HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » An observation about the ...

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:01 AM

An observation about the resignations of Trump's Deutsche Bankers

Here's a statement from the bank:

"Rosemary Vrablic and Dominic Scalzi have tendered their resignations to Deutsche Bank effective as of year-end, which was accepted by the bank," Daniel Hunter, a spokesman for the bank said in a statement.
(He should have said, "...which were accepted..." but I'm a nit-picker!)

The bank is under investigation by several authorities for possible financial crimes related to Trump and his businesses. These two individuals were instrumental in securing huge loans for Trump.

Here's the thing: On Wall Street and in big banks (maybe smaller ones, too), when you get fired you're told to resign. This is for several reasons. First, these individuals usually have fiduciary and legal responsibilities; these need to be surrendered. Second, there's a sort of "professional courtesy" that one can resign, thereby avoiding to have a termination on their employment record.

The third reason is more serious. If a bank or brokerage wants to get rid of an employee and they fire the worker, it almost always has to be "for cause" meaning there has to be a breach of law or company policy to terminate the employee. This can become an enormous legal problem for the employer with the potential to cost tons of money and lots of negative publicity. Brokers and bankers don't want controversy because it undermines faith in their markets.

Make no mistake: Vrabic and Scalzi were canned. They were probably able to negotiate some financial benefits for themselves, as is the practice in many financial (and other) businesses. But they face serious legal troubles and they'll be on their own. It's most likely that their careers in finance are finished.

Meanwhile, Deutsche Bank will "cooperate" with investigators and eventually cut their own deal.

So, here are two more Trump collaborators tossed overboard.

Everything Trump touches dies.

41 replies, 5704 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 41 replies Author Time Post
Reply An observation about the resignations of Trump's Deutsche Bankers (Original post)
PJMcK Dec 2020 OP
gab13by13 Dec 2020 #1
PJMcK Dec 2020 #3
wnylib Dec 2020 #7
PJMcK Dec 2020 #10
wnylib Dec 2020 #34
PJMcK Dec 2020 #37
wnylib Dec 2020 #40
Lochloosa Dec 2020 #16
Fortinbras Armstrong Dec 2020 #17
DFW Dec 2020 #18
Klaralven Dec 2020 #28
Klaralven Dec 2020 #2
PJMcK Dec 2020 #4
Chin music Dec 2020 #24
intrepidity Dec 2020 #5
PJMcK Dec 2020 #6
wnylib Dec 2020 #8
PJMcK Dec 2020 #9
wnylib Dec 2020 #32
2naSalit Dec 2020 #12
intrepidity Dec 2020 #15
Backseat Driver Dec 2020 #29
wnylib Dec 2020 #33
Chin music Dec 2020 #25
intrepidity Dec 2020 #14
secondwind Dec 2020 #20
dlk Dec 2020 #11
NNadir Dec 2020 #13
Buckeyeblue Dec 2020 #19
Irish_Dem Dec 2020 #26
Buckeyeblue Dec 2020 #31
Irish_Dem Dec 2020 #38
Botany Dec 2020 #21
Backseat Driver Dec 2020 #30
PRETZEL Dec 2020 #22
Irish_Dem Dec 2020 #27
Pluvious Dec 2020 #35
Irish_Dem Dec 2020 #39
malaise Dec 2020 #23
BSdetect Dec 2020 #36
Blue Owl Dec 2020 #41

Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:17 AM

1. Also, if Trump pardoned them,

they would give up their 5th Amendment rights if called to testify.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gab13by13 (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:22 AM

3. Trump can't "pardon" them

Vrablic and Scalzi haven't been charged with any crimes (yet). They simply lost their jobs.

Trump doesn't have any influence in the internal practices of Deutsche Bank so he can't "pardon" them to reinstate their jobs. In fact, I bet Trump's reaction has been along the lines of, "Who?"

