By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The New York Times reported that President Trump and his family enriched themselves by at least $1.4 billion during his first year back in office, a figure likely underestimated due to hidden wealth sources. This unprecedented profiteering occurred as millions of Americans faced healthcare and food assistance cuts. Key income streams included investments in cryptocurrencies, real estate deals, licensing his name overseas, and settlements from media and tech companies. Foreign governments and corporations sought to influence policy through investments and gifts, leading to accusations of blatant pay-for-play and a “fetid swamp” of corruption.
Read the original article here
Trump Pocketed At Least $1.4 Billion in First Year Back in Office in Unprecedented ‘Exploitation of the Presidency’: It’s frankly astonishing. The core of this story is hard to ignore: the staggering amount of money, at least $1.4 billion, that Donald Trump allegedly accumulated within his first year back in office. It paints a picture of, to put it mildly, an extraordinary exploitation of the presidency. The fact that the “he doesn’t take a paycheck!” defense is rendered completely useless is, in itself, telling. The focus isn’t on the salary; it’s on the blatant profiteering that appears to have occurred.
The sheer scale of the alleged financial gains raises serious questions. To put it in perspective, $1.4 billion in a single year is a vast sum. And as the argument goes, if what we can *see* is $1.4 billion, what’s hidden? This isn’t just about financial gain; it’s about the erosion of public trust and the fundamental ethics of leadership. The thought of this man’s family and friends profiting off this corruption, as well, is hard to digest.
This also seems to highlight a deeply troubling aspect of American politics – the priorities, and who they serve. The contrast is stark: while many Americans struggle financially, reports emerge of this level of wealth accumulation by the former president. It feels like the priorities are completely misaligned. If a political rival were accused of a similar thing, it would be all over the news!
This situation demands scrutiny and accountability. The call for indictment, prosecution, and punishment is understandable. The silence, or the deflection, is what’s unsettling. It’s difficult to see how anyone could defend this kind of behavior, given the evidence. It’s hard not to see this as some kind of organized grift.
The details are also concerning. The allegations regarding the Epstein files are incredibly disturbing. The fact that someone allegedly has knowledge of and is in possession of these files raises serious questions about transparency and ethics. There’s a clear pattern of this, and the historical comparisons are not flattering. Nixon’s famous quote comes to mind: “I’ve never profited from public service,” sounds hollow in the face of these kinds of numbers and reports.
The scale of the alleged financial exploitation has historical precedents: there are many examples of politicians seemingly using their position for personal gain. But this seems to have reached a whole new level. The precedent for accountability is being set, or not set, right now. It is unprecedented, but it is unfortunately not surprising. The lack of accountability is perhaps the most frustrating aspect of all of this.
This is all an exploitation of all Americans, and the world. The references to the “Biden crime family” or the peanut farm contrast dramatically with the scale of the alleged financial dealings. The Emoluments Clause, designed to prevent this very thing, seems to have been ignored or sidestepped. The hypocrisy of criticizing others for comparatively minor financial indiscretions while overlooking what is alleged here, is striking.
The issue also goes beyond dollars and cents. The fact that the alleged actions have gone this far with apparently no real consequences makes it feel like we live in a “banana republic.” It’s hard not to be appalled. It’s not just the money; it’s the message it sends. The message is, essentially, that anything goes, and the power of the office can be leveraged for personal gain.
And this all seems to be happening as the person at the center is reportedly declining in health. The focus on accumulating wealth for its own sake, rather than spending it or using it for a lasting legacy, is bewildering. It reinforces this as a mental illness.
The focus on personal enrichment, the “biggliest” and not the best interest of the people makes everything even more baffling.