Feds seek seizure of two New York apartments worth $14 million tied to former Mongolia leader in alleged mining scheme

[ad_1]

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday sued to seize two New York City apartments worth $14 million that were allegedly bought with proceeds from a corrupt scheme involving Mongolia’s huge copper mine, a former prime minister of that nation, and his Harvard Business School graduate son.

The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn details a total of $128 million in allegedly unlawful contracts granted by a Mongolian state-owned mining company to shell companies, which benefited then Prime Minister Sukhbaatar Batbold and his family, including his oldest son.

“During Batbold’s tenure as Prime Minister, Erdenet Mining Corporation inserted a middleman with ties to Batbold into the relationship with [the commodity trading firm] Ocean Partners, allowing Batbold to siphon off millions of dollars for his personal use and benefit, which included the purchase of the” luxury apartments in Manhattan, the suit alleges.

Batbold served as prime minister from 2009 through 2012. He currently is a member of the Mongolian parliament.

Money linked to another allegedly illegal contract for $30 million from Erdenet Mining went into a bank account in the United States controlled by the eldest son, Battushig Batbold, via wire transfers referencing “car payment,” “trips and travel,” “school payment,” and “interior designer payment,” the suit said.

Battushig Batbold, a Harvard Business School graduate, is a member of the International Olympic Committee.

He also worked as a summer associate at Blackstone in 2014, and as a mining analyst at Morgan Stanley from 2009 through 2011, according to his LinkedIn page.

Orin Snyder, an attorney at the Gibson Dunn firm that is representing Sukhbaatar Batbold and Battushig Batbold, in an email statement to CNBC said, “The claims filed today echo allegations our clients defeated two years ago in courts around the world.”

“In those cases, we proved the claims against Mr. Batbold were the product of a misinformation campaign designed to manipulate Mongolian democracy — a campaign secretly directed by Mr. Batbold’s opponents.”

“Mr. Batbold looks forward to his day in court, when he will have the opportunity to defend himself against these unfounded claims,” the attorney said.

CNBC has reached out to Mongolia’s United Nations mission in New York for comment on the allegations in the suit.

[ad_2]

Source link

What to know about the Trump ‘fake electors’ scheme in the 2020 election

[ad_1]

At the heart of the latest federal indictment of former President Donald Trump is a scheme to use “fake electors” to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The strategy attempted to find a way to undermine the Electoral College after state officials refused to change the election results.

Here’s a look at what happened:

The process of electing the president

After someone votes for president, that vote gets counted in a statewide tally. But legally speaking, the Electoral College decides who is elected president.

Before each general election, the political parties from each state choose their own slate of potential Electoral College electors. After the votes are in, each state prepares “certificates of ascertainment,” authenticated with the governor’s signature.

In mid-December, the Electoral College formally meets across the country to vote. Congress later gathers on Jan. 6 to tally the votes from the Electoral College and certify the results.

While some states require electors to vote for the candidate chosen by their state’s popular vote, the Constitution does not require it — and this is where the opportunity for mischief creeps in.

The Trump team’s alleged scheme

After numerous legal challenges were flatly rejected by federal and state judges in several battleground states, Trump and his allies began actively pushing Republican state officials to reverse the election results.

Specifically, prosecutors outlined in the indictment how they a) asked governors and secretaries of state to not certify the popular vote results, and b) pointed to nonexistent voter fraud to encourage state legislatures to set aside the popular vote and choose a fresh slate of pro-Trump electors. 

According to the indictment, the plan was outlined in a series of memos that “evolved over time from a legal strategy to preserve the Defendant’s right to a corrupt plan to subvert the federal government function by stopping Biden electors’ votes from being counted and certified.”

The Trump team helped prepare fake certificates in seven states that Trump lost: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. In many cases, these certificates falsely stated that the electors were their state’s “duly elected and qualified” electors. Those phony certificates were then submitted to the National Archives and Congress. A watchdog group published some of the fake certificates.

The certificates signed in Pennsylvania and New Mexico include a potentially important caveat, however, saying that the certificates were submitted in case the alternate electors were later recognized as duly elected (i.e., if Trump was eventually deemed the winner of the election in those states).

In any event, these seven states all went ahead and certified Biden’s electoral college victory on Dec. 14. Yet groups of pro-Trump Republicans, declaring themselves the rightful electors, gathered as well.

What was the point of this scheme?

The evidence suggests that many in Trump’s inner circle understood that the fake electors scheme wouldn’t keep him in the White House, but the goal was to create the illusion of a contested election.

Once the GOP-led state legislatures didn’t go along with the plan, the idea was to, at minimum, give Vice President Mike Pence the pretext to either block Congress from recognizing Biden’s win or delay the vote count when he performed his ceremonial role on Jan. 6. Obviously, Pence didn’t go along with that plan.

There is evidence to suggest that some believed the Trump team could cast enough doubt and then take the case to the Supreme Court, where they apparently hoped the justices would issue a favorable ruling.

What, if anything, about this plot would be unlawful (as opposed to merely destined to fail)?

