The claim that President Trump has been using his high office for personal and family enrichment has been a constant since he was first elected in 2016. It is an article of faith among the Trump Deranged and the Axis of Unethical Conduct; in my experience, sometimes the particular examples of this claimed by Trump’s political foes are supported by facts, and sometimes they have been distorted or wildly exaggerated. There is no question, however, that there are genuine instances where it does appear that Trump personally, his companies and/or his family have been direct beneficiaries of U.S. policies and foreign agreements.
Are these unethical? Sure they are. They are conflicts of interest. They represent the arrogance of power, and they are also politically stupid. Every act or word uttered by Trump that supports the position that he is an agent of evil who is only “in it for himself” makes it easier for the radical American Left to prevail politically, meaning more discrimination, open borders, less free speech, more indoctrination and crippled personal rights and liberties.
That conservative news sources are not reporting the Kazakhstan story is more than troubling. It is disgusting, and, of course, unethical. It is as unethical journalism as the Times refusing–still!– to report anything regarding the horrifying report on rape gangs in the U.K.
The United States’ republic cannot function with two diametrically opposed sets of news sources that create two divergent perceptions of reality. The situation has reached the crisis point where it is literally impossible to know what is happening in the government, in the culture, in society, and around the world. At a time where technology should permit the public to be informed more quickly and accurately than ever, we have an environment that creates skepticism, doubt, ignorance and contrived blindness. When the motives of the messenger not only are questioned with every message but legitimately so, we are all almost literally stumbling around in the dark.
That is a condition that favors the worst forces in society: the sociopaths, the swindlers, the manipulators, the liars, the totalitarians. Both “sides”—journalism shouldn’t have sides, and under traditional ethics must not—should be able to figure out that the long-term benefits of integrity and trustworthiness outweigh the short term benefits of bias and propaganda.
Apparently they can’t.
Now what?
Ethics Alarms 
I’d say the conservative media is staying silent because a lot of folks think the liberal media is crying wolf again, and the conservative media think they have no duty to disabuse them of that.
Then investigate the story and show it’s hooey. Not reporting it at all is futile and foolish. And irresponsible.
But likely successful. It is a case of the boy who cried wolf writ large.
Sadly, the Trump deranged are too far gone to realize that it is a case of the boy who cried wolf because they think everything up to this point was all valid too. They think this is just another installment, not one of the few times they’re onto something solid.
the agreement was signed SIX months ago. List stock exchange company. I can find a board of directors, but unless the Trump version of Hunter “Ukraine” Biden is on one, who cares. Also no mention of a public prosecutor being persecuted.
Trump’s. Extended family are likely invested ino every company on the NYSE to some extent. Were any laws broken or bribery even accused?
Sorry Jack, nothing to see here at this point.
There is certainly potential conflicts of interest to see here. Whether the deal is justifiable and being handled properly or has questionable operations and motivations behind it isn’t the point. The point is that the episode is worthy of public transparency, and for one whole end of the journalistic sector to ignore it is both irresponsible and suspicious.
I would be cautious about calling this an enrichment scheme. Let me first point out that mining critical minerals is not some big secret and investors globally are interested in finding such deposits. Secondly, the Trump and Lutnick children are putting money in or helping to raise money for the Australian rabbi who the Times says . . .
Mr. Althaus is the executive chairman of Kaz Resources and the related company that will mine the Kazakh tungsten deposit, and he remains a shareholder in another critical minerals firm he founded that secured up to $1.6 billion in Commerce Department financing this month.
Any firm that secures $1.6B in Commerce Department funding has well known players with a track record of success. Investors do not invest in ideas or companies they invest in the leadership team which is why the same reason the same people continue to get research funding grants from government. Nonetheless, the author decides to claim KAZ resources is a little known firm. Perhaps the author of the hit piece should learn what drive investor decisions among investments. Potential ROI is not the only factor in the equation. A management team with a history of success in accomplishing goals with a lower ROI will be funded before an unknown team with no record of success and a glitzy presentation.
Obviously, Althaus is a recognized player in the strategic minerals market and would thus be on the radar of venture capitalists (Eric and Donald Trump) and investment bankers which is the business of the Lutnick children. I believe that these types travel in similar circles and attend the same cocktail parties as others who seek them out
It should be noted that the actual amount of direct cash was $277mm. The 1.3B remainder is potential secured loans. The latter is like saying you qualify for buying a $50K new car but you only decide to spend half that amount.
I am assuming that the funding deal in question is under the CHIPS program like the Rare Earth firm noted earlier which gives some direct funding and loan guarantees. Unless the funding provides protection against losses to preferred shares (Preferred stock -not common) is what initial investors demand then there is really nothing shady at play. The investors capital is at risk.
Typically, the government through the CHIPS program provides a fraction of the funds necessary based on the business plan documents. Securing private funds to underwrite the risk of the proposed venture is not unusual. Moreover, the government and investor’s cap on the total amount invested is fixed but not always realized if the firm fails to meet milestones.
These types of deals do not require public notice because they are private placements with what the SEC call “accredited investors.” This means that only certain people who meet personal financial criteria and are considered astute investors can put their money into deals like this. Trump’s kids did not need inside information to know that mineral extraction provides high returns with high risk.
According to the story, Eric and Don Jr. have a ownership interest in an investor group that partnered with Kantor which raised about $230mm. So what. This happens every day.
I also had issues with the timeline. The story opens saying the deal was sealed at the St Regis meeting and six weeks later the investments were made by the children of Trump and Lutnik which was six days before the ceremonial signing. The author states that they invested while negotiations were ongoing but when the deal is “sealed” at St Regis then negotiations are over.
Reminder: a long comment with a link will often be held under “pending” until I see it. I get a note in my email that tells me that an approved commenter has a post stuck in moderation, and as soon as I see it, I will let it through. Rather than write the whole thing out again, send me an email at jamproethics@verzion.net I have to check email all day. That works
It used to say pending moderation so I thought I just failed to post it before I exited the site. I’ll keep your info in mind
I see my original post finally showed up so my reconstruction of my thoughts in the second comment can be ignored or deleted
Even the appearance of impropriety can be damning as accountants and attorneys know. I’m wondering what the legal limitations are for elected officials. As I understand it, Congress is still currently immune from insider trading laws, yes? What about the President and Vice-President, their staff, the Cabinet. And what about adult children? It is reported that the Pelosis have made hundreds of millions in investment income over the years. The Clintons and Obamas have substantial net worth that is far higher than their recent salaries would seem to justify. Of course they claim speaking fees and book sales, but I wonder about investments based on information and opportunities the rest of us don’t have. Has the Trump family actually crossed a line, or have they been more transparent than others?