Grifter in chief declares executive branch open for business

One of the largest differences setting Donald Trump apart from every other president is his willingness to use his presidential office as a business opportunity. While it has been extremely common over the years for presidents to sell books, clothing, or memorabilia, few have utilized this to the degree the current president has. Though Trump has donated the entirety of his salary in both terms, this pales in comparison to his real sources of income. His unprecedented decision not to cut ties with any of his businesses when stepping into the office broke a tradition that presidents often followed to eliminate conflict of interest during their presidency. Presidents like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have amassed plenty of wealth during their presidency, oftentimes through aforementioned book sales and the salary of the president. Through less common means such as Cryptocurrency, merchandise sales, and private clubs and properties, Trump has made an inordinate amount of money throughout his presidency, with estimates ranging anywhere from 1 to 4.3 billion dollars. This hyperbolic collection of wealth makes limiting the amount of money a president can make while in office seems rather reasonable.

In 2010, the landmark case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decided that an unlimited amount of money could be spent by third parties on political campaigns. This opened the door for monied interests becoming an increasingly domineering voice in American politics. Politicians more than ever had copious donations from political action committees advocating for the interests of oil companies, pharmacies, and even foreign nations. Even if not directly through their own campaign contributions, if a politician refused to listen to these interest groups they faced the threat of being primaried during the next election cycle and replaced by someone who would, because no grassroots funding campaign could beat out corporations. Donald Trump’s embracing of money in political culture, while shocking, is merely a result of the conditions that have been created within the American Overton Window. 

Before Trump, most of this bribery was received quietly, however, had he not brought it out, someone else would have. This coveting of money is a detriment to the democratic process of America by stifling the voices of everyday Americans. Alternatively, Trump  meets with the top holders of his cryptocurrency, Trumpcoin, allowing the wealthiest a direct line to the president if they so choose. Fortune 500 CEOs are also visiting the White House to give gifts to the president to a degree that seems nearly sycophantic. Whether this is the ideal situation for these companies is irrelevant, because whenever it’s preferable, they will operate within this framework. Foreign policy negotiations are becoming muddied by gifts of private jets from wealthy countries, and monied interests are creating an erosion of trust within the government. Though the president only makes four hundred thousand dollars a year, Trump has found a much more effective way of making money through merchandising, cloaking his profits under dubious claims he has divested from the family finances, leaving that to his children.

Throughout the course of both his campaigns and presidencies, Trump has not ceased to find new products to market to supporters. From teddy bears to NFTs, any purchasable to fall under the Trump trademark has been created. Some supporters have even opted into receiving a yearly thirty dollar membership card, the owners of whom receive nothing for doing so. While it’s unlikely that many of these business ventures such as the Trump phone will yield incredibly meaningful returns, their existence closes the ever shrinking gap between political support and obsession. Oftentimes the customer base of these products are the most committed fans of the president and his MAGA movement, but it also tends to be people with the most parasocial relationships with politics. This calls into question the ethicality of this marketing campaign. Most businesses consider it unsavory to directly market to vulnerable demographics that make them susceptible to excessive spending on unnecessary products. Recently, President Trump has also been interested in altering the name of buildings such as the Kennedy Center to include himself under the title. While many have written this off as simply a desire for recognition and pride, while lobbying for this, his private business interests have filed trademarks for any naming associated with his brand. Therefore, any building like an airport looking to use his name in for it would need to pay royalties to the president for its use, an unprecedented decision among presidents. 

The boundary pushing nature of Trump’s willingness to profit off of the position he holds has led many to question if the common practice of asset liquidation during a presidential term should now become a requirement. Along with many voices advocating for the overturn of Citizens United, having the president follow the same restrictions as Congress seems quite logical. The presidential salary could also then be used as a baseline to decide minimum and maximum wages, making the president a closer representative of the people due to having a closer economic relationship with his constituents. Many presidents have used their status for marketing campaigns, but the envelope has been pushed to the breaking point. Trump’s profiteering ambitions force a question into the limelight: do financial endeavors erode the trust between a leader and their country? As approval ratings plummet and many Americans are feeling the repercussions of inflation, the nonstop commercialization of branded products by the administration becomes rather tone deaf. In the pit of American consumerism, if people wish to escape, they must put collective effort towards rejecting the commercialization of the American government and push for economic freedom.

by Will Amel

Published March 2, 2026

Oshkosh West Index Volume 122 Issue V