Eric Trump’s business trip to Uruguay cost taxpayers $97,830 in hotel bills


Eric Trump’s business trip to Uruguay cost taxpayers $97,830 in hotel bills

**When the president-elect’s son, Eric Trump, jetted to Uruguay in early January for a Trump Organization promotional trip, U.S. taxpayers were left footing a bill of nearly $100,000 in hotel rooms for Secret Service and embassy staff.
It was a high-profile jaunt out of the country for Eric, the fresh-faced executive of the Trump Organization who, like his father, pledged to keep the company separate from the presidency. Eric mingled with real estate brokers, dined at an open-air beachfront eatery and spoke to hundreds at an “ultra exclusive” Trump Tower Punta del Este evening party celebrating his visit.

**The Uruguayan trip shows how the government is unavoidably entangled with the Trump company as a result of the president’s refusal to divest his ownership stake. **In this case, government agencies are forced to pay to support business operations that ultimately help to enrich the president himself. Though the Trumps have pledged a division of business and government, they will nevertheless depend on the publicly funded protection granted to the first family as they travel the globe promoting their brand.

Oh wow, the American taxpayer is now subsidizing Trump Organization. Can’t wait for the cuts to programs supporting low income people to pay for all this.


Meh. I’m not so concerned about the cost of security for Trump’s family. The world being what it is, we kind of have to do it. Trump was elected, and he and his family are entitled to Secret Service protection. And it’s the first time in a long time that we’ve had a president with adult children. Obama and Clinton and George H. Bush all had minor children – much easier to protect (although the Bush girls were in college during his presidency – tougher than protecting them when they live in the White House).

Not that I don’t have plenty of concerns about the family and their businesses. . .


President Obama took Hillary Clinton aboard Air Force One to campaign for president. I can promise you it cost a heck of a lot more than that. This selective outrage is really getting tiresome.


That doesn’t wash at all. Tax payers shouldn’t be paying for Trump’s business expenses and he needs to fully divest from those businesses. If ha can’t do that he should resign immediately.

That’s ironic because “selective” rationalizations “is really getting tiresome.”


Even the leftist Washington Post article doesn’t make such a wild claim. It says that Trump’s son’s Secret Service detail had travel expenses. This has been the case for all recent Presidents’ children. There was no claim that the US government paid Eric Trump’s expenses or those of his business associates.



When president George HE Bush was president did all his adult children get secret service protection? I don’t recall.


Piers Morgan says it is ‘instant paralysis of perspective’.

“Every single thing President Trump now does, says or tweets or is greeted by instant paralysis of perspective.”

And of course, the instant paralysis of perspective extended to whatever members of his family do as well.

No use telling him that was secret service expenses, not Eric Trump’s.

He is actually saying Trump’s adult children should not involve in business and the schooling age children should not go to school because it will involve secret service expenses. They should be all imprisoned in the White House and save secret service cost. :shrug:


at least Eric wasn’t on vacation :rotfl:


You may recall as his daughter was flying on a commercial airline she was harassed by a couple of men really irate that her father won. The one guy even ran her down according to his partner. So there is some precedent for this Presidents children needing protection.


I don’t support articles that criticize little trivialities like this, unless something truly outrageously decadent were going on.

The presidential family is going to bring with it an entourage, including a good number of secret service agents, and no, they aren’t going to be staying at the Best Western or equivalent hotels. I don’t really think much of this. $100,000 for an international business trip from the president’s son isn’t a big deal nor a particularly unusual sum of money, from either Trump or another president or even from a major CEO & accompanying crew if they are planning a major visit.


What was she doing flying coach? She is rich enough to have her own plane. Also, what kind of snowflake is she.

Oh wait, she made no complaints about the incident. It was the MSM making a fuss about a non-issue.



I remember posters on CAF lambasting the cost to taxpayers expense each and every time Obama took a vacation or took a trip. Where are they now where indeed it is a conflict of interest? Providing SS to protect children in school or engaged in their own careers is different than when Trump has a direct personal financial interest in the venture or business which accumulates financial gain for himself.

The hypocrisy is dripping and one wonders how much of it was derived from racist or religious prejudices. I mean each and every trip was eviscerated on alt-right news sites and blogs.


It is the established policy of the U.S.Secret Service that once the national conventions elect their candidate for president, the candidate and his/her family are afforded Secret Service protection. There is no bias there. 100k for a secret service detail in a foreign country is pretty much the norm. It doesn’t matter whether the children are going to a business meeting, college, or even a night out a Chuck e Cheese. It is policy. Period.


I had an honest question. I was not aware that it covered adult children.


Yeah, all talk and no action. I think that was the issue.


I remember those Obama vacations


Mary Gail:

Understand. When I was younger no one even raised an eye at the cost of protection of the families of Presidents and major candidates in election years. It only seems that from the Clinton administration on, the criticism for political purposes has amped up as a way to discredit the other side. Understandable how one can look for clarification.

And actually, I’m not sure when or if there is an age cut off anymore. I think with the threat of terrorism, kidnapping, etc. that protection is being expanded. I’m pretty sure the policy is under continual reviews as world tensions and threats become more pressing.


There;s a big difference between vacations of a sitting president and business trips for a business that he is supposedly divested from.

C’mon…this is straight abuse and there’s no reason that someone that doesn’t require SS protection couldn’t have made the trip.

This is how we make America great again?


OMG (g = are you Kidding???). We haven’t even hit one month. The article you showed was from 2015, at most 7 years in an 8 (eight) year term.

Oops, sorry. I was trying to use logic and facts. :banghead::banghead::banghead:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit