I struggle with this one. Politicians of both parties routinely use insider information, their public persona and political contacts to enrich themselves. It’s a pathetic interpretation of “public service” but that’s how it is. George Washington did real estate deals throughout his presidency. So Trump isn’t breaking new ground, but that doesn’t make it any less unseemly and distasteful to me. This is especially true when Trump acts as a spokesperson for his family businesses, even if they are in a blind trust (as they should be).
Why don’t we clean all this up and make public service a temporary stint and not a career? Oh, that’s right-Congress would have to vote on it. Of course, Congress could stabilize Social Security, pass immigration reform and increase government transparency. They do none of these things that all Americans want. They blame each other for everything, work you into a lather so you’ll send them money, and build massive wealth for themselves with our system of legal grift.
California has term limits and they create politicians looking for their next job instead of doing their job. The elder statesmen are the lobbyists who stay and stay.
I hadn't thought about it from this angle. Perhaps you're right. I get so frustrated with the politicians in bed with lobbyists and fundraisers instead of doing the job they were elected to do.
Two four-year terms for most offices. Governor Newsom is looking for a job. I'm thinking waiter at the French Laundry restaurant. He seems quite relaxed there.
Yes, he should definitely stay in CA to keep his pretty boy looks. Uptight DC would age him before his time. He really wouldn’t like the Oval - far too stressful.
I'll go a step further. I'd rather see lifetime terms for congress than the election cycle nonsense that we currently have. Anything to incentivize actual statesmanship.
I've always thought the entire idea of a "blind" trust is naive. Does anyone really think such instruments are "blind" in the sense that the owner has no input or even contact with the people "managing" that trust? It's bad enough when some kind of independent fiduciary is appointed the manager, but here we have actual family members managing it.
That being said, I confess that I do not have a good answer. We can't expect someone to give up, even temporarily, the responsibility for managing preexisting assets just because they take office, even if it's only for a couple of years and not a career. But the complexities of our economic world in these modern times are such that totally avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest is almost impossible.
I don’t think citizens would have problems with Trump appropriately keeping an eye on preexisting assets. The difficulty is these new ventures, which trade on the name and office, and rain money on the President.
I think a parallel development are so-called non-governmental organizations (NGOs), that originally were meant to do charitable or environmental work. They have turned into huge money laundering operations that individuals, PACs, and the government itself can use to influence politics or simply channel wealth.
A blind trust like this will still make the Trump family money, otherwise known as influence peddling, by virtue of Trump being president.
Good comments. I was just such a fiduciary for scientists that worked for the government. It actually works pretty well, or it did in those cases. What’s different in Trump’s case is that his family is managing his wealth. As far as I know it’s all legal, but it still feels unseemly to me. Again, Congress does nothing.
I'm struggling with this one, too, because I see several things going on here--some good, some not so good, and some just plain bad:
1. The Trump Administration is trying to establish an economic environment in the US conducive to developing blockchain technology, many applications of which seem beneficial to people. These efforts are consistent with his MAGA philosophy, so he would likely pursue them even if his family wasn't involved in cryptocurrency type applications.
2. The Trump family is benefiting richly from meme coins. It's doubtful that these coins have intrinsic value close to what people have collectively paid for them (but see 3 below). However, this is true of most meme coins, and they are a thing, whether the Trumps do them or not. As for the Trump coins specifically, they might attract particular interest from buyers due to the celebrity he built over the years. This has been the case for many Trump branded endeavors--including the Trump University real estate wealth building courses mentioned in the article. Yet his celebrity as a comeback president surely does add many millions of dollars of value to his brand, including enhancing the "attractiveness" of his meme coins. On the other hand, this is an indirect benefit of his office, and all presidents benefit financially from the fame of the office. Look at the speaking fees and book deals.
3. The meme coins can be used as a vehicle to pay Trump for favorable use of his presidential powers. It's hard to see how he can be kept blind to who does major purchases of the coins. Even if he can't log into an app and see, there are other ways a major buyer can quietly let him know who they are and how much they bought. The same holds for buyers of the family's stablecoin. Stablecoins might prove very useful, but there are many already out there that are building good reputations, so it's hard to see a use case for one sponsored by the Trumps. (If I ever need a stable coin, I sure won't be using the Trump one.)
