In a move that can only be described as, well, odd, the General Services Administration officer who oversaw the original contract giving Donald Trump control of the government property that would soon be refurbished into a new Washington, D.C. hotel, has ruled that Donald Trump is not breaking the rules in the lease that prohibits any elected official from profiting off that lease.
The reasoning goes like this; yes, Donald Trump is now an elected official. And yes, the lease says that elected officials can't profit from the arrangement. But it's all right because, and see if you can follow the logic here because it's a bit murky to us, he won't be able to directly pocket those untoward profits until he's back out of office.
Today, Kevin Terry, a GSA contracting officer who oversaw the original contract negotiations with Trump, released a letter declaring that there was no reason for concern. In the letter, which is reprinted in its entirety below, Terry takes the position that there is no violation of the clause because the Trump Organization has been rearranged to steer any profits from the hotel away from Trump's bank accounts while he's in office. Trump owns more than 76 percent of the project; his children own the remainder.
According to Terry's letter, the Trump Organization has presented documents to the GSA showing that although any profits (or losses) are accrued among the partners based on their ownership, any profits that would have gone to Trump himself will be kept separate and unavailable for Trump's personal use until he is out of office. Under the terms of the original agreement, Trump could have withdrawn money with ease, but the new corporate structure (established before Trump's inauguration) would prevent this, Terry wrote.
Got that? All sides agree that Trump is an elected official, and will indeed be profiting off any decisions he makes or the company makes based on his status as an elected official, but it's fine because even though he might indeed be profiting off his status as president and as property owner he can't actually get his hands on those profits until he leaves office—upon which no harm, no foul.
Which would seem to be akin to arguing it's perfectly legal to rob a bank, so long as you don't spend the money right away.
Keep in mind this is just the decision from the General Services Administration, whose contract with Trump is now overseen by their top-level boss ... Donald Trump. It's not an evaluation of the apparent emoluments issues or the glaringly obvious ethics problems involved with having a sitting president own the nearby hotel where glad-handing foreign dignitaries or corporate favor-seekers might park themselves in the hopes that their stays will be noticed by the nation's profits-obsessed leader. It's just, you know, business.
But it's probably not the end of the argument.