Booray said:
Sam Lowry said:
Booray said:
What is clear is that he has promoted his private interests far more than any one to ever occupy the Oval Office.
No.
Yes.
By constantly conducting state business at his private properties he gets the benefit of direct revenue and the benefit of free advertising. His aborted selection of his own hotel to host G-7 was just a gross overreach. The US has 500 resorts that could host that summit. How in the world can you justify that conflict of interest?
He tweets about his clubs, has aircrews stay at his places,. Kellyanne Conway shills for Ivanka's clothing brand. Who knows we're all the MAGA merchandise money goes. Don Jr sells his attempt at literature.
It literally never ends.
Ideally Trump would donate the direct revenue back to the government, but it's not like his critics would cut him any slack for it. How do I know? Because he does, and you don't.
The Turnberry scandal has been completely debunked. Those aircrews were a small percentage of the personnel staying in the area under an agreement signed by Obama. There's zero evidence that Trump did anything to alter the arrangement.
And Don Jr's books, really? Obama spent $79,000 of taxpayer money to
buy his own books and hand them out as "gifts" (read: free advertising). He also reworked his book deals after the 2008 election. He's multiplied his income many times over and done so almost entirely by leveraging interest in his political career.
This kind of thing is so far beneath the radar of constitutional concern that Republicans didn't even bother to feign outrage over it. That ought to tell you something. President aren't priests. It was never the Founders' intention that they take a vow of poverty.