I don’t know about the unspecific “other graft” but I agree about the 747. It technically went to the DoD. If it stays there, that’s one thing. But if it goes to the Trump presidential library, that’s quite another. We should have ironclad “no gift” policies for public servants.
Having a crypto business doesn’t make it “corruption “, but I sure wouldn’t invest in it. As someone else pointed out, if it blows up that will certainly negatively impact the Trump brand.
When Trump mentioned the real estate development possibility of a New Riviera in Gaza when it is "cleared out," it was like FDR talking about investing in office buildings in Berlin, a slight conflict of interest.
We have a thing in the code of legal ethics or professional responsibility (Laugh if you want, it was important to me, and I was taught by a preeminent legal ethics professor) called the "appearance of impropriety." Even if this is all technically legal, it sure has the appearance of impropriety. And I say this as largely a Trump supporter (I am a JD Vance guy).
Good for you. Glad there are still people who have a sense of ethics. JD, who I also generally like, probably has a quieter but large stake in the government investment in AI with all of his tech-bros. While I think it unlikely neither Trump nor Vance is shaping policy primarily for their own financial gain, being in and of the business world it would be really hard for their stint in government service to be totally neutral to their fortunes.
Exactly. Taking it further, if I were the person in the administration regulating these entities and I knew the boss had an interest, how would I be objective (and keep my job)? I have a lot of respect for Jamie Dimon (I technically worked for him for a period of time many years ago) and he thinks Crypto is nonsense. I am not sure if it is or isn't, but it sure has Ponzi scheme qualities (as do many Wall Street investments to be fair). I would want them (the regulators) to be watching this stuff like a hawk.
Crypto may well be a Ponzi type scheme, but it has a long way to go to best the government ran SSA, which forcibly taxes workers for revenue, as opposed to marketing "profit opportunities" to coax investment. As far as expected ethics from politicians, dream on.
I'm a Trump supporter, but there is no part of 'influence peddling' that I find acceptable. Not from Clinton, Biden, or Trump. Politicians becoming wealthy in office is nearly universal and no doubt contributes to their poor approval ratings. Public service should be just that, not a guaranteed get-rich-quick scheme. Unfortunately, it would take the very crooks benefiting to rein it in.
this is niche, but as a chronic pain patient of 20 yrs, i find it really interesting that as a pharmaceutical company making questionable “opioid alternatives” ALT5 Sigma, just pivots to crypto financial services, as if that’s a normal thing.
This is off the topic, but I have a great interest in the insanity surrounding opiates and their ethical use and administration (I refuse to use the term "opioid").
I am shocked, but not surprised, that mad scientists are working on such "alternatives," given the demonization of one of nature's greatest miracles, the opium poppy. Fentanyl is one example of a drug that emerged because of the stigma surrounding opium and the endless tinkering by chemists who have apparently never heard the expression "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
I hope your pain management is going well. Here in FL, keeping my 92-year-old mother comfortable requires enduring a nightmarish series of bureaucratic restrictions, including the indignity of submitting her to periodic urine tests.
Why do you refuse to use the scientific name for substances that bind to the "opioid" receptors in the brain?
The terms "opioid" and "opiate" are sometimes used interchangeably, but the term "opioid" is used to designate all substances, both natural and synthetic, that bind to opioid receptors in the brain. Opiates are alkaloid compounds naturally found in the opium poppy plant Papaver somniferum.
Nothing controversial or coded in the term "opioid" at all. There are no "opiate" receptors in the brain.
"Is Trump using the presidency for personal profit? Yes, it's more than likely, but at least it doesn't involve funding a war, like Biden's scam..."Will investors get screwed, like the investors in Trump-branded gimmicks such as Trump University?' Again yes, more than likely, but at least it will be by personal choice whether to invest, unlike Biden's family scams that garnered tax dollars from the government with no oversight. It's not good by any means, but relatively compared to previous administrations, it's an improvement.
"... but at least it doesn't involve funding a war, like Biden's scam..."
Did you forget what's going on in Gaza and the West Bank? I could link you to an "AI" video posted by Trump depicting the "Gaza Riviera" complete with a new Trump hotel/resort/casino, but I'm sure you've seen it already.
