Deutsche Bank Has ‘Vast Trove’ Of President Donald Trump Records | The Beat With Ari Melber | MSNBC


>>>BREAKING NEWS IN THE FIGHT>>>BREAKING NEWS IN THE FIGHT OVER TRUMP’S TAX RETURNS, OVER TRUMP’S TAX RETURNS, LAWYERS FOR DEUTSCHE BANK LAWYERS FOR DEUTSCHE BANK CONFIRMING THE FIRM HOLDS TAX CONFIRMING THE FIRM HOLDS TAX RETURNS RELATING TO SUBPOENAS RETURNS RELATING TO SUBPOENAS FOR TRUMP, HIS COMPANIES AND HIS FOR TRUMP, HIS COMPANIES AND HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS. IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS. THE BANK WILL NOT PUBLICLY THE BANK WILL NOT PUBLICLY CONFIRM EXACTLY WHO THOSE CONFIRM EXACTLY WHO THOSE RETURNS BELONG TO. RETURNS BELONG TO. CLAIMING THAT WOULD REVEAL CLAIMING THAT WOULD REVEAL SPECIFIC DETAILS ABOUT HOW ITS SPECIFIC DETAILS ABOUT HOW ITS CUSTOMERS CONDUCT BUSINESS. CUSTOMERS CONDUCT BUSINESS. IT IS THE LATEST TWIST IN HOUSE IT IS THE LATEST TWIST IN HOUSE DEMOCRATS’ LEGAL BATTLE TO GET DEMOCRATS’ LEGAL BATTLE TO GET TRUMP’S FINANCIAL RECORDS, IN TRUMP’S FINANCIAL RECORDS, IN FACT, LATE LAST WEEK JUDGES FACT, LATE LAST WEEK JUDGES CLASHING WITH LAWYERS ON THIS CLASHING WITH LAWYERS ON THIS VERY ISSUE. VERY ISSUE.>>DOES THE BANK HAVE TAX>>DOES THE BANK HAVE TAX RETURNS OF ANY OF THE NAMED RETURNS OF ANY OF THE NAMED PEOPLE OR ENTITIES. PEOPLE OR ENTITIES.>>YOUR HONOR, GIVEN CONTRACTUAL>>YOUR HONOR, GIVEN CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND OTHER LEGAL OBLIGATIONS AND OTHER LEGAL OBLIGATIONS THAT’S UNFORTUNATELY OBLIGATIONS THAT’S UNFORTUNATELY NOT A QUESTION THAT WE’RE ABLE NOT A QUESTION THAT WE’RE ABLE TO ADDRESS. TO ADDRESS. THE BANK HAS — THE BANK HAS –>>WHAT PRIVILEGE ARE YOU>>WHAT PRIVILEGE ARE YOU ASSERTING? ASSERTING?>>THE BANK HAS CONTRACTUAL>>THE BANK HAS CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS TO ITS CLIENTS OBLIGATIONS TO ITS CLIENTS RELATED TO CONFIDENTIAL — RELATED TO CONFIDENTIAL –>>YOU THINK YOU CAN CONTRACT>>YOU THINK YOU CAN CONTRACT AWAY THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER A AWAY THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER A COURT’S QUESTION WITHOUT A COURT’S QUESTION WITHOUT A PRIVILEGE SUCH AS THE FIFTH PRIVILEGE SUCH AS THE FIFTH AMENDMENT OR SOMETHING AMENDMENT OR SOMETHING COMPARABLE? COMPARABLE? YOU JUST CAN SAY WE TOLD OUR YOU JUST CAN SAY WE TOLD OUR CLIENT WE DON’T DO IT. CLIENT WE DON’T DO IT.>>THEY’RE SKEPTICAL OF DEUTSCHE>>THEY’RE SKEPTICAL OF DEUTSCHE BANK’S ARGUMENT BUT EVEN GOT BANK’S ARGUMENT BUT EVEN GOT MORE HEATED. MORE HEATED.>>I’M NOT ASKING YOU FOR THE>>I’M NOT ASKING YOU FOR THE CONTENT OF THEM AT ALL. CONTENT OF THEM AT ALL. I’M ASKING YOU DO YOU HAVE THEM? I’M ASKING YOU DO YOU HAVE THEM?>>EVEN JUST ANSWERING THAT>>EVEN JUST ANSWERING THAT QUESTION, I THINK, COULD RUN QUESTION, I THINK, COULD RUN AFOUL OF — AFOUL OF –>>YOU THINK IT COULD.>>YOU THINK IT COULD.>>YEAH, YOUR HONOR, WE’RE NOT>>YEAH, YOUR HONOR, WE’RE NOT IN A POSITION TO ANSWER THAT IN A POSITION TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION BASED ON THE RELEVANT QUESTION BASED ON THE RELEVANT STATUTES. STATUTES.