discussion about Trump yesterday. The notion was about conflicts of interest, not the mere act of making money, like with a book, during a presidency. Unless you've got something in mind to share that I don't see, I don't see how collecting royalties on a book has the potential to influence presidential action, so its hard to see a conflict of interest. In the example given yesterday of foreign diplomats on official business being a specific source of revenue (hotel bookings), it's impossible not to see a conflict of interest.

The existence of the conflict is the problem. Even absent proof that the president was influenced by the conflict.