The GSA and the Trump Organization in 2013 agreed to a $180 million lease over 60 years. As president, Trump would oversee the GSA and appoint its administrator ― a conflict of interest with his business.

The contract language is clear: “No ... elected official of the Government of the United States ... shall be admitted to any share or part of this Lease, or to any benefit that may arise therefrom...”   

In almost all federal government contracts, the government reserves the right to terminate the contract “for the convenience of the government” (with appropriate compensation due to the contractor), whenever “it is in the Government’s interest.” Unfortunately, the Trump hotel lease explicitly prohibits GSA from exercising that longstanding, well-established, Congressionally-mandated right.

"The contract between GSA and the Trump Organization specifically says that no elected official of the United States government shall be party to, share in, or benefit from the contract," he says, citing clause 37.19 of the contract.

Drabkin, the former senior procurement officer at the GSA, thinks for this reason alone, the president-elect should give up the hotel.But as far as the tool to force him to do that, Drabkin doesn't think clause 37.19 is it.

David Drabkin, once the GSA's senior procurement officer, said he thinks the clause doesn't apply to Trump because it only prohibits adding elected officials to the lease after it was signed, not banning original parties to it who subsequently get elected to office. He adds, though, that a president leasing the building is "absolutely untenable" because of other conflicts of interest issues.