Trump has used them and, as usual, has cast them aside now that he's finished with them. It's his typical M.O.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:38 AM

7. Also - Isn't this investigation

aimed at Trump, his family, and his business? Aren't they the ones likely to be charged by the US system if crimes are found and not the employees of a foreign bank?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wnylib (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:56 AM

10. The net could get pretty wide

For example, consider the Mueller investigation. Paul Manafort ended up in jail for crimes that really weren't related to Trump. Likewise, President Clinton ended up impeached because Starr originally began looking into a failed real estate deal.

The bank, the two former employees, the Trumps and who-knows-how-many others could get swept up if the investigators get aggressive enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 02:29 PM

34. Does the US have the legal right to

charge employees of a foreign bank for things they did as employees of that bank? If they broke US laws, it seems like they could be charged, but what if they only did things that allowed US citizens to break US law, e.g. giving a loan to someone who misrepresented his income? If they knew he misrepresented it, they would be accountable to their employer and perhaps to German law, but would US law apply to them?

Also, If Trump then misrepresented the value of his income or properties, loans, interest, etc. on his tax returns, the German bank employees would not be liable, would they?

I'm no expert on American law, and I know even less about international laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wnylib (Reply #34)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 05:34 PM

37. See post #16 below your post (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Reply #37)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 06:38 PM

40. Ok. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gab13by13 (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:19 AM

16. Deutsche Bank is a German bank.

Most likely any crimes committed would fall under German laws. Even if they are charged under US laws, I doubt they will be charged before January 20th.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lochloosa (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:35 AM

17. If the banking is done in the US, any crimes would fall under US law. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lochloosa (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:37 AM

18. Not necessarily.

A german bank still has to register as an American entity if it wishes to do business in the USA. If officials of an American branch committed crimes in the USA, they are prosecutable where they occurred, not where the home office of the bank is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lochloosa (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 11:15 AM

28. Deutsche Bank in the US is mainly Bankers Trust of NY and Alex Brown of Baltimore, acquired in '99

The US operation is under US law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:21 AM

2. Conflict of interest should be enough

According to the report, the bankís internal review is centered on a Manhattan apartment purchased by Vrablic and two Deutsche Bank colleagues from a company called Bergel 715 Associates for $1.5 million in 2013. At the time of the purchase, Kushner was one of Vrablicís clients and simultaneously held an ownership stake in Bergel, circumstances with significant potential for conflicts of interest. One of the other bank employees involved in the transaction, Dominic Scalzi, also tendered his resignation.


https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/trumps-banker-at-deutsche-bank-resigns-amid-scandals-escalating-investigations-into-presidents-finances/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Klaralven (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:26 AM

4. Great find!

I was unaware of this important detail. Thanks, Klaralven.

Of course, with this crowd, the apartment will probably turn out to be a crack through which a great many other bad acts will be seen.

The web of questionable behavior, to be polite, surrounding Trump, DB, the Kennedys and a few others is a nice fat conspiracy just crying out to be revealed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Klaralven (Reply #2)


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:31 AM

5. About that nit....

Are you sure? It doesn't sound right with "were" because of the clause... I don't know the correct grammatical vernacular to explain what I mean, other than that the "was" refers to the condition (end of year). Read it with "were" -- does it sound right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intrepidity (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:36 AM

6. Here's how I parsed it

"Rosemary Vrablic and Dominic Scalzi have tendered their resignations... which were accepted by the bank."

It was the resignations that were accepted, not the end of the year. The year will be over whether or not DB accepts it!

However, I could be wrong. Like you, I've forgotten the grammatical terms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:47 AM

8. You are correct. It's called

subject-verb agreement. The subject of the dependent clause is "resignations," a plural noun. It calls for a plural verb - "were" instead of "was."

It's a common mistake for people to use the wrong verb if the subject and verb are separated by clauses and phrases that make people forget which word is the subject.