And also remember that Palantir and several other military/surveillance contractors with close ties to the Trump family (and in which they are invested) are profiting massively from Israel's war on Palestinians. Wouldn't surprise me to learn that those "bunker buster" bombs used on Iran also had to be replaced at great cost, or that members of the Trump clan have investments in the likes of Lockheed Martin or Raytheon.
Agreed. It’s a scam but the alternative candidate was enormously worse. And at least this family’s scam is unlikely to end up with ICBMs being launched.
And yet this is the reality. As with many perhaps most things in life, often we are faced with two non optimum choices. In this case one choice is clearly better than the other, in my opinion, even if far less than perfect.
If you're comparing straight profits, Trump and his family mafia have benefited far more financially than the Biden Crime Syndicate. And last time I checked, the war between Russia, NATO and the Ukro-fascists rages on, despite Trump's promise to end it in 24hrs, including the relatively recent (unprecedented in the history of US-Russia/USSR relations) Ukrainian attack on the Russian nuclear strategic bomber fleet that almost certainly had approval and ISR assistance from high levels in the Trump administration and/or Pentagon.
No doubt "buyer beware" is in order. Corruption runs wide and deep in DC, unfortunate if Trump has decided to join the gravy train... although typically the grift comes directly from monies flowing into the federal government via tax receipts or borrowed monies.
Matt, great journalism……….again. Trump’s Yes, there are actually fleas doing stunts in the flea circus persona would allow him to profit from his Presidency. Worse than book deals before you leave office, probably so, but not beyond the pale for our now standard low-bar Presidential standards.
Whether it’s legal, right, or wrong is kind of irrelevant. It’s about the perception it exudes as one of receiving gain largely due to the office he holds. That is the problem.
It may be his son’s venture but it appears he is co-mingling his political stature into their business. That seems obvious, and, at the very least ethically I think it smells.
Not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, I don't think elected officials nor their families should be allowed to enrich themselves through favors granted or insider trading information they may have access to. I don't know how you go about preventing it entirely. On the other hand, Trump is the most conspicuous person on the planet. So, it would be almost impossible for someone not to profit on something with his name associated right now. I would never personally invest in challenge coins or crypto currency based on Trump's persona; but there are those who will, and I supposed it is their risk to take. As a means of showing support, it is probably not any worse than previous President's signing book deals, organizing lecture tours. Mostly, it just amuses me to no end that the more Trump's enemies try to bankrupt him, the richer he gets.
He could at least wait until he's out of office in three years (or earlier, given the current climate of political violence) to enrich himself and his survivors with this wheeling and dealing. Right now, in his position of enormous influence, it looks like a conflict of interest. As Sea Sentry here says, it's not like he's the first person holding office that uses that office for financial gain. I suppose as long as there's no criminal activity involved, like the insider trading allegations against Pelosi for example, It doesn't bother me as long as he keeps taking care of national business. So far, he's been the only President since . . . jeez . . . Kennedy to make any seriously positive impact on US domestic life. I am reconsidering my former admiration for the Civil Rights Act and the creation of the Welfare State, seeing as how the latter ruined the intent of the former.
I have zero understanding of how cryptocurrencies work and don't care, since I'm in the twilight of my life as a lower-to-middle class citizen and have never had any interest in the wheelings and dealings of the rich and powerful, unless they somehow negatively impact my scene or the financial well-being of mah fellow 'Murcans (a tip of the hat to LBJ).
It's a little hard for me to see what he is supposed to do when presented with a bill passed by Congress. His choices are sign it or veto it; I can't believe the right thing is to veto it just because he arguably profits from it. Nor would I expect him to say, "Whoops! This is a good bill; I'd better get my family out of the crypto business and then sign it." The precedent for a hostile Congress to make the President dance around like a marionette by passing carefully-tailored bills seems bad.
(Sure, he probably proposed the bill in the first place. Maybe that's the problem: The President should leave lawmaking to the legislature.)
Crypto is a huge scam. If you made a list of all the pros and cons of capitalism, crypto is taking only the con side of the ledger and turning it into religion.
It's like absurd performance art from some anti-capitalist art collective. Value completely disconnected from reality and productivity. It's a perfect parody of modern money and finance. Reality is a number in a database. I'm still not sure if the whole things was a troll or not.
It's also the perfect way to circumvent a bunch of election finance laws--again, crypto is a perfect parody of modern money and finance.
Maybe the "art" of crypto is the your face absurdism combined with the accessibility of a lottery ticket. A chance for the poor to sell their soul too.
The biggest advantage the rich are given is people making offers on your soul. Bribing the poor is pointless--that's just called equal pay (rimshot). The poor are steamrolled, not bribed.
Crypto says everyone is worth bribing because the poor are just as corrupt as the rich.
Don't underestimate a back handed complement showing its palm.
Exactly. While in the very beginning, crypto conceivably presented a legitimate "democratizing" opportunity for micro finance and payments (and a way for "criminals" to skirt SWIFT surveillance and law enforcement), it has been completely co-opted by the usual (types of) Wall Street players, Tech-Finance Bros and their bought off politicians. The entire crypto ecosystem has become a giant pump-n-dump Ponzi scheme and a huge rug pull waiting to happen - BY DESIGN.
I struggle with this one. Politicians of both parties routinely use insider information, their public persona and political contacts to enrich themselves. It’s a pathetic interpretation of “public service” but that’s how it is. George Washington did real estate deals throughout his presidency. So Trump isn’t breaking new ground, but that doesn’t make it any less unseemly and distasteful to me. This is especially true when Trump acts as a spokesperson for his family businesses, even if they are in a blind trust (as they should be).
Why don’t we clean all this up and make public service a temporary stint and not a career? Oh, that’s right-Congress would have to vote on it. Of course, Congress could stabilize Social Security, pass immigration reform and increase government transparency. They do none of these things that all Americans want. They blame each other for everything, work you into a lather so you’ll send them money, and build massive wealth for themselves with our system of legal grift.
I would add that term limits are hugely popular with voters, but somehow never make it to the floor to be voted on.
California has term limits and they create politicians looking for their next job instead of doing their job. The elder statesmen are the lobbyists who stay and stay.
I hadn't thought about it from this angle. Perhaps you're right. I get so frustrated with the politicians in bed with lobbyists and fundraisers instead of doing the job they were elected to do.
How long are they allowed to hold which offices?
I'm sure your implication is correct that term limits control the timing rather than the grift. Gotta hurry to make hay while the sun shines!
Two four-year terms for most offices. Governor Newsom is looking for a job. I'm thinking waiter at the French Laundry restaurant. He seems quite relaxed there.
Thanks!
Yes, he should definitely stay in CA to keep his pretty boy looks. Uptight DC would age him before his time. He really wouldn’t like the Oval - far too stressful.
I'll go a step further. I'd rather see lifetime terms for congress than the election cycle nonsense that we currently have. Anything to incentivize actual statesmanship.
That’s an interesting angle I’ve never heard before. I’m all for incentivizing statesmanship!
I've always thought the entire idea of a "blind" trust is naive. Does anyone really think such instruments are "blind" in the sense that the owner has no input or even contact with the people "managing" that trust? It's bad enough when some kind of independent fiduciary is appointed the manager, but here we have actual family members managing it.
That being said, I confess that I do not have a good answer. We can't expect someone to give up, even temporarily, the responsibility for managing preexisting assets just because they take office, even if it's only for a couple of years and not a career. But the complexities of our economic world in these modern times are such that totally avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest is almost impossible.
I don’t think citizens would have problems with Trump appropriately keeping an eye on preexisting assets. The difficulty is these new ventures, which trade on the name and office, and rain money on the President.
I think a parallel development are so-called non-governmental organizations (NGOs), that originally were meant to do charitable or environmental work. They have turned into huge money laundering operations that individuals, PACs, and the government itself can use to influence politics or simply channel wealth.
A blind trust like this will still make the Trump family money, otherwise known as influence peddling, by virtue of Trump being president.
Yes, and let us not forget the "foundations".
Same sort of monster.
NGO’s have turned into grift machines in many cases, with very little oversight. It’s a monumental con.
Good comments. I was just such a fiduciary for scientists that worked for the government. It actually works pretty well, or it did in those cases. What’s different in Trump’s case is that his family is managing his wealth. As far as I know it’s all legal, but it still feels unseemly to me. Again, Congress does nothing.
Lots of “legal” things are still wrong.
I'm struggling with this one, too, because I see several things going on here--some good, some not so good, and some just plain bad:
1. The Trump Administration is trying to establish an economic environment in the US conducive to developing blockchain technology, many applications of which seem beneficial to people. These efforts are consistent with his MAGA philosophy, so he would likely pursue them even if his family wasn't involved in cryptocurrency type applications.
2. The Trump family is benefiting richly from meme coins. It's doubtful that these coins have intrinsic value close to what people have collectively paid for them (but see 3 below). However, this is true of most meme coins, and they are a thing, whether the Trumps do them or not. As for the Trump coins specifically, they might attract particular interest from buyers due to the celebrity he built over the years. This has been the case for many Trump branded endeavors--including the Trump University real estate wealth building courses mentioned in the article. Yet his celebrity as a comeback president surely does add many millions of dollars of value to his brand, including enhancing the "attractiveness" of his meme coins. On the other hand, this is an indirect benefit of his office, and all presidents benefit financially from the fame of the office. Look at the speaking fees and book deals.
3. The meme coins can be used as a vehicle to pay Trump for favorable use of his presidential powers. It's hard to see how he can be kept blind to who does major purchases of the coins. Even if he can't log into an app and see, there are other ways a major buyer can quietly let him know who they are and how much they bought. The same holds for buyers of the family's stablecoin. Stablecoins might prove very useful, but there are many already out there that are building good reputations, so it's hard to see a use case for one sponsored by the Trumps. (If I ever need a stable coin, I sure won't be using the Trump one.)
Trump isn’t breaking new ground? Read it again. And this is just the crypto corruption. Not the Qatari 747 “gift” or all the other graft.
I don’t know about the unspecific “other graft” but I agree about the 747. It technically went to the DoD. If it stays there, that’s one thing. But if it goes to the Trump presidential library, that’s quite another. We should have ironclad “no gift” policies for public servants.
Having a crypto business doesn’t make it “corruption “, but I sure wouldn’t invest in it. As someone else pointed out, if it blows up that will certainly negatively impact the Trump brand.
When Trump mentioned the real estate development possibility of a New Riviera in Gaza when it is "cleared out," it was like FDR talking about investing in office buildings in Berlin, a slight conflict of interest.
We have a thing in the code of legal ethics or professional responsibility (Laugh if you want, it was important to me, and I was taught by a preeminent legal ethics professor) called the "appearance of impropriety." Even if this is all technically legal, it sure has the appearance of impropriety. And I say this as largely a Trump supporter (I am a JD Vance guy).
Good for you. Glad there are still people who have a sense of ethics. JD, who I also generally like, probably has a quieter but large stake in the government investment in AI with all of his tech-bros. While I think it unlikely neither Trump nor Vance is shaping policy primarily for their own financial gain, being in and of the business world it would be really hard for their stint in government service to be totally neutral to their fortunes.
Exactly. Taking it further, if I were the person in the administration regulating these entities and I knew the boss had an interest, how would I be objective (and keep my job)? I have a lot of respect for Jamie Dimon (I technically worked for him for a period of time many years ago) and he thinks Crypto is nonsense. I am not sure if it is or isn't, but it sure has Ponzi scheme qualities (as do many Wall Street investments to be fair). I would want them (the regulators) to be watching this stuff like a hawk.
Crypto may well be a Ponzi type scheme, but it has a long way to go to best the government ran SSA, which forcibly taxes workers for revenue, as opposed to marketing "profit opportunities" to coax investment. As far as expected ethics from politicians, dream on.
During his first term, Trump called crypto a scam.
Then someone showed him how he could handsomely profit from it, and he became Chief Crypto Cheerleader. Straight money game.
Exactly. Now that he knows how to profit from crypto, why not have the top 200 investors over for lunch?
I'm a Trump supporter, but there is no part of 'influence peddling' that I find acceptable. Not from Clinton, Biden, or Trump. Politicians becoming wealthy in office is nearly universal and no doubt contributes to their poor approval ratings. Public service should be just that, not a guaranteed get-rich-quick scheme. Unfortunately, it would take the very crooks benefiting to rein it in.
this is niche, but as a chronic pain patient of 20 yrs, i find it really interesting that as a pharmaceutical company making questionable “opioid alternatives” ALT5 Sigma, just pivots to crypto financial services, as if that’s a normal thing.
This is off the topic, but I have a great interest in the insanity surrounding opiates and their ethical use and administration (I refuse to use the term "opioid").
I am shocked, but not surprised, that mad scientists are working on such "alternatives," given the demonization of one of nature's greatest miracles, the opium poppy. Fentanyl is one example of a drug that emerged because of the stigma surrounding opium and the endless tinkering by chemists who have apparently never heard the expression "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
I hope your pain management is going well. Here in FL, keeping my 92-year-old mother comfortable requires enduring a nightmarish series of bureaucratic restrictions, including the indignity of submitting her to periodic urine tests.
Why do you refuse to use the scientific name for substances that bind to the "opioid" receptors in the brain?
The terms "opioid" and "opiate" are sometimes used interchangeably, but the term "opioid" is used to designate all substances, both natural and synthetic, that bind to opioid receptors in the brain. Opiates are alkaloid compounds naturally found in the opium poppy plant Papaver somniferum.
Nothing controversial or coded in the term "opioid" at all. There are no "opiate" receptors in the brain.
As one might infer from my comment, I am prejudiced against synthetics in favor of "compounds naturally found" in the poppy.
Big Trump fan here. Love this article. Hard hitting but written in a fair and factual way. Without all the hatred you see in the legacy press.
Yep. He’s totally corrupt. Raking in billions. Won’t change a thing will it?
"Is Trump using the presidency for personal profit? Yes, it's more than likely, but at least it doesn't involve funding a war, like Biden's scam..."Will investors get screwed, like the investors in Trump-branded gimmicks such as Trump University?' Again yes, more than likely, but at least it will be by personal choice whether to invest, unlike Biden's family scams that garnered tax dollars from the government with no oversight. It's not good by any means, but relatively compared to previous administrations, it's an improvement.
"... but at least it doesn't involve funding a war, like Biden's scam..."
Did you forget what's going on in Gaza and the West Bank? I could link you to an "AI" video posted by Trump depicting the "Gaza Riviera" complete with a new Trump hotel/resort/casino, but I'm sure you've seen it already.
https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2025/02/07/trump-gaza-real-estate-family/
And also remember that Palantir and several other military/surveillance contractors with close ties to the Trump family (and in which they are invested) are profiting massively from Israel's war on Palestinians. Wouldn't surprise me to learn that those "bunker buster" bombs used on Iran also had to be replaced at great cost, or that members of the Trump clan have investments in the likes of Lockheed Martin or Raytheon.
Agreed. It’s a scam but the alternative candidate was enormously worse. And at least this family’s scam is unlikely to end up with ICBMs being launched.
This is really not a position one would want to spend much time defending: the other guy was a bigger criminal.
And yet this is the reality. As with many perhaps most things in life, often we are faced with two non optimum choices. In this case one choice is clearly better than the other, in my opinion, even if far less than perfect.
If you're comparing straight profits, Trump and his family mafia have benefited far more financially than the Biden Crime Syndicate. And last time I checked, the war between Russia, NATO and the Ukro-fascists rages on, despite Trump's promise to end it in 24hrs, including the relatively recent (unprecedented in the history of US-Russia/USSR relations) Ukrainian attack on the Russian nuclear strategic bomber fleet that almost certainly had approval and ISR assistance from high levels in the Trump administration and/or Pentagon.
Thanks for taking this on Eric.
No doubt "buyer beware" is in order. Corruption runs wide and deep in DC, unfortunate if Trump has decided to join the gravy train... although typically the grift comes directly from monies flowing into the federal government via tax receipts or borrowed monies.
“If” Trump has decided to join the money train?
Everything Trump does is to enrich himself, he doesn’t give a rat’s ass for the average American.
Exactly.
Matt, great journalism……….again. Trump’s Yes, there are actually fleas doing stunts in the flea circus persona would allow him to profit from his Presidency. Worse than book deals before you leave office, probably so, but not beyond the pale for our now standard low-bar Presidential standards.
Greg Collard wrote this piece.
Nope, it was Eric Salzman! I'm just the editor.
Alrighty. I would like to thank all involved in the writing of this extraordinary piece.
Oh, now if that's not "I didn't do it, it wasn't me, I want my lawyer..."
My bad, I'm still learning to read.
Somebody is flagging you as "Author" on this very comment. I don't know what settings need to change, but expect more confusion until they do.
