

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
President-elect Donald Trump's team is reportedly considering setting up a "discretionary trust" that would allow Trump to distance himself from his businesses while still reaping their financial benefits--an arrangement that, as government watchdogs put it, is "inappropriate" at best and "a betrayal" at worst.
Politico on Wednesday reported that Trump aides were speaking with the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) this week, indicating that the team is still attempting to sidestep ethical boundaries rather than abide by them. It's the latest in a series of steps by the family that suggest they are selling off access to the president and attempting to profit off Trump's rise to power.
"It's highly inappropriate," former ethics lawyer Richard Painter told Politico. "To have someone baby-sit your conflict-creating assets while you go around and do whatever you want, in my view that's a violation of at least the spirit of the rules and that's an abuse."
In a typical blind trust, an independent financial manager takes over the official's assets and handles them without input from the owner. Assets that are considered conflicts of interest--of which Trump has a historic amount--are sold off and replaced.
But, Politico's Josh Gerstein writes,
with a discretionary trust, the conflicts almost magically disappear because the investments aren't considered to belong to the incoming official at all--even if they're producing a steady stream of income for the official. Instead, the assets are held in a trust that is often overseen by a family member who can, but is not legally required to, send revenues from the assets to the government official. Another benefit: there's no explicit prohibition on the official talking with the trustee about the financial holdings.
"You don't have to disclose it, since you don't own it, Aunt Millie owns it," Painter said. "And it cures your financial conflicts of interest under the criminal statute. ... If you really have a discretionary trust, you can participate in government decisions that affect those assets--if they let you get away with it."
Kait Sweeney, press secretary for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), said that "by not disclosing and divesting, Trump is betraying his own voters by prioritizing his own corporate interests at the expense of working families. The framers of our Constitution did not intend for presidents to put their own interests and corporations ahead of the American people."
Earlier this month, Senate Democrats, led by Wall Street watchdog Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), announced plans to roll out legislation that would force Trump to "divest and disclose" financial assets that pose conflicts of interest.
Sweeney on Wednesday called on all Democrats to support that legislation--"and not hide behind absurd 'half-blind trusts'."
On Twitter, the reactions were acerbic.
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
President-elect Donald Trump's team is reportedly considering setting up a "discretionary trust" that would allow Trump to distance himself from his businesses while still reaping their financial benefits--an arrangement that, as government watchdogs put it, is "inappropriate" at best and "a betrayal" at worst.
Politico on Wednesday reported that Trump aides were speaking with the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) this week, indicating that the team is still attempting to sidestep ethical boundaries rather than abide by them. It's the latest in a series of steps by the family that suggest they are selling off access to the president and attempting to profit off Trump's rise to power.
"It's highly inappropriate," former ethics lawyer Richard Painter told Politico. "To have someone baby-sit your conflict-creating assets while you go around and do whatever you want, in my view that's a violation of at least the spirit of the rules and that's an abuse."
In a typical blind trust, an independent financial manager takes over the official's assets and handles them without input from the owner. Assets that are considered conflicts of interest--of which Trump has a historic amount--are sold off and replaced.
But, Politico's Josh Gerstein writes,
with a discretionary trust, the conflicts almost magically disappear because the investments aren't considered to belong to the incoming official at all--even if they're producing a steady stream of income for the official. Instead, the assets are held in a trust that is often overseen by a family member who can, but is not legally required to, send revenues from the assets to the government official. Another benefit: there's no explicit prohibition on the official talking with the trustee about the financial holdings.
"You don't have to disclose it, since you don't own it, Aunt Millie owns it," Painter said. "And it cures your financial conflicts of interest under the criminal statute. ... If you really have a discretionary trust, you can participate in government decisions that affect those assets--if they let you get away with it."
Kait Sweeney, press secretary for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), said that "by not disclosing and divesting, Trump is betraying his own voters by prioritizing his own corporate interests at the expense of working families. The framers of our Constitution did not intend for presidents to put their own interests and corporations ahead of the American people."
Earlier this month, Senate Democrats, led by Wall Street watchdog Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), announced plans to roll out legislation that would force Trump to "divest and disclose" financial assets that pose conflicts of interest.
Sweeney on Wednesday called on all Democrats to support that legislation--"and not hide behind absurd 'half-blind trusts'."
On Twitter, the reactions were acerbic.
President-elect Donald Trump's team is reportedly considering setting up a "discretionary trust" that would allow Trump to distance himself from his businesses while still reaping their financial benefits--an arrangement that, as government watchdogs put it, is "inappropriate" at best and "a betrayal" at worst.
Politico on Wednesday reported that Trump aides were speaking with the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) this week, indicating that the team is still attempting to sidestep ethical boundaries rather than abide by them. It's the latest in a series of steps by the family that suggest they are selling off access to the president and attempting to profit off Trump's rise to power.
"It's highly inappropriate," former ethics lawyer Richard Painter told Politico. "To have someone baby-sit your conflict-creating assets while you go around and do whatever you want, in my view that's a violation of at least the spirit of the rules and that's an abuse."
In a typical blind trust, an independent financial manager takes over the official's assets and handles them without input from the owner. Assets that are considered conflicts of interest--of which Trump has a historic amount--are sold off and replaced.
But, Politico's Josh Gerstein writes,
with a discretionary trust, the conflicts almost magically disappear because the investments aren't considered to belong to the incoming official at all--even if they're producing a steady stream of income for the official. Instead, the assets are held in a trust that is often overseen by a family member who can, but is not legally required to, send revenues from the assets to the government official. Another benefit: there's no explicit prohibition on the official talking with the trustee about the financial holdings.
"You don't have to disclose it, since you don't own it, Aunt Millie owns it," Painter said. "And it cures your financial conflicts of interest under the criminal statute. ... If you really have a discretionary trust, you can participate in government decisions that affect those assets--if they let you get away with it."
Kait Sweeney, press secretary for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), said that "by not disclosing and divesting, Trump is betraying his own voters by prioritizing his own corporate interests at the expense of working families. The framers of our Constitution did not intend for presidents to put their own interests and corporations ahead of the American people."
Earlier this month, Senate Democrats, led by Wall Street watchdog Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), announced plans to roll out legislation that would force Trump to "divest and disclose" financial assets that pose conflicts of interest.
Sweeney on Wednesday called on all Democrats to support that legislation--"and not hide behind absurd 'half-blind trusts'."
On Twitter, the reactions were acerbic.