EDIT to add:

In the end, most people understand what is meant even if there is a grammatical error, when speaking or in informal writing. But sometimes the meaning can be confusing if the grammar is wrong. Also, if you submit a formal paper, grammatical mistakes look bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wnylib (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 08:52 AM

9. Thanks!

In junior high school, we had what we called concentration camp. It was a six-week intensive course in grammar. I've forgotten the reasons for the rules but I usually remember how to use them!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 02:12 PM

32. LOL. Same here as far as remembering

how to use them but not always remembering the terms. This one was easier to remember. I didn't have a 6 week intensive grammar course, but for a couple years in junior high, we had to diagram sentences for at least 2 six week units per year.

However, I confess that I slip sometimes on correct word usage - which, that, as, since, etc. I just use the one that sounds right to me at the moment, but I know that a good grammarian could slice my language to ribbons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wnylib (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:00 AM

12. YES!

Thank you!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wnylib (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:08 AM

15. Oh, those terms are all vaguely familiar

from high school English class that I guess I didn't pay enough attention to!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intrepidity (Reply #15)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 11:29 AM

29. BTW, I also learned one should not ever end sentences in a preposition.

Better grammar to write: Oh, ...from high school English class, to which, I guess, I did not pay enough attention!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Backseat Driver (Reply #29)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 02:16 PM

33. I was taught that the rule against

ending a word with a preposition is nonsense. Also, that it's OK to split infintives. Some grammar rules are ridiculous BS set up by people who need to just get a life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wnylib (Reply #8)


Response to PJMcK (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:05 AM

14. I guess what I was thinking was that the "acceptance"

by the bank, was of the clause that the resignations would be effective at year end, versus immediately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intrepidity (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 10:04 AM

20. "Resignations" is plural, imho

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:00 AM

11. Someone I'm close to is an executive at a large bank

He said the same thing; Vrablic was asked to resign, and the resignation wasnít optional. Thatís how itís done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:03 AM

13. Unfortunately he's touched the United States.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 09:39 AM

19. What about Justice Kennedy's son? I thought he was part of that group

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buckeyeblue (Reply #19)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 10:51 AM

26. I have been wondering the same thing. Funny how he has disappeared from the news.

Did they fire him too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Irish_Dem (Reply #26)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 11:48 AM

31. Probably got promoted and moved to a different part of the bank.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buckeyeblue (Reply #31)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 06:28 PM

38. Geez, you are probably right. :(. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 10:23 AM

21. I hope I am wrong but I think both Ms. Rosemary Vrablic and Ms. Dominic Scalzi are gonna go ...

.... missing very soon. Putin doesn't like loose ends.

And wasn't Justice Kennedy's son involved in getting Trump a loan from Deutsche Bank?


https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/the-son-of-former-supreme-court-justice-anthony-kennedy-helped-trump-secure-loans-at-deutsche-bank/

The Son of Former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy Helped Trump Secure Loans at Deutsche Bank

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 11:36 AM

30. I thought I read that SCOTUS Kennedy's son was transferred to another position in a different area

of the bank - perhaps, investment banking (securities) instead of RE mortgage finance (collateral)? Can't quite remember...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 10:31 AM

22. Definitely, they were canned,

make no mistake about that,

However, now the questions become,

Are they going to take the fall for Deutsche in connection to the Trump loans?

Is Deutsche cutting ties with Trump and will call their loans when due?

Will they cooperate with the investigations? With or without immunity?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PRETZEL (Reply #22)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 10:53 AM

27. I think they are going to take the fall for Deutsche. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Irish_Dem (Reply #27)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 02:49 PM

35. Assuming they don't take a fall out a window. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pluvious (Reply #35)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 06:29 PM

39. Or they get bad underwear. :(

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 10:33 AM

23. Hope they sing

Shit is getting real

Happy Holidays PJMck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #23)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 03:26 PM

36. They will have signed some NDA or similar linked to their generous payout.

Probably a year's salary and all share options vested plus pension retained or converted.

If canned they would lose all that. Or most of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PJMcK (Original post)

Wed Dec 23, 2020, 07:31 PM

41. The Douche Bags of Deutsche Bank

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread