US President Donald Trump has today announced massive new tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminium, while threatening to “shut down” its car industry and saying the best way to end the trade war was for Washington’s ally to be absorbed into the US.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
126 points

He’s probably having his stock broker sell off a bunch of stuff, announcing tariffs, then buying back. His stock transactions should be public record while president.

permalink
report
reply
79 points

He shouldn’t even be allowed to own any stocks as president

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Prior presidents had their assets placed in blind trusts, and they didn’t know where they were invested. They didn’t even know how wealthy they were until they left office.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

Thank you! It’s ridiculous how much even people opposed to Trump have allowed him to frame the debate.

Fucker should’ve been impeached and removed on Inauguration Day – 2017, let alone 2025 – for Emoluments Clause violations alone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Holding public office is supposed to be an act of service. All federal and probably all state politicians and their staff should not be allowed to own any individual stocks or companies, including any mutual funds without diverse holdings. And the right people to lead would be glad to do it and to transparently demonstrate their compliance.

But nope. The system is designed to attract and reward scumbags. Mainstream society tells us that loathsome narcissistic sociopaths who happen to accumulate a large net worth are the pinnacle of human existence and we should be thanking them for dragging us out of the dark ages.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

This should go for Trump and all the other oligarchs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

This should go for all citizens, if you trade then it should be public record. We should be able to see everyone’s stock history in case they ever run for office we can look at their trading history to look for conflicts of interest.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

That’s a stretch. Normal citizens buying some nominal amount of shares of Company XYZ 5 years ago doesn’t mean there’s a conflict of interest now, especially if they were sold just as long ago. For if someone might run for office? 99.5% of people won’t.

It’s just undue surveillance on normal people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

Confirmed already; $1-5M lunch buy-ins with corporate execs per head - the topic? Tariff exemptions.

Who cares about billions and trillions of wealth destruction of the public coffers when he can make millions per day personally?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

His stock transactions should be public record while president.

I think that it may be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act

The Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112–105 (text) (PDF), S. 2038, 126 Stat. 291, enacted April 4, 2012) is an Act of Congress designed to combat insider trading. It was signed into law by President Barack Obama on April 4, 2012. The law prohibits the use of non-public information for private profit, including insider trading, by members of Congress and other government employees. It confirms changes to the Commodity Exchange Act, specifies reporting intervals for financial transactions.

The STOCK Act was modified on April 15, 2013, by S. 716. This amendment modifies the online disclosure portion of the STOCK Act, so that some officials, but not the President, Vice President, Congress, or anyone running for Congress, can no longer file online and their records are no longer easily accessible to the public. In Section (a)2, the amendment specifically does not alter the online access for trades by the President, the Vice President, Congress, or those running for Congress.[23]

That being said, my guess is that there are probably trivial ways to game the transparency portion of the bill. Like, if I own a business, and the business holds stock rather than myself directly, I’ll bet that no disclosure is required. And I bet that if you have a spouse or kids doing transactions, no disclosure is required.

Could still get in trouble for insider trading if it could be proven that you were doing so.

kagis

From Trump’s first term:

https://www.npr.org/2016/12/22/506497041/trumps-businesses-could-be-tripped-up-by-a-2012-insider-trading-law

“If he continues to own his businesses and he uses insider information, or information he has as president, then arguably it’s a violation of the STOCK Act,” says Larry Noble, general counsel of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan advocacy group.

Trump has repeatedly said that he plans to turn over management of his businesses to his grown children once he is in the White House and play no role in operations himself.

“The STOCK Act says all executive branch employees are subject to the securities laws, Trump included,” says New York University Law School professor Stephen Gillers.

The STOCK Act originally applied to the buying and selling of securities, such as stocks and bonds. But some legal experts say privately held companies such as the Trump Organization could also fall under its purview, especially if Trump transfers ownership to his children.

Because presidents are privy to an enormous amount of information that could affect stock prices, Trump would risk passing on inside information anytime he talks to his children, even if he doesn’t intend to. That could open Trump, his children and businesses up to nearly constant allegations of insider trading.

Haven’t been following the issue since then.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Don’t worry it was completely ignored. Laws are just mild suggestions for the rich.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 332K

    Comments