ConflictClarifier

ردیاب بحران ایران-خلیج فارس ۲۰۲۶
CC
Events Archive
strikeApr 13, 2026

Trump family deal spree could open door for future presidents to profit from office

Summary

NEW YORK (AP) — For decades, presidents avoided even the appearance of profiting from their office. Harry Truman refused to lend his name to any business, even in retirement. Richard Nixon so feared a brother might profit off their ties, he had his phone tapped. And George W. Bush dumped his individual stock holdings before taking office. President Donald Trump is taking a different approach. The family real estate business is undergoing the fastest overseas expansion since its founding a century ago, each deal potentially shaping everything from tariffs to military aid. Led by Eric, and his brother, Donald Jr., the family business has expanded into cryptocurrencies with ventures that brought in billions of dollars but raised questions about whether some big investors received favorable treatment in return. The brothers have also joined or invested in a number of companies that aim to do business with the government their father runs. Last month, they struck a deal giving them stakes worth millions in an armed drone maker seeking contracts with the Pentagon and with Gulf states under attack by Iran and dependent on the U.S. military led by their father. The White House and the Trump Organization deny there are any ethical problems. Asked about the issue at a recent crypto conference, Donald Jr. said, “Frankly, it’s gotten old.” The problem of conflicts of interest goes back a decade to when Trump first ran for office, but some government ethics experts and historians argue it’s more pressing than ever as conflicts pile up in his second term that they consider unprecedented, blatant and dangerous to democracy. “I don’t think there’s any line right now between policy decisions and political calculations and the interest of the Trump family,” said Julian Zelizer, a presidential historian at Princeton University. Deal-making spree abroad In Trump’s first term, the Trump Organization did zero deals in foreign countries. In a little over a year into his second term it did eight, all ostensibly complying with the Trump Organization’s self-imposed rule not to do business directly with foreign governments. But governments in authoritarian and one-party states rarely take a hands-off approach — especially when the business belongs to a sitting president. In Qatar, a Trump golf club and villa project is being developed in part by a company owned by the Qatari government. In Vietnam, where The New York Times reported the government pushed farmers off their land to make way for a Trump resort, the country’s deputy prime minister signed off on the deal at a ceremony. And in Saudi Arabia, a planned “Trump Plaza” resort on the Red Sea is being built by a Saudi real estate developer close to the ruling family. Whether the deals played any role in changing U.S. policies in ways these countries sought is nearly impossible to know but the countries did get what they wanted – access to advanced U.S. technology for Qatar, tariff relief for Vietnam and fighter jets for Saudi Arabia. And the Trump Organization got something too: Tens of millions in fees. Asked about those projects, the Trump Organization said it has done no deals with governments so far, noting that the Saudi company was private and has said it is “collaborating” with the Qatari business and had not struck a “partnership” with it that would have broken its self-imposed rules. The UAE, crypto and Binance Another deal raising conflicts of interest questions first came to light in a Wall Street Journal article in January — a year after it was struck. Days before the inauguration, the Trump family sold nearly half of its World Liberty Financial crypto business to a UAE government-linked company run by a member of the UAE royal family for $500 million. A second UAE entity, a government fund, invested in the offshore cryptocurrency exchange Binance using $2 billion worth of a digital currency called a stablecoin issued by World Liberty. That allowed the Trump company that received the dollars to put it in safe investments such as bonds or money market funds and keep the tens of millions of dollars in interest for itself. Shortly after, the Trump administration reversed a Biden-era restriction and granted the UAE access to advanced U.S. chips. Binance’s founder, Changpeng Zhao, later got a pardon from Trump, despite having pleaded guilty to failing to stop criminals from using his platform to move money connected to child sex abuse, drug trafficking and terrorism. A lawyer for Zhao denied any connection between the Binance’s business with the Trump family and the pardon. “Any claim of a quid pro quo by Binance or CZ, or preferential financial treatment by Binance, is a clear misstatement of the public record,” said Teresa Goody Guillen in a email to the AP, referring to Zhao by his initials. Asked about the pardon, the White House said federal authorities had unfairly punished Zhao in what it called “The Biden Administration’s war on crypto.” World Liberty dismissed the notion of a conflict, saying the UAE deal had no connection to the president’s chips policy. Crypto billions World Liberty has also provided a separate income stream to a new Trump limited liability corporation through sales of “governance tokens” that give owners certain voting rights in its business, though not equity stakes, raising $2 billion last year. That translates into hundreds of millions of dollars for the Trumps through their World Liberty ownership stake and a separate side deal allowing them a cut of these sales. One big token investor was Justin Sun, a cryptocurrency billionaire who as a foreign citizen would be banned under U.S. law from making political donations to U.S. politicians. Between Trump’s election and inauguration, Sun spent $75 million on the tokens. In February last year, a federal lawsuit charging Sun with duping investors was paused before being settled last month for a $10 million fine. Then there are the souvenir-type “meme” coins stamped with Trump’s face that went on sale days before he took the oath of office last year. Over the next four months, the coins generated $320 million, mostly going to Trump-related entities, according to blockchain tracker Chainalysis. That is more than double the money collected in four years running his Washington D.C. hotel in Trump’s first term. Unlike the lobbyists or campaign donors trying to