by 
Wanting to have leaders that are not able to be bought is certainly a valid concern. For that reason, businesses and governments have ethics rules to make sure that people are not profiting off of the office they hold instead of doing the job they were elected to do. And yet, many elected representatives end up very wealthy because of the positions they hold in government, and the government makes sure to exempt certain kinds of “lobbying” under the guise that there’s a line between a bribe and just being friendly– and why can’t some things be the latter?
This concept of being worried about foreign interference in our elected officials usually only takes place in the opposing party, so it’s no surprise that we’re already being treated to the idea that foreign governments could contribute to former President Trump’s social media company and thereby try to curry favor with him:
Should he retain his control of the [media] company while in office, the ethical questions that arose from Mr. Trump’s hotels and other properties in his first term as president would only multiply when applied to a publicly traded media company, they said.
“This will be a very easy vehicle for foreign governments that want to curry favor with the president to throw money at him in a way that benefits his financial bottom line,” said Jack Goldsmith, a law professor at Harvard University and a top Justice Department official under President George W. Bush.
Corporations and other players wanting to sway Mr. Trump could buy advertising on Truth Social, other experts said. They could try to get on his radar by buying shares in the company.
“Mr. Trump ended the first day of public trading $4.6 billion richer on paper….”
This whole concept I find rather amusing. What the person complaining wants you to believe is that it is better to have a President who is building a brand off of his name and access to his power– explicitly!– than it is to have someone who is successful in business and has wealth and didn’t need campaign contributions or huge PACs to help him win the election the first time around.
Who is more likely to be swayed to do something to chase the millions– the one who already has it or the one that doesn’t?
