福克斯新聞的當(dāng)家主播肖恩·哈尼迪這周過得很不輕松。

上周一，美國總統(tǒng)特朗普的私人代理律師邁爾克·科恩表示，哈尼迪曾經(jīng)是他的三個客戶之一?？贫饔捎谏嫦釉诖筮x期間替特朗普掏錢擺平成人AV女星斯托米·丹尼爾斯的糾纏而正在受到調(diào)查。哈尼迪否認(rèn)了自己曾聘請過科恩作律師，不過這并不能阻止人們關(guān)注他的幾筆金融交易。而且事實證明，他的這些交易遠(yuǎn)比之前所知的更廣泛和復(fù)雜。以下是我們目前掌握的信息：

1.哈尼迪與至少20家空殼公司有關(guān)

根據(jù)《衛(wèi)報》看到的文件，哈尼迪曾通過20多家注冊在喬治亞州的空殼公司購買過房地產(chǎn)?？諝す臼怯脕沓钟匈Y產(chǎn)的一種方法，可以幫助受益人保持匿名。雖然空殼公司本身并不違法，但也經(jīng)常有人用它從事逃稅等違法行為。雖然目前并無跡象表明哈尼迪從事任何不法行為，但他畢竟作為“影子買主”匿名購買了大量房產(chǎn)。貌似他這樣做是為了限制他在這些房地產(chǎn)交易中的債務(wù)。過去10年間，這些空殼公司共斥資9000萬美元，在美國的7個州收購了870套住宅。

2.購買了銀行的沒收房產(chǎn)

雖然哈尼迪曾在電視上大肆批評奧巴馬將美國的沒收質(zhì)押房產(chǎn)率定得過高，但他顯然是大蕭條之后大量質(zhì)押房產(chǎn)被沒收的受益者。2013年，他以折扣價購買了一些被沒收的質(zhì)押房產(chǎn)。據(jù)《衛(wèi)報》報道，他以這種方式抄底的房產(chǎn)至少有幾十套。

3.用住房和城市發(fā)展部的貸款買房

據(jù)稱，哈尼迪用美國住房和城市發(fā)展部（HUD）提供的按揭貸款購買了兩處最有價值的房產(chǎn)。而且這筆1790萬美元的貸款還是在奧巴馬時代拿到的。在特朗普時代，本·卡森領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下的HUD又將這筆貸款提高了500萬美元。但去年哈尼迪在電視上采訪時本·卡森時，并沒有披露他與HUD之間的交易。他只是對卡森說，他“做得很不錯”。

4.把自己的理財經(jīng)理包裝成專家上電視

哈尼迪的空殼公司都是在漢斯勒理財公司旗下注冊的，該公司的一位名叫比爾·拉可的負(fù)責(zé)人也曾上過哈尼迪的廣播節(jié)目，并曾在該節(jié)目的官網(wǎng)上發(fā)表過文章。雖然節(jié)目中也披露了兩人的生意關(guān)系，但最近拉可在該節(jié)目官網(wǎng)上發(fā)表的一篇軟文卻沒有附上類似的免責(zé)聲明。

哈尼迪在一封電子郵件聲明中告訴《財富》：“我把個人資金投資到了急需此類投資的社區(qū)，卻因此遭到攻擊，實在很諷刺。我相信，那些攻擊我的人肯定沒有投錢到需要他們的社區(qū)上。”他還補充道：“我并沒有單獨選擇或控制這些投資，也不清楚這些投資的細(xì)節(jié)?！?

哈尼迪還在聲明中稱：“我從未與住房和城市發(fā)展部的任何人談過奧巴馬時代獲得的貸款問題，也沒有跟他們談過貸款后續(xù)融資的問題，因為它們是私人問題。對于HUD與任何此類投資的關(guān)系，我既沒有參與，也沒有任何責(zé)任?！保ㄘ敻恢形木W(wǎng)）

編者注：此文因哈尼迪的聲明而有更新。

譯者：樸成奎

Fox News anchor Sean Hannity had a bad week.

Last Monday, a lawyer representing Donald Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, said that Hannity was one of Cohen’s three clients. Cohen is under investigation in relation to a payment he reportedly made to adult film star Stormy Daniels on behalf of then-candidate Trump. Hannity denied (kind of) that he’d retained Cohen’s services, but that hasn’t stopped people from taking a closer look at his financial dealings, which have proven to be more extensive and complicated than previously known. Here’s what we know so far.

1. He is linked to at least 20 shell companies

According to documents reviewed by The Guardian, Hannity bought real estate through more than 20 shell companies registered in Georgia. A shell company is a vehicle used to hold assets and can help beneficiaries remain anonymous. They are not in themselves illegal, though they are sometimes used to conduct illegal activities such as tax evasion. There is no indication that Hannity is engaged in any illegal practices, but he is the hidden owner behind at least some of the 20 companies through which he has bought property. In his case, it appears the shell companies were used to limit his liabilities in the real estate deals in question. In the last 10 years, the companies have spent $90 million on 870 homes in seven U.S. states.

2. He bought foreclosed properties

Despite his criticism of President Obama over the U.S. foreclosure rate, Hannity was an apparent beneficiary of the high number of foreclosures that accompanied and followed the great recession. In 2013 he purchased homes at a discount after their previous owners lost them to foreclosure. The Guardian reports he bought dozens of homes this way.

3. He used HUD programs

Hannity used mortgages funded through the Department for Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to buy two of the most valuable properties in his portfolio. The $17.9 million in loans was first guaranteed under the Obama administration. Ben Carson’s HUD recently increased the loans by $5 million. Hannity failed to disclose his dealings with HUD when he had Ben Carson on his show last year. During that appearance, Hannity told Carson he’d “done a good job.”

4. He uses his financial manager as an expert on his show

Hannity’s shell companies are registered at Henssler Financial. A principal at the firm, Bill Lako, has appeared on Hannity’s radio show and has written for the show’s website. Though the fact that the two men do business together was disclosed on air, a recent op-ed penned by Lako and published on the Hannity show’s website had no such disclaimer.

In an email statement, Hannity tells Fortune, “It is ironic that I am being attacked for investing my personal money in communities that badly need such investment and in which, I am sure, those attacking me have not invested their money.” He adds that he “did not individually select, control, or know the details about” the investments.

“I have never discussed with anybody at HUD the original loans that were obtained in the Obama years, nor the subsequent refinance of such loans, as they are a private matter,” reads the statement. “I had no role in, or responsibility for, any HUD involvement in any of these investments.”

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to include a statement from Hannity.