influence Trump, the coin buyers can buy anonymously. One who chose to make his purchase public was Sun, who spent $200 million on the coins and got access to Trump at a gala party he held for the biggest buyers. Another family cryptocurrency business, American Bitcoin went public in September, giving Donald Jr. and Eric about $1 billion in paper wealth at that time. Months earlier, their father announced a new national bitcoin reserve, sending the price for the cryptocurrency soaring to a record. The Trump businesses aren’t completely immune to crypto’s notorious volatility. The value of bitcoin and other digital tokens have since plunged and rattled investors. Both American Bitcoin stock and the value of Trump’s souvenir meme coins have collapsed 90% from their highs. Last month, Trump announced he would hold another dinner with new top holders of his meme coins, giving the coin a boost before it fell back again. “Whatever constraints there were in the first term appear to have completely disappeared,” says Columbia University historian Timothy Naftali. “Do you want future presidents to be open to the highest bidder?” Trump thinks people don’t care Asked to comment for this story, the White House said Trump acts in an “ethically-sound manner” and that any suggestion to the contrary is either “ill-informed or malicious.” It reiterated that his assets are in a trust managed by his children and stated he has “no involvement” in family business deals. “There are no conflicts of interest,” said spokesperson Anna Kelly. In a separate statement, the Trump Organization said it is “fully compliant with all applicable ethics and conflicts of interest laws” and added, “The implication that politics has enriched the Trump family is unfounded.” Trump in January told The New York Times that when it comes to potential conflicts of interest, “I found out that nobody cared, and I’m allowed to,” alluding to an exemption the president gets from the federal statute banning federal officials from holding financial interests in businesses impacted by public policy they help shape. It’s not clear he’s wrong about American attitudes, though they appear to be changing even among Republicans. In a Pew Research Center poll in January, 42% of those voters said they were confident that Trump acts ethically in office, down from 55% at the start of his second term a year ago. Change of fortune Forbes estimates Trump’s net worth is now $6.3 billion, soaring 60% from before he returned to office, a striking development given how much the Trump Organization struggled before. The Trump International Hotel in D.C. never turned a profit before being sold. Two Trump hotel chains catering to middle class travelers in his first term shut down for lack of demand. Condominium buildings stripped the Trump name off their facades after discovering that instead of attracting buyers, it was repelling them. No new U.S. condominiums are putting the Trump name above their entrances in his second term, but his name is prized in Washington where people have business before the federal government. Donald Jr., Trump’s oldest son, opened a private club in the Georgetown section of Washington that is charging initiation fees as high as $500,000 for founding members. One of the few clubs with comparable fees, the Yellowstone Club in Montana, offers access to multiple resorts, 50 ski trails and more than a dozen restaurants across a members-only area the size of Manhattan. Donald Jr.’s club is in the basement of a building but offers something else — proximity to power. The club’s name is “Executive Branch.” Bibles, guitars and sneakers Other presidents and their families have done things in pursuit of profit that stained that high office. Hunter Biden got paid as a director of a Ukrainian gas company while his father was vice president. The Clinton Foundation got foreign donations, though after Bill Clinton had left office. And Jimmy Carter’s brother Billy cashed in on the family name by selling beer. In Trump’s case, the president himself is hawking goods, including $59.99 “God Bless the USA” Bibles, $399 sneakers stamped “Never Surrender” and electric guitars priced up to $11,500 — shipping not included — for a model autographed by the president. New year, new profits In the first months of Trump’s second year back in the White House, the momentum hasn’t let up. In January, the Trump Organization announced its third deal involving Saudi Arabia in less than a year, this time a “collaboration” with a company more directly tied to the government because it is owned by the country’s sovereign wealth fund chaired by its crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman. Asked by the AP whether the project outside Riyadh for Trump mansions, a hotel and golf course violated the company’s pledge not to strike deals with foreign governments, the Trump Organization said it doesn’t “conduct business with any government entity” but didn’t address the project specifically. Meanwhile, as the two oldest brothers’ new drone company seeks Pentagon contracts, other government contractors in which one or both have gotten ownership stakes this past year are taking in tens of millions of dollars of new taxpayer money. That includes a rocket motor maker, an AI chip supplier and a data analytics company, according to government contracting records. Asked about potential conflicts after the drone deal was announced, Eric said, “I am incredibly proud to invest in companies I believe in.” A spokesman for Donald Jr. said he doesn’t “interface” with the government on companies in his portfolio, adding that “the idea that he should cease living his life and making a living to provide for his five kids just because his dad is president, is quite frankly, a laughable and ridiculous standard.” A new investment firm that the brothers joined as advisers last year has raised $345 million in an initial public offering to buy stakes in U.S. companies designed to help their father revive America’s manufacturing base. After the AP asked Trump’s chief business lawyer about language in a regulatory filing stating the firm would target companies seeking federal grants, tax credits and government contracts, he filed a new document with that language removed. Zelizer, the Princeton historian, says he expects future presidents will show more restraint in enriching themselves, but worries about the message Trump is sending. “He has shown politically there is no price to be paid to making money,” he said. “You know you can go there.”

