result. If a state civil investigation turned up more evidence of criminal fraud, state and federal prosecutors could use these findings to indict the Trump Organization and its officials, including Mr. Weisselberg.
In addition to allegations of campaign finance felonies, Mr. Cohen also alleged that Mr. Weisselberg, along with the Trump Organization officials Mr. Lieberman and Mr. Calamari, engaged in insurance fraud, bank fraud and tax fraud by dishonestly inflating and then deflating the valuation of Trump assets for insurance, banking and tax advantages. Keep in mind that the Southern District of New York, when it was headed by Rudolph Giuliani in 1988, indicted a state legislator for overvaluing property and submitting false financial statements.
In the current situation, the proceeding would start with a civil investigation of fraud, not a criminal investigation. In such a civil investigation, many Trump family members and Organization officials would probably invoke the Fifth Amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination, because testimony in a civil deposition could lead to criminal implications. But the investigation could turn up clear evidence of crimes, leading some of these officials to make cooperation deals with state prosecutors and perhaps waive their Fifth Amendment claims. That would allow them to admit their crimes and testify against higher officials.
Mr. Weisselberg is more likely to cooperate if the New York attorney general and state prosecutors have already begun to investigate his conduct. President Trump cannot use a pardon to rescue Mr. Weisselberg from state prosecution; presidential pardons do not affect state criminal liability. Moreover, unlike federal prosecutors at the Southern District of New York or in Robert Mueller’s office, Mr. Trump cannot fire or interfere with them.
The window for these prosecutions to move forward is closing. The states are a complementary law enforcement system, and they can do what Mr. Mueller might not be able to do: Send a message that the president is not above the rule of law.
This state investigation might turn up evidence that President Trump committed crimes himself. If the Justice Department will not indict a sitting president, we must ask what is worse: the potential distraction of states indicting presidents, or the crisis for the rule of law of presidential immunity, especially during a re-election when those crimes may recur with the goal of four more years of impunity. If the specter of state indictments is unsettling, that is a reason to allow federal prosecutors to bring indictments instead, perhaps building on state officials’ findings.
Indictments, even if trials are long delayed, at least serve an important message from law enforcement to society about legal norms. Even if justice is delayed, no one will be above the law.
Jed Handelsman Shugerman (@jedshug) is a professor at Fordham Law School. He is a co-author on amicus briefs challenging President Trump's Emoluments Clause violations and his appointment of Matthew Whitaker as attorney general.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.B:
