QP!
Verified User
Again more meaningless words by you. There is no law that Hunter broke selling his art by grifting off his family name. It is something that has always happened and always will and there is no way any law could ever tell kids of celebrities or politicians they cannot make money off their family name. Some ecological firm might want a "Gore" on their Board since they think it raises their profile. Another kid might sell their art because they are a kid of a top movie star. So what. You and i can say it is often unseemly but that is the extent of it.
What Trump did actually broke laws and/or Ethics requirements of holding office.
So it is only your TDS that makes you argue what Hunter did was bad and what Trump did OK.
1.
Under U.S. public-official ethics statutes, federal employees — including the president — are generally prohibited from using their office for personal financial gain, and they must avoid financial conflicts of interest. Federal ethics rules require:
- Disclosure of financial interests,
- Recusal from matters where they have a financial stake,
- Avoidance of benefiting from official actions. Senator Schiff
Profiting from crypto ventures while in office blends personal financial interests with the power to shape related regulation/
2.
The U.S. Constitution’s Emoluments Clauses (both domestic and foreign) prohibit federal officeholders from accepting gifts or payments from foreign states or entities without Congressional consent. Global cryptocurrency holdings and foreign investors buying meme coins tied to the president’s brand could function as prohibited payments — especially if they resemble financial gain tied to official position. GovInfo
3.
Federal anti-bribery statutes (e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 201) make it unlawful for public officials to corruptly solicit or accept anything of value in exchange for being influenced in their official actions. Offering crypto-related access (e.g., dinners or events tied to token holdings) could be construed as soliciting payments for official influence — potentially crossing into bribery or “honest services fraud.” GovInfo
4.
Whether a crypto token, NFT, or meme coin is a security under U.S. law matters for regulation and fraud liability. The SEC has taken the position that many tokens do not qualify as securities (a position it adjusted in early 2025), meaning they aren’t subject to registration or disclosure rules under the Securities Act of 1933. Forbes
Because Trump-linked tokens have been treated as non-securities, traditional SEC securities-law violations (e.g., insider trading or unregistered offerings) may not apply in the same way they would to stocks or traditional financial products.
5.
U.S. campaign finance law limits contributions to candidates and forbids foreign nationals from contributing to political campaigns. Crypto purchases could function as de facto contributions if linked to political access or fundraising, but there’s no clear legal precedent holding crypto purchases as prohibited political donations absent explicit coordination with a campaign entity. PolitiFact
6.
Several bills have been introduced in Congress specifically aimed at addressing these kinds of concerns:
- The COIN Act would prohibit public officials from issuing or sponsoring digital assets and require reporting of crypto holdings. Senator Schiff
- The MEME Act was proposed to ban presidents, members of Congress, and other officials from issuing or endorsing crypto assets tied to their likeness or position. Wikipedia