Yeah, I think that just has to do with Substack credentials. I’m an “author” in our system.
Steve Witkoff is the father of Zach Witkoff a co-founder of World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency company. Probably worth mentioning.
Whether it’s legal, right, or wrong is kind of irrelevant. It’s about the perception it exudes as one of receiving gain largely due to the office he holds. That is the problem.
It may be his son’s venture but it appears he is co-mingling his political stature into their business. That seems obvious, and, at the very least ethically I think it smells.
Not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, I don't think elected officials nor their families should be allowed to enrich themselves through favors granted or insider trading information they may have access to. I don't know how you go about preventing it entirely. On the other hand, Trump is the most conspicuous person on the planet. So, it would be almost impossible for someone not to profit on something with his name associated right now. I would never personally invest in challenge coins or crypto currency based on Trump's persona; but there are those who will, and I supposed it is their risk to take. As a means of showing support, it is probably not any worse than previous President's signing book deals, organizing lecture tours. Mostly, it just amuses me to no end that the more Trump's enemies try to bankrupt him, the richer he gets.
We all bitched (appropriately) about Hillary’s 3 speeches to private groups at Goldman Sachs for a total of $675,000.
More than 20 years earlier, Reagan gave a speech in Japan very soon after leaving the White House. For $2 million.
And the Obamas got a rich Netflix deal. Because, you know, they are well known geniuses in entertainment.
oh give me a break, the grifter-in-chief -- never gets enough.
He could at least wait until he's out of office in three years (or earlier, given the current climate of political violence) to enrich himself and his survivors with this wheeling and dealing. Right now, in his position of enormous influence, it looks like a conflict of interest. As Sea Sentry here says, it's not like he's the first person holding office that uses that office for financial gain. I suppose as long as there's no criminal activity involved, like the insider trading allegations against Pelosi for example, It doesn't bother me as long as he keeps taking care of national business. So far, he's been the only President since . . . jeez . . . Kennedy to make any seriously positive impact on US domestic life. I am reconsidering my former admiration for the Civil Rights Act and the creation of the Welfare State, seeing as how the latter ruined the intent of the former.
I have zero understanding of how cryptocurrencies work and don't care, since I'm in the twilight of my life as a lower-to-middle class citizen and have never had any interest in the wheelings and dealings of the rich and powerful, unless they somehow negatively impact my scene or the financial well-being of mah fellow 'Murcans (a tip of the hat to LBJ).
It's a little hard for me to see what he is supposed to do when presented with a bill passed by Congress. His choices are sign it or veto it; I can't believe the right thing is to veto it just because he arguably profits from it. Nor would I expect him to say, "Whoops! This is a good bill; I'd better get my family out of the crypto business and then sign it." The precedent for a hostile Congress to make the President dance around like a marionette by passing carefully-tailored bills seems bad.
(Sure, he probably proposed the bill in the first place. Maybe that's the problem: The President should leave lawmaking to the legislature.)
Crypto is a huge scam. If you made a list of all the pros and cons of capitalism, crypto is taking only the con side of the ledger and turning it into religion.
It's like absurd performance art from some anti-capitalist art collective. Value completely disconnected from reality and productivity. It's a perfect parody of modern money and finance. Reality is a number in a database. I'm still not sure if the whole things was a troll or not.
It's also the perfect way to circumvent a bunch of election finance laws--again, crypto is a perfect parody of modern money and finance.
Maybe the "art" of crypto is the your face absurdism combined with the accessibility of a lottery ticket. A chance for the poor to sell their soul too.
The biggest advantage the rich are given is people making offers on your soul. Bribing the poor is pointless--that's just called equal pay (rimshot). The poor are steamrolled, not bribed.
Crypto says everyone is worth bribing because the poor are just as corrupt as the rich.
Don't underestimate a back handed complement showing its palm.
Exactly. While in the very beginning, crypto conceivably presented a legitimate "democratizing" opportunity for micro finance and payments (and a way for "criminals" to skirt SWIFT surveillance and law enforcement), it has been completely co-opted by the usual (types of) Wall Street players, Tech-Finance Bros and their bought off politicians. The entire crypto ecosystem has become a giant pump-n-dump Ponzi scheme and a huge rug pull waiting to happen - BY DESIGN.