>>IF WE WANT AN ANSWER TO THAT>>IF WE WANT AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION WE GO TO A COURT AND QUESTION WE GO TO A COURT AND SEEK AN ORDER. SEEK AN ORDER.>>WELL, WE’D BE HAPPY –>>WELL, WE’D BE HAPPY –>>I’M SERIOUS.>>I’M SERIOUS.>>THE JUDGE IS SERIOUS AND SO>>THE JUDGE IS SERIOUS AND SO IS CONGRESS. IS CONGRESS. IN FACT, LAST WEEK, THE LAWYER IN FACT, LAST WEEK, THE LAWYER FOR DEMOCRATS IN THIS CASE FOR DEMOCRATS IN THIS CASE REVEALING THAT THEY ARE REVEALING THAT THEY ARE INVESTIGATING, QUOTE, MASSIVE INVESTIGATING, QUOTE, MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF RUSSIAN MONEY AMOUNTS OF RUSSIAN MONEY INCLUDING POSSIBLE MONEY INCLUDING POSSIBLE MONEY LAUNDERING. LAUNDERING. I’M NOW JOINED BY DAVID ENRICH I’M NOW JOINED BY DAVID ENRICH FINANCE EDITOR WRITING A BOOK FINANCE EDITOR WRITING A BOOK ABOUT TRUMP’S RELATIONSHIP WITH ABOUT TRUMP’S RELATIONSHIP WITH DEUTSCHE BANK AND MAYA WILEY, A DEUTSCHE BANK AND MAYA WILEY, A FORMER CIVIL PROSECUTOR IN THE FORMER CIVIL PROSECUTOR IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. DAVID, LET’S START WITH YOU. DAVID, LET’S START WITH YOU. YOU’VE BEEN INVESTIGATING WITH YOU’VE BEEN INVESTIGATING WITH THIS. THIS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT THE NEWS WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT THE NEWS CAME OUT TODAY, WHAT DO THESE CAME OUT TODAY, WHAT DO THESE FILINGS REALISTICALLY TELL US? FILINGS REALISTICALLY TELL US?>>WELL, THE BOTTOM LINE LEER IS>>WELL, THE BOTTOM LINE LEER IS THAT WE NOW KNOW WITHOUT ANY THAT WE NOW KNOW WITHOUT ANY DOUBT THAT DEUTSCHE BANK IS DOUBT THAT DEUTSCHE BANK IS SITTING ON A VAST TROVE OF SITTING ON A VAST TROVE OF TRUMP’S PERSONAL AND CORPORATE TRUMP’S PERSONAL AND CORPORATE FINANCIAL RECORDS, NOT HIS TAX FINANCIAL RECORDS, NOT HIS TAX RETURNS BUT ALL SORTS OF RETURNS BUT ALL SORTS OF CORPORATE RECORDS GOING BACK CORPORATE RECORDS GOING BACK OVER THE FULL SCALE OF THE OVER THE FULL SCALE OF THE BANK’S 20-YEAR RELATIONSHIP WITH BANK’S 20-YEAR RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM. HIM.>>THESE TAX RETURNS THEMSELVES,>>THESE TAX RETURNS THEMSELVES, IT’S UNCLEAR HOW USEFUL THOSE IT’S UNCLEAR HOW USEFUL THOSE ARE GOING TO BE. ARE GOING TO BE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE BANK HAS THE FIRST SUMMARY BANK HAS THE FIRST SUMMARY PAGES, FIRST TWO OR THREE OR PAGES, FIRST TWO OR THREE OR FOUR PAGES OF TAX RETURNS FOR A FOUR PAGES OF TAX RETURNS FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT YEARS AND SO NUMBER OF DIFFERENT YEARS AND SO IT’S UNCLEAR TO ME HOW USEFUL IT’S UNCLEAR TO ME HOW USEFUL THAT ACTUALLY IS GOING TO BE. THAT ACTUALLY IS GOING TO BE. CERTAINLY NOT AS USEFUL AS IF CERTAINLY NOT AS USEFUL AS IF YOU HAD ALL THE SCHEDULES YOU HAD ALL THE SCHEDULES ATTACHED AND MINUTE DETAILS ATTACHED AND MINUTE DETAILS WHERE DEMOCRATS AND A LOT OF WHERE DEMOCRATS AND A LOT OF JOURNALISTS HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS JOURNALISTS HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS NOW DYING TO GET THEIR HANDS ON. NOW DYING TO GET THEIR HANDS ON.