Jump to content

Trump charity to dissolve under deal with N.Y. attorney general


webfact

Recommended Posts

Trump charity to dissolve under deal with N.Y. attorney general

By Brendan Pierson

 

2018-12-18T180545Z_1_LYNXMPEEBH1CW_RTROPTP_3_USA-TRUMP-TRUMP-FOUNDATION.JPG

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump presents a mock check from theTrump Foundation representing $100,000 to members of the Puppy Jake Foundation, which provides military veterans with trained service dogs, in Davenport, Iowa, U.S., January 30, 2016. REUTERS/Rick Wilking/File Photo

 

(Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump's namesake charitable foundation has agreed to dissolve under court supervision, partially resolving a New York state lawsuit claiming he misused it to advance his 2016 presidential campaign and his businesses, the state attorney general said on Tuesday.

 

The lawsuit against the Donald J. Trump Foundation also seeks to recoup $2.8 million and ban Trump and his three eldest children from leadership roles in any other New York charity.

 

The agreement, which must be approved by a New York state judge, would give state Attorney General Barbara Underwood the power to vet the charities that receive the foundation's remaining assets.

 

Underwood said in a statement that the foundation had served as "little more than a checkbook to serve Mr.Trump's business and political interests," and called the agreement "an important victory for the rule of law."

 

Alan Futerfas, a lawyer for the Trumps, responded in a statement that the lawsuit had delayed the foundation's plan to dissolve after Trump won the U.S. presidential election in November 2016.

 

He added that over the past decade, the foundation had distributed about $19 million, including $8.25 million ofTrump's personal money, to over 700 charitable organizations.

 

Trump, a Republican, has previously said on Twitter that Underwood's lawsuit was a concoction by "sleazy New York Democrats." In their motion to dismiss the case, the Trumps said it reflected Underwood's "pervasive bias" against them.

 

The new agreement came less than a month after Justice Saliann Scarpulla of the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan rejected the motion to dismiss.

 

The motion had argued that the U.S. Constitution immunized Trump from Underwood's claims alleging breach of fiduciary duty, improper self-dealing, and misuse of assets belonging to the Foundation.

 

Underwood sued Trump and his adult children Donald Jr., Eric and Ivanka on June 14, after a 21-month probe that she said uncovered "extensive unlawful political coordination" between the foundation and Trump's campaign.

 

Underwood alleged, among other things, that Trump wrongly ceded control to his campaign of about $2.8 million donated to the foundation in a 2016 Iowa fundraiser for military veterans. Other challenged expenses included $100,000 to settle a dispute

involving Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, and $10,000 for a portrait of Trumpthat was later hung at one of his golf clubs.

 

(Reporting by Brendan Pierson in New York; Editing by Richard Chang)

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-12-19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, GalaxyMan said:

I find it disgusting that he's being given a free pass on this. Dissolve the 'charity'? That's it?

 

I'm under the impression (I'm often wrong) that this was a civil suit rather than a criminal one. So the solutions usually involve monetary penalties, and/or agreements to cease the activities which led to the suit.

 

Can criminal charges be filed? Maybe, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards on this one?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GalaxyMan said:

I find it disgusting that he's being given a free pass on this. Dissolve the 'charity'? That's it? Where are the indictments for the criminality involved? Pisses me off. President Little Hands Grifter needs to be behind bars with his entire family.

 

I'm inclined to feel the same way. However, the part that's missing from the OP here is any explanation of what "partially" resolves the case means, as is, what other elements are still alive despite the agreement to dissolve the foundation. Perhaps another news source will have a better explanation of that and just what it may mean in terms of consequences for Trump and Co.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

Investigations and lawsuits are still ongoing even after the "charity" dissolves.  There could still be criminal acts to be discovered, like the $25,000 "donation" to Pam Bondi (Florida AG) campaign, after which (a few days later) the Florida AG dropped their investigation into Trump University.  The foundation also did not report this donation in their legal filings.

An AG who does not seem to know anything about conflicts of interests! ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s not just a closure.

 

The courts have seized the assets within the foundation.

 

Court seizes assets of a sitting president.

 

That, for Trump, is going to become a very troublesome snowball.

I remember reading that the Foundation paid for some giant painting of him that was in Mar la Go.   If they confiscate it, I wonder what it's worth...or who would buy it?

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s not just a closure.

 

The courts have seized the assets within the foundation.

 

Court seizes assets of a sitting president.

 

That, for Trump, is going to become a very troublesome snowball.

The court is not seizing the assets of the President.  They are dissolving the charity under court supervision.  My guess is the Donald Trump will still be able to pick the charities (real charities this time) which will receive the distributed funds.  The assets must be used for charitable purposes.  It sounds as though they also will try to recoup some misappropriated charitable distributions (2.8 million) which will then have to be repaid to the charity. 

 

The complete records of the charity will have to be turned over to be fully audited and any criminal activity found will be passed on to the relevant authorities to deal with.  There will likely be penalties assessed in addition (financial and possible criminal) to the repayment of the misappropriated funds. 

 

Once the funds were paid to the charity, they became the assets of the charity and not of the family.  The family would have received a tax deduction for the donations.

 

This process will likely be ongoing for several years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

Con Man In Chief...Shyster of the USA. 

 

Trump University

Trump Airlines

Trump Vodka

Trump Magazine

Trump Steaks

Trump Mortgage 

Trump Casinos

 

And now the charity scam. :bah:

You forgot the "Trump Presidency" scam.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...