The Deutsche Bank subpoena for Trumps bank records fake news?
21 2017-12-05 by RocketSurgeon22
Trying to find CNN article that dropped the story first and cannot find it. Then I keep looking and see many of the sites have deleted the story. Then I search on Google and see stories that Deutsche has not received subpoena. Did I miss understand the story and it was a "plan" or is this another CNN Fake News effort?
UPDATE: White House is claiming it is not true.
43 comments
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
This is the latest one I've seen. https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-lawyer-deutsche-bank-not-received-subpoena-trump-201036488--sector.html
1 craftyanasty 2017-12-05
The old lost in he mail trick
1 Weirdbhamcall 2017-12-05
Can we take Trump's lawyer at his word though?
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Who Ty Cobb? That poor guy.
1 SnugMeatSocks 2017-12-05
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/05/muellers-team-has-not-subpoenaed-deutsche-bank-on-trumps-finances-source-says.html
Jay Sekulow is calling it fake too
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Wow I missed that one. Instead of correcting they just delete the story now?
1 SnugMeatSocks 2017-12-05
It depends on who was the source of the article. If they wrote it they have to retract. If they didn't write and were sourcing another lie merchant instead, just sly delete it. Sanders just confirmed in the press briefing today that it is bs too
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Wonder who will catch the blame on this one. It is mighty quiet.
1 bigepidemic 2017-12-05
Drudge Report is reporting that it's true. That's odd.
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
I found it on Drudge and Reuters but CNN and major MSM sites I cannot find it. I noticed Bloomberg as well.
1 Th3_Admiral 2017-12-05
The original source that several articles have pointed to is the the German newspaper Handelsblatt. I don't know anything about how reliable this paper is, but they have not retracted or deleted their story. In the article they site several unnamed "sources familiar with the investigation" along with a spokesperson for Deutsche Bank.
https://global.handelsblatt.com/finance/muellers-trump-russia-investigation-engulfs-deutsche-bank-861185?ref=MTA5NDE2&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=post
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Thank you. I'm seeing a lot of different stories now. WSJ for example focused its story about previous subpoenas from lawmakers going back to June that were denied. Either this is strange as fuck or I'm losing my shit.
1 Th3_Admiral 2017-12-05
No, this is definitely strange as fuck. The Fox article that someone else linked says Trump's lawyers are claiming the bank told them there were no subpoenas. Someone is obviously wrong here but I have no clue who it is. This seems like a really huge story for one side or the other to be wrong about. If it does turn out to be false, it makes me wonder if someone is intentionally leaking false information to let the media embarrass themselves. If it turns out to be true, either the bank is lying to the lawyer or the lawyer is lying to us. Kinda crazy no matter which way it goes.
1 Sarcophilus 2017-12-05
Is a bank required or even allowed to respond to requested information regarding subpoenas if a defendant asks?
1 Th3_Admiral 2017-12-05
That is what I'm wondering as well. I haven't seen a definitive answer yet, but that would be quite the story if the newspapers found out before their own client.
1 Th3_Admiral 2017-12-05
It's a bit late, and you may have already figured this out on your own, but I just found this linked in another thread. It is entirely possible that the bank did receive a subpoena but told Trump's lawyer that they didn't.
https://www.justice.gov/usam/criminal-resource-manual-426-prohibiting-banks-notifying-customers-grand-jury-subpoenas
1 Sarcophilus 2017-12-05
Wow thanks! I didn't expect that.
I appreciate your effort!
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
I feel like they were looking for a reaction. They want to drive some behavior or action by this. No way somebody just fucking makes this shit up and it hits the wire like it did.
1 Th3_Admiral 2017-12-05
When you say "they" do you mean the investigators? That's a pretty big gamble, isn't it? If it isn't true, you've just convinced several huge, mostly reliable newspapers like Reuters to report a lie. If they didn't know it was a lie, they are going to be pissed. If they did know it was a lie, this'll really hurt their credibility.
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
They meaning CIA deep state. I doubt the media would be pissed. The push lies and delete them later when they report on another story. Noticed it last week didn't You? The only difference is the media outlet in this situation isn't located in US.
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
White House Press Brief just said it was not true.
1 bigepidemic 2017-12-05
Then that proves it! I can rest now.
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
You cannot rest. You're wrecked
1 Sarcophilus 2017-12-05
It was first reported by the german Handelsblatt by sources presumably within Deutsche Bank Source
Afaik the rest just reported the Handelsblatt findings.
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Time stamp is weird though. What does yours say when you click on it?
1 Sarcophilus 2017-12-05
December 5 12pm. But the german article is from December 4th 9:30 pm cet Source
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Yeah this is fucking CIA shit man. WH Brief said it wasn't true. CIA went to Handelsblatt then CNN ran with it. They had to find another agency because CNN is getting buried with their reputation. The WSJ article is the one that threw me off because it was pitching the headline but when you read it - it was talking about shit from June. I think they were trying to ruffle feathers or get Trump team to say something stupid.
1 Sarcophilus 2017-12-05
Why would the CIA go to a german paper? That makes no sense. It's more likely the Handelsblatt has sources within Deutsche Bank and got their info from there.
Either the source lied or Trumps lawyer is lying. At the moment I lean to Trumps lawyer lying to protect his client. And based on past experiences I expect Trump to tweet soon and contradict his lawyer
But I can't imagine the Handelsblatt will just make shit up for the CIA.
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Makes perfect sense. People are tired of fake news so why have a US media agency break a story that is false? I doubt Handelsblattt has sources. Trump has a lot of money in that bank. If a subpoena was handed - he would have been the first to know.
1 Sarcophilus 2017-12-05
Why shouldn't Handelsblatt have sources within Deutsche Bank? It's an investment and stock paper. The name literally translates to "trading paper". It for sure has sources in banks and corporations. And Deutsche Bank is one of our largest banks.
What would it help if Trump knew about the subpoena? He surely wouldn't admit it publicly right?
1 RocketSurgeon22 2017-12-05
Banks leaking to the media is very well coordinated. Higher ups would have known first. Level of security to confidentiality is a costly mistake in their world.
1 it is about Trump and his family. Not Trump the Prez but Trump and family. By Trump knowing would allow him and his family to prepare for potential loses. Leak can cause loses of money like Brian Ross's stunt last week. I doubt he would admit before taking preventative measures. Never know with Trump. He could come out of the closet tomorrow.
1 zonkerton 2017-12-05
It happens all the time:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-28/top-german-journalist-admits-mainstream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-cia
1 PM_ME_ANYTHING_FUN 2017-12-05
Yes, even the daily press beating today said it was
1 pizzacatcasefiles 2017-12-05
Why listen to SHS?
1 LineDriveToTheFace 2017-12-05
Because I'm turned on by giant women with hillbilly accents?
1 1872revealed 2017-12-05
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Damn liberals so desperate for a win they just make shit up, AS USUAL. That half of the UNIPARTY is just fucking nuts and have lost all credibility..
1 OrangeCladAssassin 2017-12-05
19 day old account. Trump cheerleader. Surprise
1 1872revealed 2017-12-05
lol, salty aren't we snowflake?
1 1872revealed 2017-12-05
Instead of belittling my account (LOL) you could offer some sort of a thoughtful retort, but that isn't in the left's play book now is it.
1 OrangeCladAssassin 2017-12-05
"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Damn liberals so desperate for a win they just make shit up, AS USUAL. That half of the UNIPARTY is just fucking nuts and have lost all credibility.."
You think that comment warrants any kind of thoughtful retort? Especially when it comes from a 3 week old Trump rally account?
Maybe you're brainwashed, maybe you're shilling, either way you've lost in whatever agenda you have
1 1872revealed 2017-12-05
agenda, spoken like a true tool. you make it too easy its time for me to move. buh bye
1 OrangeCladAssassin 2017-12-05
You do have an agenda. Just the quickest browse through your comment history shows how deeply brainwashed you are.
1 1872revealed 2017-12-05
lol. believe what you will little one. Just know you are a sheep and I'm don't with whatever this is. buy bye
1 OrangeCladAssassin 2017-12-05
19 day old account. Trump cheerleader. Surprise
1 pizzacatcasefiles 2017-12-05
Why listen to SHS?
1 1872revealed 2017-12-05
agenda, spoken like a true tool. you make it too easy its time for me to move. buh bye