>>TO THAT POINT HOW DOES THIS>>TO THAT POINT HOW DOES THIS HELP THE DEMOCRATS IN THEIR HELP THE DEMOCRATS IN THEIR LEGAL CASES? LEGAL CASES? THEY CONTINUE TO PIECE MORE THEY CONTINUE TO PIECE MORE INFORMATION, IN FACT, IF IT’S INFORMATION, IN FACT, IF IT’S NOT THE FULL SCOPE OF THE THANKS NOT THE FULL SCOPE OF THE THANKS RETURNS WITH ALL THE SCHEDULES RETURNS WITH ALL THE SCHEDULES AND HOW COMPREHENSIVE OR AND HOW COMPREHENSIVE OR EXTENSIVE IT IS, WHAT IF EXTENSIVE IT IS, WHAT IF ANYTHING DOES THIS CHANGE IN THE ANYTHING DOES THIS CHANGE IN THE GAME? GAME?>>WELL, I THINK THERE ARE>>WELL, I THINK THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO ISSUES HERE. ACTUALLY TWO ISSUES HERE. SO ONE IS, OF COURSE, THE MORE SO ONE IS, OF COURSE, THE MORE INFORMATION DEMOCRATS CAN GET, INFORMATION DEMOCRATS CAN GET, THE MORE LIKELIHOOD THEY’RE ABLE THE MORE LIKELIHOOD THEY’RE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THEIR OTHER TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THEIR OTHER SOURCES OR OTHER PEOPLE THEY SOURCES OR OTHER PEOPLE THEY SHOULD BE SUBPOENAING RECORDS SHOULD BE SUBPOENAING RECORDS FROM. FROM. SO THAT’S ONE REASON WHY THEY SO THAT’S ONE REASON WHY THEY WANT TO GET THE MOST INFORMATION WANT TO GET THE MOST INFORMATION AROUND HIS TAX RETURN, HOW MUCH AROUND HIS TAX RETURN, HOW MUCH INFORMATION THEY’RE REALLY GOING INFORMATION THEY’RE REALLY GOING TO GET IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION. TO GET IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION. THE OTHER IS THE LEGAL ISSUE. THE OTHER IS THE LEGAL ISSUE. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS TAKEN FIRST OF ALL THE TRUMP — TAKEN FIRST OF ALL THE TRUMP — DONALD TRUMP HIMSELF HAS TAKEN A DONALD TRUMP HIMSELF HAS TAKEN A VERY AGGRESSIVE AND LEGALLY WEAK VERY AGGRESSIVE AND LEGALLY WEAK ARGUMENT THAT ESSENTIALLY SAYS ARGUMENT THAT ESSENTIALLY SAYS THIS IS JUST A POLITICAL ATTACK THIS IS JUST A POLITICAL ATTACK ON ME AND I HAVE A RIGHT TO ON ME AND I HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY DESPITE HOLDING THE MOST PRIVACY DESPITE HOLDING THE MOST POWERFUL CHAIR IN THE COUNTRY. POWERFUL CHAIR IN THE COUNTRY.>>YEAH, YOU BRING THAT UP.>>YEAH, YOU BRING THAT UP. LET ME PLAY THIS FOR YOU. LET ME PLAY THIS FOR YOU. HE’S BEEN EXTREMELY DEFENSIVE. HE’S BEEN EXTREMELY DEFENSIVE. WATCH WHAT HE SAID IN THE PAST. WATCH WHAT HE SAID IN THE PAST.>>MAYBE I’M GOING TO DO THE TAX>>MAYBE I’M GOING TO DO THE TAX RETURNS WHEN OBAMA DOES HIS RETURNS WHEN OBAMA DOES HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. BIRTH CERTIFICATE.>>IF I DECIDE TO RUN FOR OFFICE>>IF I DECIDE TO RUN FOR OFFICE I’LL PRODUCE MY TAX RETURNS, I’LL PRODUCE MY TAX RETURNS, ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY.>>WHAT IS YOUR TAX RATE?>>WHAT IS YOUR TAX RATE?>>IT’S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.>>IT’S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. YOU’LL SEE WHEN I RELEASE IT. YOU’LL SEE WHEN I RELEASE IT.>>YOU DON’T RELEASE THE RETURNS>>YOU DON’T RELEASE THE RETURNS WHEN THE AUDIT IS COMPLETE. WHEN THE AUDIT IS COMPLETE. MY TAX RETURNS, AGAINST MY MY TAX RETURNS, AGAINST MY LAWYER’S WISHES, WHEN SHE LAWYER’S WISHES, WHEN SHE RELEASES HER 33,000 EMAILS. RELEASES HER 33,000 EMAILS.