Trump to leave his business empire

dchd9's picture
Rank: Senior Orangutan | 409

From Business Insider

President-elect Donald Trump announced on Twitter early Wednesday morning that he would leave his business "in total" to avoid conflict of interests and "fully focus on running the country."

He added that legal documents were being drafted that would remove him "completely" from business operations.

Trump, the chairman and president of the Trump Organization, said he would discuss the move at a December 15 press conference in New York City with his children, to whom he has said he plans to leave control of his business.

Thoughts? I saw this on Twitter as it happened, right after the whole recount fiasco in PA did not come to fruition (Stein missed the deadline).

Now it'll be hard for his critics in the media to say that he's not committed to running the country.

I would think mainstream media comes up with some other claim to persuade more Americans to join the whole #NotPresident thing. I doubt that it matters. Trump won the office and will become President on January 20, 2017.

What do you think of his move?

Comments (36)

Best Response
Nov 30, 2016

I assume he'll be giving control to his kids, so I see no real difference and the conflict of interest remains. Will Donald give preferential treatment to foreign leaders that stay at his hotels? Will the Secret Service be renting space in Trump Tower? Will Donald be making foreign or domestic policy decisions that can in any way benefit his businesses? Will he have knowledge of the business operations through his children? Will his children be involved at all in the administration, like they have been with the transition, or benefit from the connection to their father who is President? The double standard between Trump's situation and the Clinton Foundation allegations is just bizarre to me.

    • 7
    • 1
Nov 30, 2016

"The double standard between Trump's situation and the Clinton Foundation allegations is just bizarre to me." -

not sure there is a double standard .. people on the right scrutinize Hilary while people on the left scrutinize Trump .. maybe that means there are two double standards (one quadruple standard? - mind blowing)

"Will Donald give preferential treatment to foreign leaders that stay at his hotels? Will the Secret Service be renting space in Trump Tower? "

Pretty sure the most expensive Trump suite is $20k per night. That's peanuts, doubt there is an issue.

"Will Donald be making foreign or domestic policy decisions that can in any way benefit his businesses?"

I think a great solution, although not realistic, is for Trump (or any politician) to liquidate any asset that he has controlling interest in and direct the proceeds to a blind trust.

It just gets tough when there is family involved. You cant tell someone that they are not allowed to own certain assets because there father/grandfather/cousin won political office.

Nov 30, 2016

Of course there are two double standards in that scenario - he's simply saying that many people on the right have become oddly quiet about the criticism they voiced in regards to Clinton's "possible" conflicts of interest in the Clinton Foundation should she become President. When Trump won, all of a sudden it become an argument of character rather than actions, and a very similar potential conflict has come to light, and there is no criticism of "shady business dealings" or worry that Trump might not be as fully removed from his assets as they demanded of Hillary - for some reason, people seem to trust him a lot more based on mere intuition and his political party alignment.

He stands to gain a great deal more than the $400k salary he decided not to take, such as collecting rent from Secret Service, using his personal jets to expense trips taken around the world, and he won't even release his tax returns so people can really gauge the true extent of his conflicts of interest - it's odd that nobody on the right is really questioning this and doesn't want to at least see for themselves if he has holdings in Russia or any other foreign body that could be seen as conflicting. They'd surely want to see the same for Hillary - and even went so far as to make Obama release his birth certificate because they weren't sure he was truly a citizen...but somehow have blind faith in Trump not having any conflicts of interest.

I'm not sure what the correct solution is. I know Obama liquidated his entire portfolio and invested in US treasuries and bonds, but am aware that's not as realistic for a person in Trump's position. It'd help to picture what you expected of Hillary if she had won, and just go from there instead of all of a sudden not having an issue with the subject.

Dec 1, 2016

I'm 100% certain that the Trump WH, like every other administration ever, will publicly release its ethics plan, specifically detailing how this will work (you will probably have to wait a few months to read the plan, so you can stop hyperventilating about it). As I said below, the Clinton Foundation and Trump corp. are not remotely comparable situations--not even partially parallel.

Dec 2, 2016
Virginia Tech 4ever:

I'm 100% certain that the Trump WH, like every other administration ever, will publicly release its ethics plan, specifically detailing how this will work (you will probably have to wait a few months to read the plan, so you can stop hyperventilating about it). As I said below, the Clinton Foundation and Trump corp. are not remotely comparable situations--not even partially parallel.

ok trump fan boy

    • 3
    • 1
Dec 2, 2016

Not remotely. Which is why people can click on MS on your post but don't have a response

Dec 2, 2016
hawketrackler:

I assume he'll be giving control to his kids, so I see no real difference and the conflict of interest remains.

No, this is wrong. I don't think you read the article...it says he's drafting legal documents. Do you know how serious those are? Let me clue you in: they're quite serious. Almost as much as a vigorous pinky swear. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about

    • 2
    • 1
Nov 30, 2016

1 - Don't you have some kind of law against nepotism in public office?
2 - I've seen a lot of comments from him like "while the law is on my side..." or "there is no requirement that I get rid of my business, the President can't have a conflict of interest" which look comical. I may be wrong as I am not familiar with US regs on this, but this shouldn't even be a question - Even if for reputational purposes only, the "adequate"thing to do would be to at least reliniquish control of these businesses.
3 - The Clinton Foundation comments during the election actually made sense ("receiving money from country XYZ"), but then you have Trump commercial interests (even if indirect) with exposure to Bank of China, Deutsche (with all that DOJ fine thing) and god knows who else. To me it seems like the same risk is there but conveniently "ignored" for now.

    • 1
Dec 1, 2016
  • What nepotism are you talking about? That doesn't even make sense. His kids aren't being paid with public money. They don't occupy a GS salaried job. There is no public nepotism here.
  • The law is 100% on his side. The President and VP are explicitly exempted from conflict of interest laws. Every world leader could stay solely at Trump hotels from now until the end of time and it's completely legal.
  • Trump is a billionaire. Everyone on planet Earth knew that Trump had all of these business interests when he was elected and that there was no realistic way for Trump to dispose himself of these conflicts. That is the risk that the public took when the public voted for him. Trump promised countless times during the campaign to relinquish the business to his kids and he made good on that promise. What more do you want? For Trump to sell off $3-10 billion of illiquid assets? It's not gonna happen and the only people who care are the media establishments that speak to the echo chamber of Trump haters who will never be converted.
Dec 1, 2016

I had no idea about VP and Prez being exempt

Dec 2, 2016
Virginia Tech 4ever:
  • What nepotism are you talking about? That doesn't even make sense. His kids aren't being paid with public money. They don't occupy a GS salaried job. There is no public nepotism here.
  • The law is 100% on his side. The President and VP are explicitly exempted from conflict of interest laws. Every world leader could stay solely at Trump hotels from now until the end of time and it's completely legal.
  • Trump is a billionaire. Everyone on planet Earth knew that Trump had all of these business interests when he was elected and that there was no realistic way for Trump to dispose himself of these conflicts. That is the risk that the public took when the public voted for him. Trump promised countless times during the campaign to relinquish the business to his kids and he made good on that promise. What more do you want? For Trump to sell off $3-10 billion of illiquid assets? It's not gonna happen and the only people who care are the media establishments that speak to the echo chamber of Trump haters who will never be converted.

you need to take a step back and ask yourself why you are defending these points.
there is a difference, as you know, between what's legal and what is ethical and moral.

you are correct that the clinton foundation is very different from trump's businesses because the fundamental reason for being is different. i don't think there is a need to explain to you the differences between the 2 orgs; or you can continue to embarrass yourself by implying somehow the clinton foundation only exist to line their own pockets

and as someone who worked in high levels of government, there is much more to flying on AF1 vs trump's private plane and its not about dollar expenses. AF1's mission is not just "carrying the president around" but of course, you wouldn't know that and i unfortunately am not in a position to discuss further

you keep coming back to dollar amounts... which is very telling because like most of WSO, we eat and see $s. i recommend you explore outside of the business/finance world and critically think a bit deeper about world affairs, from rural china to mumbai and then and only then, you can defend trump.

    • 6
    • 1
Nov 30, 2016

click-bait game strong

    • 1
Nov 30, 2016

The issue for the past month has remained the same; even if he separates and gives his hot children control of the business, there will still be conflict of interest.

How is my grammar? Drop me a note with any errors you see!

    • 3
Dec 2, 2016

'nana for "hot children" lol

Nov 30, 2016

Still clearly a conflict of interest. Past presidents put their assets in a blind trust, when Trump was asked if he would he responded "I don't know what that is, but my kids will run my business". This is the near antithesis of a blind trust, and he will still very much be involved in his business dealings just as his kids will be involved in his office.

    • 2
Dec 1, 2016

LOL @ this being transparency (and no I'm not a bitter Clinton supporter and voted for Trump). This has about the same level of meaning as his not taking the President's salary and only taking $1.

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

    • 2
Dec 1, 2016

Since when did shitty steaks and squandering an inheritance become a "business empire," because I'm at a loss.

Dec 2, 2016

Don't forget the fake college, and the TV show. Classic business empire stuff, the best, believe me

    • 5
    • 2
Dec 2, 2016

^Guys above must have been either really salty about staying late in the office or got emotionally drunk at the Thirsty Thursday happy hour

    • 1
Dec 3, 2016

Deleted

Dec 3, 2016

A blind trust implies that his personal assets would be sold off and liquidated with the proceeds given to a neutral third party to invest as best they see fit. It's not as if he hands over his business for a few years and then takes it back once he isn't President any more - that's not what a blind trust is.

Dec 3, 2016
Comment