[genericone]

China knows how to play the game. They know that their investment won't stay under wraps... so I don't see how this would benefit Trump. Could the trump organization have rejected China's investment into the Indonesian state project if they wanted to stay clean? Or would that require dropping out of the entire project completely, and what would the contract violation terms have entailed if they were as major a part of that project as it seems? Would the contract violation agreement result in greater than 500M losses? There are very interesting political games afoot.

[nimish]

In this case the "game" is outright corruption and quid pro quo.

This is not a game without consequence.

[mikeash]

All of your questions demonstrate why the President should never be in that situation in the first place. That Trump wasn’t instantaneously impeached for enormous ongoing conflicts of interest is a stain on Congressional leadership.

[genericone]

Very true, could you imagine the political implications if the Trump organization DID reject the Chinese investment into an Indonesian state project? If acceptance of money is, ipso facto, a sign of political corruption, then would blocking the exchange of money between 2 sovereign nations be considered meddling in foreign economies? What intentions could be read from an act of rejection? How much of the invested money would have actually reached the Trump organization? The Trump organization is far too tied to the Trump presidency for comfort. But this has been true of the Clinton foundation during Bill and Barack's terms as well.

As an aside, the president should first and foremost, represent the nation's best interests. But I can't determine what Trump holds in higher regard, the office of the president, or himself. I imagine most people think being president of the US would be the highest position in the world. For any politician at least, US or foreign, the top of their food chain is the US President. But how does a billionaire like Bezos, with a business and news-media empire, view being president? Does someone like that look down or up? What I mean is, would and should a billionaire 'play' president the same way a politician would 'play' president? My imagination is that a billionaire would want to become president in order to use the office to accomplish political goals not possible simply with money, versus a career politician who might simply see the US Presidency as a goal in itself. At the end of the day, both want to see their desired outcomes come to fruition, both want to be in a position of governmental power to make their wants happen. Which one is better for the nation?

[mikeash]

I don’t understand what you’re saying about what Clinton Foundation. It wasn’t formed until after Bill left office and as far as I know Obama wasn’t involved. The worst Obama did was have a book people could buy.

[genericone]

I had to look it up since I didn't know enough about it, but it looks like the Clinton Foundation was set up in 1997, at the beginning of Bill's 2nd term. As for mentioning Obama's term, what I meant by that was that since Hillary was Secretary of State at the time, there's definite potential for conflict of interest. I used wikipedia for my info.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation

[mikeash]

From that article: “The origins of the foundation go back to 1997, when then-president Bill Clinton was focused mostly on fundraising for the future Clinton Presidential Center in Little Rock, Arkansas. He founded the William J. Clinton Foundation in 2001 following the completion of his presidency.”

[genericone]

Whether its a charity/fundraiser/guest-lecture/business-deal, I imagine it still works the same way, regardless of the stated focus or purpose of said thing: Money goes in, Influence comes out (or Favor_B in exchange for Favor_A). I have neither money nor influence, and the favors I can grant are minuscule, so I can't tell you what ratio of Money:Influence works for powerful people, but I can at least say that they are not inversely proportional. The more you give, the higher your surface area becomes to receive something and the more offended you can act if you don't receive something quid pro quo.

[martythemaniak]

> I don't see how this would benefit Trump

It puts money in his bank account. Of all the things to understand, this seems like it should be the easiest.