>>I MEAN I BECAME PRESIDENT.>>I MEAN I BECAME PRESIDENT. NO, I DON’T THINK THEY CARE AT NO, I DON’T THINK THEY CARE AT ALL. ALL.>>WHY IS HE SO DEFENSIVE TO THE>>WHY IS HE SO DEFENSIVE TO THE POINT THAT YOU ARE MAKING HIS POINT THAT YOU ARE MAKING HIS DEFENSE — WHY IS HE SO DEFENSE — WHY IS HE SO DEFENSIVE ABOUT HIS TAX RETURNS. DEFENSIVE ABOUT HIS TAX RETURNS.>>WE’VE HEARD SEVERAL THINGS>>WE’VE HEARD SEVERAL THINGS THAT SUGGEST REASONS HE MIGHT BE THAT SUGGEST REASONS HE MIGHT BE DEFENSIVE, ONE, FOR EXAMPLE, IS DEFENSIVE, ONE, FOR EXAMPLE, IS “THE NEW YORK TIMES” REPORTING “THE NEW YORK TIMES” REPORTING ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY HE HAS ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY HE HAS LOST. LOST. I MEAN, THERE IS CERTAINLY THE I MEAN, THERE IS CERTAINLY THE FACTOR OF RUNNING ON BEING AN FACTOR OF RUNNING ON BEING AN EXCELLENT BUSINESSMAN WITH EXCELLENT BUSINESSMAN WITH PERHAPS A FINANCIAL RECORD THAT PERHAPS A FINANCIAL RECORD THAT SHOWS YOU’RE NOT. SHOWS YOU’RE NOT. THE SECOND IS IMPLICATIONS IN — THE SECOND IS IMPLICATIONS IN — OF WHETHER HE’S OVERSTATING OF WHETHER HE’S OVERSTATING EARNINGS, OVERSTATING EARNINGS, OVERSTATING DEDUCTIONS, IMPLICATIONS ABOUT DEDUCTIONS, IMPLICATIONS ABOUT WHETHER HE’S ACTUALLY COMMITTED WHETHER HE’S ACTUALLY COMMITTED TAX FRAUD, FOR EXAMPLE, OR TAX FRAUD, FOR EXAMPLE, OR INSURANCE FRAUD FOR THAT MATTER. INSURANCE FRAUD FOR THAT MATTER. I MEAN MICHAEL COHEN SAID HE DID I MEAN MICHAEL COHEN SAID HE DID THESE KIND OF THINGS ALL THE THESE KIND OF THINGS ALL THE TIME AND SUGGESTED THAT MIGHT BE TIME AND SUGGESTED THAT MIGHT BE A PROBLEM. A PROBLEM. THE THIRD AND THIS IS WHERE THE THE THIRD AND THIS IS WHERE THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE POINT, THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE POINT, THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE ALSO WANTS THIS INFORMATION ALSO WANTS THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE ROBERT MUELLER ALL BUT BECAUSE ROBERT MUELLER ALL BUT CONFIRMED COUNTERINTELLIGENCE CONFIRMED COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION OF THE FBI, NOT INVESTIGATION OF THE FBI, NOT THAT SURPRISING, LOTS OF REASON THAT SURPRISING, LOTS OF REASON TO SUSPECT THERE MIGHT BE TO SUSPECT THERE MIGHT BE ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS OF SOME ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS OF SOME FORM, DEUTSCHE BANK IS THE BANK FORM, DEUTSCHE BANK IS THE BANK THAT HAS BEEN IN BED WITH RUSSIA THAT HAS BEEN IN BED WITH RUSSIA FOR A LONG TIME AND IT IS ONE OF FOR A LONG TIME AND IT IS ONE OF THE ONLY BANKS THAT WOULD LEND THE ONLY BANKS THAT WOULD LEND MONEY TO DONALD TRUMP. MONEY TO DONALD TRUMP. SO IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND SO IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER OR NOT RUSSIA HAS ANY WHETHER OR NOT RUSSIA HAS ANY LEVERAGE OVER DONALD TRUMP, THAT LEVERAGE OVER DONALD TRUMP, THAT IS A GOOD PLACE TO LOOK. IS A GOOD PLACE TO LOOK.