Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by martyb on Thursday January 11 2018, @02:02AM   Printer-friendly
from the no-comment dept.

The Trump administration has waived part of the punishment for five megabanks whose affiliates were convicted and fined for manipulating global interest rates. One of the Trump administration waivers was granted to Deutsche Bank — which is owed at least $130 million by President Donald Trump and his business empire, and has also been fined for its role in a Russian money laundering scheme.

The waivers were issued in a little-noticed announcement published in the Federal Register during the Christmas holiday week. They come less than two years after then-candidate Trump promised “I'm not going to let Wall Street get away with murder.”

http://www.ibtimes.com/g00/political-capital/trump-administration-waives-punishment-convicted-banks-including-deutsche-which


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by arslan on Thursday January 11 2018, @03:37AM (4 children)

    by arslan (3462) on Thursday January 11 2018, @03:37AM (#620787)

    So no other American politician had had to make policies that affect companies that has dealings with their private ventures? This kind of stuff is not uncommon.

    He's not cherry picking DB for the waiver. Its an extension of an existing waiver from a former president. You can of course draw all sorts of conclusions and conspiracy theories from it - but in the ends it is just speculation and poo flinging.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Whoever on Thursday January 11 2018, @03:44AM (1 child)

    by Whoever (4524) on Thursday January 11 2018, @03:44AM (#620791) Journal

    Most recent presidents have chosen to put their holdings into a blind trust, in order to avoid this exact problem.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @06:51PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @06:51PM (#621030)

      Does tax law allow for assets to be put into a blind trust without causing a tax event?

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @05:52AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @05:52AM (#620814)

    This kind of stuff is not uncommon.

    Possibly. It is also illegal, immoral, and possibly fattening. And for a sitting Precedent, unconstitutional. See: Emoluments Clause.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday January 11 2018, @06:42PM

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday January 11 2018, @06:42PM (#621028) Journal