Actors involved

USIran

Sources

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranUN
1 source

The US and its allies Britain, France and Germany are pushing other countries on the UN nuclear watchdog's board to pass a resolution next week reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for the first time in 20 years, diplomats said on Friday. If passed, the resolution would follow up on one adopted on June 12 of last year declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for not fully cooperating with an investigation into uranium traces found at undeclared sites.

The US launched an air war against Tehran on February 28 in which, together with Israel, it destroyed or badly damaged Iran's uranium-enrichment facilities. Iran has not let International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors return to the bombed sites since then or verify what remains of its stocks of enriched uranium, some of which was enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.

Resolution would be culmination of standoff over IAEA's access to nuclear sites A resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation board reporting Iran to the Security Council would also be the culmination of a standoff over IAEA access to those sites, since the board has passed two resolutions in the past year demanding Iran declare its enriched uranium stocks and grant the IAEA full access to verify them.

A draft text for the resolution has yet to be formally submitted to the board and negotiations between countries over the exact wording are ongoing, diplomats said. A draft is usually formally submitted early in the week of a board meeting. As a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has the right to develop nuclear technology, including enrichment, for peaceful purposes.

Iran says it would never produce nuclear weapons. It is, however, the only country to enrich to 60% without making a bomb. The amount it has enriched to that level is "a matter of serious concern" to the IAEA. The IAEA believes well over 200 kg of that highly enriched uranium has survived the bombardments and is held in a tunnel complex at Isfahan and at the Natanz facility.

Location: Jerusalem
strikeUnverifiedUSIranChina
1 source

The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on the Turkish bank Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi, alleging it facilitated the transfer of Iranian oil revenues into cash and gold. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated these measures are part of "Operation Economic Outcast," an initiative launched following more than six months of conflict to pressure Iran.

Location: Iran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranEURussiaChinaUkraineHamas
1 source

Rabobank reported that geopolitical developments, including Russian statements regarding potential peace talks in Ukraine and US-Iran hostilities, continue to dominate market sentiment, though analysts noted these claims remain unverified. The bank also cited unconfirmed reports that South Korea may deploy forces to the Strait of Hormuz and that Israel has stated regime change in Tehran is a primary objective, while noting that Ukrainian media reports of an impending northern Russian offensive lack independent verification.

Location: Tehran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaUkraine
1 source

The White House is now apparently using Russian tactics to convince the American public that the war in Iran is not, in fact, a war. When asked by reporters at the White House on Thursday whether the most intense sustained air campaign by American forces since the invasion of Iraq would be over by the midterms, Vice President JD Vance replied: “I wouldn’t call it a war.

” Vladimir Putin said much the same thing when he invaded Ukraine. Russia was not fighting a war either, the Kremlin insisted; it was merely conducting a “special military operation.” If that comparison strikes you as shocking, consider the contours of the two conflicts.

A vastly more powerful military launched a punishing offensive against a smaller, less well-equipped adversary, inflicted enormous damage without achieving a decisive resolution, and then found itself drawn into a longer, grinding conflict with no clear way out.

The motivations behind the wars may be different, and they’re playing out in different theaters, but the pattern is eerily similar. Now, so too is the attempt by those in power to control how the public understands, and even what it is allowed to call, the obvious war unfolding in front of them.

If This Isn’t a War, What Is? Let us take a moment to assess what exactly has happened since February 28, when the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury. The opening U.S.-Israeli attack killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, along with the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, the defense minister and various other senior officials.

According to the U.S. military’s own accounting, the first 38 days of major combat operations involved more than 10,200 sorties and 13,500 strikes. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) says those attacks damaged or destroyed more than 85 percent of Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval defense industrial base, while knocking out 82 percent of its air-defense missile systems.

The U.S. sent carrier strike groups and warships into the region, later imposing a military blockade on Iranian ports. Meanwhile, American and allied air defenses intercepted more than 6,000 Iranian attack drones and 1,500 ballistic missiles fired at U.