>>ALL RIGHT, SO I FEEL LIKE WE>>ALL RIGHT, SO I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE THE PERFECT GUEST TO ANSWER HAVE THE PERFECT GUEST TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR US. THAT QUESTION FOR US. YOU’VE BEEN LOOKING AT THE YOU’VE BEEN LOOKING AT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DONALD RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DONALD TRUMP AND DEUTSCHE BANK FOR THE TRUMP AND DEUTSCHE BANK FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS. PAST 20 YEARS. WITHOUT GIVING AWAY ALL OF THE WITHOUT GIVING AWAY ALL OF THE REPORTING UNLESS YOU WANT TO REPORTING UNLESS YOU WANT TO GIVE AWAY THE KEY NUGGET OF WHAT GIVE AWAY THE KEY NUGGET OF WHAT YOU FOUND, TELL US A LITTLE YOU FOUND, TELL US A LITTLE ABOUT THIS RELATIONSHIP. ABOUT THIS RELATIONSHIP. WHY HAS IT BECOME THE FOCAL WHY HAS IT BECOME THE FOCAL POINT IN THIS THREE-WAY NEXUS POINT IN THIS THREE-WAY NEXUS BETWEEN RUSSIA, DEUTSCHE BANK BETWEEN RUSSIA, DEUTSCHE BANK AND DONALD TRUMP. AND DONALD TRUMP.>>AS YOU SAID DEUTSCHE BANK IS>>AS YOU SAID DEUTSCHE BANK IS THE ONLY MAINSTREAM BANK THAT THE ONLY MAINSTREAM BANK THAT HAS BEEN WILLING TO TOUCH DONALD HAS BEEN WILLING TO TOUCH DONALD TRUMP CONSISTENTLY FOR THE PAST TRUMP CONSISTENTLY FOR THE PAST TWO DECADES AND ALSO ONE OF ONLY TWO DECADES AND ALSO ONE OF ONLY MAINSTREAM BANKS IN THE WORLD MAINSTREAM BANKS IN THE WORLD THAT HAS BEEN DEEP IN BED AND IN THAT HAS BEEN DEEP IN BED AND IN HAWK WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT HAWK WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT AND WITH RUSSIAN BANKS TIED TO AND WITH RUSSIAN BANKS TIED TO THE CREME LEARN — KREMLIN AND THE CREME LEARN — KREMLIN AND CLOSE TO PUTIN. CLOSE TO PUTIN. IT’S AN INCREDIBLE COINCIDENCE IT’S AN INCREDIBLE COINCIDENCE BUT BASED ON THE REPORTING WE’VE BUT BASED ON THE REPORTING WE’VE DONE THERE’S PEOPLE INSIDE DONE THERE’S PEOPLE INSIDE DEUTSCHE BANK IN THE COMPLIANCE DEUTSCHE BANK IN THE COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT AND IN THE ANTI-MONEY DEPARTMENT AND IN THE ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING PARTS OF THE BANK LAUNDERING PARTS OF THE BANK WHERE THEY WERE SEEING WHERE THEY WERE SEEING SUSPICIOUS STUFF WITH JARED SUSPICIOUS STUFF WITH JARED KUSHNER’S ACCOUNTS AND DONALD KUSHNER’S ACCOUNTS AND DONALD TRUMP’S ACCOUNTS AND PEOPLE TRUMP’S ACCOUNTS AND PEOPLE REPEATEDLY TRIED TO BLOW THE REPEATEDLY TRIED TO BLOW THE WHISTLE AND THEIR CONCERNS WHISTLE AND THEIR CONCERNS OVERRULED BECAUSE THE BANK WAS OVERRULED BECAUSE THE BANK WAS SO DESPERATE TO KEEP MONEY OFF SO DESPERATE TO KEEP MONEY OFF THESE LUCRATIVE CLIENTS. THESE LUCRATIVE CLIENTS. DONALD TRUMP IS CLEARLY EAGER TO DONALD TRUMP IS CLEARLY EAGER TO KEEP HIS FINANCES SECRET. KEEP HIS FINANCES SECRET. THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE DON’T KNOW THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE DON’T KNOW WHY BUT IT’S CLEARLY FOR SOME WHY BUT IT’S CLEARLY FOR SOME REASON AND SOONER OR LATER WE’LL REASON AND SOONER OR LATER WE’LL FIND OUT. FIND OUT.>>WE’LL SEE IF THESE DEMOCRATS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *