United States | News & Politics

7227 readers

141 users here now

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

pangyuehung@lemmy.ml

yogthos@lemmy.ml

267

Judge Tries to Stop Trump From Hiding His Money (www.thedailybeast.com)

submitted 1 year ago by DevCat@lemmy.world to c/usa@lemmy.ml

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The judge who doomed Donald Trump’s family business last week took an aggressive and preemptive step on Wednesday to ensure the former president can't secretly shift assets to salvage his real estate empire.

In an order that was posted on the fourth day of the former president’s bank fraud trial, Justice Arthur F. Engoron commanded that the Trumps identify any corporations they have—and come clean about any plans to move around money in an attempt to hide or keep their wealth.

It's a powerful maneuver meant to counter the sort of underhanded moves Trump has displayed so far during the three-year investigation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Holyginz@lemmy.world 112 points 1 year ago (3 children)

My god. Are we seriously at a point the US government isn't able to get one washed up old traitorous racist to obey the rules in court? This is just sad. He should have been locked up so long ago it isn't even funny anymore.

[–] nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 1 year ago

Jail all the poors, the rich run free. So, working as intended.

[–] fleabomber@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought this was a preemptive step to prevent the shenanigans.

[–] Kerrigor@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a step to prevent further shenanigans of the same kind that he's already been doing for years

[–] fleabomber@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An ex president has faced a corporate death sentence before? I feel like we're in uncharted waters here. His tricks really don't seem to hold up in court, other than delay, delay, delay, and that tactic seems to be running out of steam.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

An ex president has faced a corporate death sentence before?

An ex president shouldn't have had a corporation to dissolve in the first place because he should've been forced to divest due to the Emoluments Clause.

[–] fleabomber@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

I'm not sure that's relevant since we're talking about laws he's broke, not laws we wish were in place. As far as I know, divestment is not a requirement.