Financial Monitor Tells Court That Trump's Finances Are Still Riddled With Inaccuracies

The court-appointed financial monitor that is overseeing every transaction of the Trump Organization (and Trump and his sons) told the judge late last week that the filings they are receiving are still riddled with inaccuracies, meaning that the company still can't be honest about their finances. This is not going to sit well with the judge who has the power to completely dissolve the company, and he may have no choice but to do that based on this new information. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what's happening.

Check out our merch by visiting our store

Subscribe to our podcast

Become a member today!

Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!

Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!

Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel

Be sociable! Follow us on:

*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

The Trump organization has some very real problems. The court appointed monitor, the Judge Arthur Geron, put in charge of overseeing all of the financials of the Trump organization, and of course, by extension Donald Trump and his two adult sons. That reporter or that monitor, excuse me, submitted a letter to the court last week telling them that, Hey, um, this company's financial statements are still riddled with inaccuracies. In other words, the company's still lying about everything even as they're on trial for lying about everything. Let me read you this. This comes from the messenger. As reported from Raw story, I have identified certain deficiencies in the financial information that I have reviewed, including disclosures that are either incomplete, present results inconsistently and contain errors. Uh, she described Trump and his businesses as COO cooperative with her investigation, and she added that information required to be submitted to me pursuant to the terms of the Monitorship order and review.

Protocol has at times been lacking in completeness and timeliness. Uh, she says that they have implemented some of the changes that they were supposed to implement, uh, but it needs to shape up even more absent steps to address the items above my observations, suggest misstatements and errors may continue to occur, which could result in incorrect or inaccurate reporting of financial information to third parties. In other words, she's saying, listen, they're not, they've done a little bit, but they're not doing everything that they need to do. And if they continue to do what they're doing, they're going to keep lying to third parties, which means they're gonna lie to the tax people, they're gonna lie to the banks. By the way, those are the same things you're currently having a trial about, and I'm telling you as the monitor, they're not up to code yet. Now, I don't know about you, but if I were running a business that was being tried for fraud, sued for fraud, had already been found liable for the fraud and a summary judgment from the judge, you know what I would probably do?

Given the fact that that judge has the ability to terminate my entire company, I probably wouldn't still be doing fraud because ING Iran's gonna look at this and we're gonna get that decision. I mean, I mean, at this point, any moment now, hell, it may have already come down while I'm sitting here talking to you, but Gerron has the authority and the ability to completely dissolve the Trump organization. And he's gonna look at this letter from the monitor that he put in place, and the monitor's telling him they're still doing it. So he is going to take that into consideration. And so when he's looking, they're like, well, should I dissolve the co? I mean, did the company

Learn their lessons? Are they still trustworthy? Can, can they get on the straight and narrow? Now the financial monitors saying, no, they can't. 'cause they're still not, they're not even turning stuff into me on time. They have made transactions, and this was reported a couple weeks ago that they didn't even submit to me. So if I'm the judge in this case and I'm looking at their past behavior and comparing that to their present behavior, I'm pretty much left with no choice but to completely dissolve that corporation because obviously they are never going to abide by the rules. And hopefully that's exactly what ing on is gonna decide.