this post was submitted on 19 May 2026
399 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29900 readers
2336 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Call him the Trader in Chief.

Recent presidents have stayed away from trading stocks in companies whose fortunes they could lift or scuttle with the stroke of a pen, but Donald Trump smashed that precedent in the first quarter of this year with more than 3,600 buy and sell orders, many of them involving companies whose profits have been directly impacted by his decisions as head of the government.

Among the Trump trades in a recent report filed with a federal ethics agency was as much as $6 million in Nvidia, whose advanced chips Trump approved for sale to China last year. His portfolio also scooped up stocks of several U.S. military suppliers impacted by the Iran war, including Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman.

“If he were defense secretary, he would be committing a crime,” said Richard Painter, the chief White House ethics adviser in the George W. Bush administration and a big critic of congressional trading, too. “Technically he can do this, but it is fundamental breach of trust.”

U.S. law bans federal employees from holding financial assets that could be impacted by their policy work, but there is a carveout for the president.

A spokesperson for the Trump family business said the president’s portfolio is handled by third parties that have “sole and exclusive” authority to make investment decisions.

“Neither President Trump, his family, nor The Trump Organization plays any role in selecting, directing, or approving specific investments,” spokesperson Kimberly Benza said in a statement. “They receive no advance notice of trading activity and provide no input regarding investment decisions or portfolio management.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But it's okay now, he declared it /s

[–] lemmyng@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"Call him the Trader in Chief."

I'd rather call him dead.

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 24 points 1 week ago (2 children)

But for now, Traitor in Chief will do.

Or Cheater in Chief?

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

Child raping orange painted mushy brained dementia riddled cunt...in chief.

[–] northernlights@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Insider Trader in Chief

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

He hasn't experienced any consequences thus far, so why wouldn't he just put his dirt out in the open? The only reason he's so precious about the Epstein stuff is he knows Qanonsense got him elected and that might actually turn his base against him if it's damning enough.

[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago
[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

very tired of reading the latest blatant corruption in the united states. Not enough people in the country care about the corruption.

Lots care. It just turns out that their entire legal system was smoke and mirrors except for the poor.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Neither President Trump, his family, nor The Trump Organization plays any role in selecting, directing, or approving specific investments,” spokesperson Kimberly Benza said in a statement. “They receive no advance notice of trading activity and provide no input regarding investment decisions or portfolio management."

In other news, beef tallow is good for you, Iran is always seconds from nuking Tel Aviv, and the cow goes woof.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Insider trading! Say it ain't so!

[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Trump is the result of our corruption, not the cause.

Why should Pelosi and McConnell and their peers be the only ones? They've been insider trading for years, it's rampant. Some are making trades for tens of millions of dollars. Of course the President will also get rich, and his children, who will sit on the boards of many companies for decades in the future.

https://www.capitoltrades.com/trades

Their salary is less than 200K, yet their wealth is spectacular.

Almost forgot, you got me, bOtH pArTiEs, I'm a russian-chinese agent bot, etc., you win

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

I think we need a law that says any stock trades that an elected member of the government (or their staff) directs or advises on must be publicly annouced 30 days before the trade, and the trade must be completed.

[–] elbiter@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

He has made his corruption legal, just by not having anyone around powerful enough to judge him and jail him.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

and the Democrats are promising to pass a whole new bunch of anti-corruption laws with real criminal consequences!

[–] No1@aussie.zone 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

At this stage, why even bother ?

We've seen countless 'outrages', threats of impeachment etc, but nothing ever happens.

Well, only one thing might happen. Trump could fire and/or shut down whatever government agency was responsible for reporting this information.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

shhhh...they are ALL doing this.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.cafe 1 points 1 week ago

“Technically he can do this, but it is fundamental breach of trust.”

That's all Trump needs to hear. "Technically" does a lot of heavy lifting in his world. "Trust" not so much.