As His Term Ends, Trump Faces More Questions on Payments to His Hotel

New York Times logo

A civil case being pursued by the attorney general for the District of Columbia has brought renewed attention to what limits there should be on a president’s ability to profit from the office.

WASHINGTON — It was a month before Donald J. Trump’s inauguration, and one of his aides had a delicate question: Wasn’t there going to be a backlash when it became known that the inauguration had spent donors’ money at Mr. Trump’s hotel in Washington, even though other places would cost much less or even be free?

“These are events in P.E.’s honor at his hotel, and one of them is with and for family and close friends,” Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, then an event planner for Mr. Trump, wrote in an email to a colleague in December 2016, referring to Mr. Trump as the president-elect and saying she raised the issue to “express my concern.”

As Mr. Trump’s presidency comes to a close, expenditures like those are receiving renewed legal scrutiny in the form of a civil case being pursued by the attorney general for the District of Columbia. Continue reading.

‘They broke the law’: DC attorney general rebuts Ivanka Trump’s attack over inauguration case

AlterNet logo

Ivanka Trump, along with the Trump Organization, has been under investigation for years for suspicions around the conduct of the president’s 2017 inaugural committee and its funding. This week, she found herself being deposed for reportedly more than five hours by the D.C. attorney general as the investigation continues, leading her to lash out and accuse the investigators of being politically motivated.

But Karl Racine, the attorney general in question, hit back, saying it is clear the Trump family and the inaugural committee broke the law.

At the heart of the investigation is the question of whether the Trump family use inaugural funds for extensive self-dealing. Because the committee, which raised an unprecedented amount of funds, spent much of its money on Trump properties, it could have been illegally funneling money to the family by charging egregiously high amounts for Trump Organization services. Continue reading.