2016年六彩开结果历史记绿完整版【议】【论】【一】【直】【在】【持】【续】，【而】《【变】【形】【金】【刚】》【的】【动】【画】【和】【玩】【具】，【也】【一】【直】【在】【紧】【锣】【密】【鼓】【的】【制】【作】【当】【中】。 【一】【个】【月】【之】【后】【的】【一】【天】，【奇】【木】【动】【画】【总】【监】【王】【石】【打】【来】【电】【话】，【十】【分】【兴】【奋】【的】【说】【道】：“【李】【凡】【老】【弟】，《【变】【形】【金】【刚】》【第】【一】【季】【已】【经】【制】【作】【完】【成】。” 【李】【凡】【稍】【微】【有】【些】【意】【外】，【比】【他】【想】【象】【的】【快】【了】【不】【少】。 【至】【于】【玩】【具】，【第】【一】【批】【也】【已】【经】【生】【产】【完】【成】【了】。【只】【等】【动】【画】【片】【出】
【实】【际】【上】【在】《【荒】【野】【大】【镖】【客】：【救】【赎】》【里】【面】，【也】【并】【非】【是】【十】【赌】【九】【输】。 【在】【这】【方】【面】【上】【杨】【晨】【没】【有】【利】【用】【什】【么】【伪】【随】【机】【的】【机】【制】，【比】【如】【说】【什】【么】【玩】【家】【累】【计】【输】【几】【次】【就】【必】【赢】【一】【次】。 【而】【是】【直】【接】【采】【取】【了】【完】【全】【随】【机】【的】【机】【制】，【如】【果】【你】【的】【运】【气】【足】【够】【好】，【你】【能】【够】【一】【直】【赢】【下】【去】。 【如】【果】【你】【的】【运】【气】【差】，【你】【一】【把】【都】【赢】【不】【了】。 【因】【为】【是】【单】【人】【线】【下】【的】【游】【戏】【体】【验】，【再】【加】
“【这】【怎】【么】【行】？”【洛】【珊】【赶】【紧】【迈】【开】【步】【子】【追】【了】【上】【去】，“【白】【羽】【学】【姐】【进】【的】【可】【是】【女】【厕】【所】，【你】【一】【个】【大】【男】【生】【怎】【么】【可】【以】……” “【啊】【呀】，【管】【不】【了】【那】【么】【多】【了】，”【申】【海】【龙】【一】【边】【快】【步】【往】【上】【走】，【一】【边】【应】【道】，“【这】【很】【重】【要】，【关】【系】【着】【你】，【或】【者】【说】【我】【们】【以】【后】【怎】【么】【对】【白】【羽】【的】【问】【题】。” “【不】【行】！”【洛】【珊】【见】【申】【海】【龙】【没】【有】【停】【下】【来】，【反】【而】【越】【走】【越】【快】【愈】【发】【地】【着】【急】【起】【来】
【很】【奇】【怪】，【我】【将】【自】【己】【在】【医】【院】【病】【房】【门】【口】【跟】【段】【球】【球】【初】【次】【见】【面】【的】【画】【面】【快】【速】【回】【忆】【了】【一】【遍】，【再】【莫】【名】【其】【妙】【的】【嘴】【角】【越】【扬】【越】【上】。 【而】【我】【很】【是】【了】【解】，【自】【己】【的】【性】【格】【不】【可】【能】【接】【受】【长】【时】【间】【的】【暗】【恋】，【因】【为】【这】【憋】【久】【了】【容】【易】【将】【脑】【壳】【憋】【坏】，【导】【致】【神】【志】【不】【清】，【真】【假】【不】【分】，【其】【症】【状】【总】【是】【觉】【得】【心】【中】【的】【她】【在】【留】【意】【自】【己】，【她】【也】【一】【直】【在】【等】【待】【着】【自】【己】【的】【表】【白】，【实】【则】【对】【方】【什】【么】【狗】2016年六彩开结果历史记绿完整版【沈】【梦】【柔】【甩】【出】【的】***【和】【戒】【指】，【还】【有】【她】【说】【的】【话】【都】【不】【是】【最】【伤】【人】【的】。 【伤】【人】【的】【是】【穆】【瑾】【城】【的】【这】【些】【录】【音】—— 【纵】【使】【她】【不】【愿】【意】【相】【信】【这】【些】【是】【真】【的】，【可】【是】【穆】【瑾】【城】【的】【录】【音】【也】【不】【会】【错】。 【她】【忘】【记】【自】【己】【是】【怎】【么】【从】【咖】【啡】【厅】【里】【面】【出】【来】【的】，【也】【没】【有】【上】【车】【回】【到】【白】【桐】【然】【的】【地】【盘】，【脑】【子】【里】【面】【所】【回】【响】【的】，【都】【是】【穆】【瑾】【城】【刚】【刚】【的】【那】【些】【录】【音】。 【他】【说】【要】【抚】【养】【权】，【说】【了】【对】【沈】
【沈】【汀】【兰】【勾】【了】【勾】【唇】，【没】【有】【说】【话】，【嗯】，【有】【两】【个】【美】【人】【跟】【着】【她】，【她】【也】【很】【高】【兴】，【她】【一】【定】【会】【保】【护】【好】【美】【人】【的】。 【雷】【仙】【儿】【看】【了】【她】【一】【眼】，【在】【心】【里】【翻】【了】【个】【白】【眼】，【一】【开】【始】【还】【以】【为】【这】【位】【魏】【国】【候】【有】【多】【难】【缠】，【以】【为】【对】【方】【定】【是】【心】【思】【莫】【测】【之】【辈】，【结】【果】，【就】【是】【个】【小】【姑】【娘】，【还】【是】【个】【喜】【欢】【美】【人】【的】【小】【姑】【娘】。 【跟】【着】【她】，【自】【己】【反】【正】【是】【受】【不】【了】【什】【么】【委】【屈】【的】。 【驿】【馆】【里】
【可】【是】【自】【己】【应】【该】【用】【怎】【样】【的】【反】【应】，【严】【格】【来】【说】，【千】【羽】【是】【不】【记】【得】【秦】【于】【风】【的】，【千】【羽】【还】【记】【得】【这】【一】【点】。 “【你】【是】……【大】【哥】？”【千】【羽】【疑】【问】【道】。 【秦】【于】【风】【看】【着】【千】【羽】，【当】【初】【的】【千】【羽】【刚】【出】【生】，【定】【是】【记】【不】【得】【自】【己】【的】，【看】【着】【她】【楚】【楚】【可】【怜】【的】【样】【子】，【秦】【于】【风】【点】【了】【点】【头】，“【我】【是】【你】【大】【哥】，【你】【的】【名】【字】【还】【是】【我】【取】【的】【呢】！【十】【六】【年】【没】【有】【见】【到】【千】【羽】【了】，【千】【羽】【长】【得】【真】【漂】
“【我】【没】【有】【呀】，”【钱】【浅】【笑】【嘻】【嘻】【地】【答】【道】：“【我】【只】【是】【看】【上】【了】【个】【男】【人】，【准】【备】【把】【他】【扒】【拉】【回】【家】【给】【你】【们】【做】【女】【婿】。” ？？？？？【什】【么】【情】【况】？？！【童】【女】【士】【真】【是】【一】【头】【问】【号】。【这】【孩】【子】【是】【疯】【了】【吧】…… 【钱】【浅】【宣】【布】【自】【己】【看】【上】【了】【个】【男】【人】，【要】【尽】【快】【嫁】【人】。【这】【样】【的】【豪】【言】【壮】【语】【当】【然】【引】【起】【了】【钱】【浅】【爸】【妈】【的】【疑】【虑】，【但】【两】【口】【子】【足】【足】【观】【察】【了】【半】【年】，【也】【没】【看】【见】【男】【人】【的】【影】