S. forces, Israel and American partners across the Middle East. More than 50,000 U.S. service members remain deployed across the region. The fighting has killed 18 U.S. service members and at least 8,000 people across Iran, Lebanon, Israel and the Gulf states.

More than 750 U.S. service members have been wounded. Last month, during a lull in the fighting, the U.S. Treasury unveiled a sanctions package likened to an “economic D-day” that is designed to make Iran an “economic outcast” and cut the adversary off from all available forms of economic support.

In the announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent openly declared that Iran had been “at war against America” for 47 years. This week, the shooting resumed; the U.S. hit targets in and around the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran blasted missiles at targets in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Iraq.

All this from an administration that almost exactly a year ago launched a rapid rebrand of the Defense Department into the “Department of War”. No boots on the ground, though, so it’s not a war, right? Tell It Kind of Like It Is Even the very best snake-oil salesman would have a hard time convincing people that the war in Iran isn’t a war.

So why is JD Vance even trying? Well, if there’s one thing politicians understand better than anyone, it’s the importance of language and rhetoric. Words have immense power; a well-written speech can unite millions of people, and a catchy slogan like Make America Great Again can come to represent an entire political philosophy.

But war is a pesky word. For one, it implies there will eventually be a winner and a loser. It also brings with it certain expectations—and some very difficult questions. What is the objective? How many people will die? When will it end? And, perhaps most dangerously of all: was it worth it?

Those are not questions the White House wants Americans to be asking. Trump built a substantial part of his political identity around ending, rather than beginning, America’s “endless wars.” When Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding in June, the White House presented it as proof that Trump’s America First approach could deliver peace without another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict.

Then the hostilities started again. Earlier this week, Trump shared a Truth Social graphic declaring that “Hormuz Oil Volumes are BACK!”, saying 18 million barrels a day were once again leaving the Strait, compared with 20 million before the war. No independent commodity tracking company or energy analyst appeared to verify Trump’s claims.

But most Americans won’t be checking tanker-tracking dashboards. What they’ll care about is the cold, hard fact that diesel hit a new record price this morning, soaring to an average of $5.85 a gallon for the first time ever. Gasoline is $4.15 a gallon on average, compared with $3.

20 at this time last year, according to AAA. The numbers on the sign at the gas station and the price on the grocery receipt aren’t affected by Trump’s tall tales, but they’ll surely affect how Americans vote at the midterms. When viewed in this light, Vance’s attempt to discourage reporters from “call[ing] it a war” begins to make sense.

A war is something that we want to end. It tends to result in a winner and a loser. And its worth is up for debate at all times. A different kind of engagement that doesn’t quite meet the threshold of war—say, a special military operation—is not exposed to the same kind of scrutiny.

Vance effectively made that case himself. “When you ask, ‘When will this end?’ You’re asking me a question like, ‘When will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?’” he said. By that logic, there is no American war—only recurring Iranian provocations that require American military responses.

That’s exactly the logic applied by Putin to Ukraine and supposed expansion of NATO. Putting the Toothpaste Back in the Tube U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly invoked the War Powers Resolution to challenge Trump’s authority to keep fighting Iran without specific congressional authorization.

The law generally gives a president 60 days after U.S. forces enter “hostilities” to secure congressional approval or bring those hostilities to an end. That makes the pauses in fighting hugely important. When the original 60-day deadline arrived in May, Trump told Congress that the temporary ceasefire reached in April meant the hostilities that began on February 28 had ended.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued that the War Powers clock could “pause, or stop” when the shooting did. That position is disputed by legal experts, but its political utility is obvious. If every new outbreak of fighting can be treated as a separate skirmish, rather than part of one continuous war, the administration can argue that a fresh 60-day clock starts each time.

Vance’s insistence that there is no continuing “war” fits neatly for an administration that has already tried to divide six months of conflict into separate periods of hostilities, interrupted by ceasefires and pauses. This brings us back to Moscow.

The Kremlin’s own linguistic trick was also about making one sprawling war sound smaller, more limited and more manageable than it really was. From the very beginning of the invasion, Putin described the war as a special military operation. Only after two years of grinding warfare did Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov openly declare Russia to be in a “state of war”—and even then, he said the transformation had occurred because the “collective West” had joined the fight against Russia.

Vance is playing a similar game, but in reverse. Only now—with soaring fuel prices, mounting casualties, concerns over the military’s munitions stockpiles, and midterm elections on the horizon—is the conflict no longer a war. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, though, and the American people aren’t stupid.

Vance and the White House may discover in November that voters are perfectly capable of recognizing a war, even when the vice president doesn’t want to call it one.

Location: Iran