Prosecutors largely charged Trump with the crimes as referred to in the target letter his attorneys received last month. Federal statute 18 USC § 241 is a Civil War-era statute that makes it unlawful for two or more people to “conspire to injury, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person” in the free exercise of their constitutional rights.

Courts have repeatedly found the statute applies in the voting rights context, specifically in the right to have one’s vote properly counted. Examples of past conspiracies have included stuffing ballot boxes, destroying ballots or changing votes at voting machines. The law does not require the conspiracy to be successful.

In this case, the theory is that Trump and others participated in a scheme to send phony certificates from pro-Trump electors to the National Archives and Congress, with the aim of thwarting the will of the voters in those seven battleground states who had voted for Biden.

18 USC 1512 § (c)(2), which involves obstructing an official proceeding, is also charged. The official proceeding in this case would be the vote certification in Congress on Jan 6. The prosecutor’s argument would be that by submitting phony electoral certificates to the National Archives, Trump and his allies attempted to obstruct that normal certification process. This is a statute that has been charged frequently in other Jan. 6 cases, and has been upheld by the D.C.’s highest federal appeals court (where we believe the charges would happen).

18 USC § 371 is the other statute primarily at issue. That’s about conspiring to defraud the U.S. government. Again, the theory would be that Trump and others conspired to obstruct “the lawful federal government function” of collecting, counting and certifying the election results.

[ad_2]

Source link

Alex Murdaugh accomplice sentenced to 7 years in prison for role in fraud scheme

[ad_1]

The man who once headed a highly respected bank in the South Carolina Lowcountry will spend seven years in federal prison for helping convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh steal nearly $2 million from clients’ legal settlements.

Russell Laffitte was sentenced Tuesday after a jury found him guilty of six charges related to wire and bank fraud back in November. The ex-CEO of Palmetto State Bank became the first of the disgraced former attorney’s accomplices to face prison time following the June 2021 shooting deaths that stemmed from sprawling investigations into the Murdaugh family finances.

U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel also ordered Laffitte to pay more than $3 million in restitution, local media reported. Murdaugh will cover a piece of that sum. The former banker has said he will appeal the decision.

The man who once headed a highly respected bank in the South Carolina Lowcountry will spend seven years in federal prison for helping convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh steal nearly $2 million from clients’ legal settlements.

Russell Laffitte
Former Palmetto State Bank CEO Russell Laffitte exits federal court in Charleston, S.C. on Sept. 6, 2022.John Monk / The State/Tribune News Service via Getty Images file

Russell Laffitte was sentenced Tuesday after a jury found him guilty of six charges related to wire and bank fraud back in November. The ex-CEO of Palmetto State Bank became the first of the disgraced former attorney’s accomplices to face prison time following the June 2021 shooting deaths that stemmed from sprawling investigations into the Murdaugh family finances.

U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel also ordered Laffitte to pay more than $3 million in restitution, local media reported. Murdaugh will cover a piece of that sum. The former banker has said he will appeal the decision.

Laffitte similarly came from a prominent family that had built an upstanding reputation for Palmetto State Bank. The Independent Banks of South Carolina even honored Laffitte as the banker of the year in 2019.

But that good standing tanked over his actions as the court-appointed safeguard for settlement money that Murdaugh won for some of his most vulnerable clients. Prosecutors argued he used the role to elaborately pocket tens of thousands of dollars and collect as much as $450,000 in untaxable fees. The position also allowed him to send large chunks toward Murdaugh — who had grown desperate to repay mounting loans as an opioid addiction further depleted his accounts.

Laffitte acknowledged by name each victim sitting in the Charleston federal courthouse on Tuesday, local media reported. He apologized for not fulfilling his duties to them. He apologized to the judge for erring in his judgment. And he apologized to Palmetto State Bank customers for failing them.

Still, Laffitte continued to maintain his innocence. He has insisted for months instead that he didn’t know he was committing crimes and was manipulated by a major customer.

The defense sought a reduced sentence of three to five years imprisonment. Relatives, friends and business acquaintances vouched for his character in letters submitted to court. His lawyers pointed to his professional ruin and lack of prior criminal record as evidence that a stiff penalty is not necessary to deter future crimes.

“In addition, the name ‘Russell Laffitte’ is now known throughout South Carolina and beyond, and not in a good way — Russell will be forevermore tied to Mr. Murdaugh and known infamously as ‘the Murdaugh banker,” they wrote in a July 28 memo.

Prosecutors asked the judge to put Laffitte behind bars for at least nine years. Rebuffing the claims of ignorance, they noted that the diverted checks were made payable to Palmetto State Bank and not Laffitte as the overseer of the funds. The sophisticated move, they argued, intentionally concealed the final destination.

A lengthier prison stay is also necessary to atone for the damaged public trust in banking, prosecutors wrote in a July 27 memo.

“The Government does not dispute that Murdaugh is the more culpable actor in the criminal conspiracy, or that Murdaugh benefited more from the scheme,” the prosecution wrote. “But the Defendant was the only person who could have stopped him. Instead, the Defendant enabled him. Repeatedly.”

[ad_2]

Source link