Reckoning with Trump's past

[Trump's problems consist of wrongdoing from before election and wrongdoing after election. This blog entry discusses Trump's wrongdoing from before election. The blog entry Trump's conflicts of interest problem discusses Trump's wrongdoing after the election.]

Limited vetting in 2016 election of Trump's past history
In the 2016 election, there was widespread voter dissatisfaction with career politicians seeming to serve their own interests, and seeming not to care about a protracted shrinking of the middle class and deterioration in the economic lives of tens of millions of Americans.

This dissatisfaction was charged up by candidates Sanders and Trump making harsh attacks on a "rigged" political system and by Trump being especially vicious in alleging Clinton corruption.

In this political environment, Trump swept into the 2016 Presidential election with a campaign spectacle unlike anything seen before in American politics.

In the campaign Trump trashed Obama and the other Presidents as being stupid incompetents and touted that he Trump, aided by his supreme "art of the deal" business skills, could fix the country's problems that the other Presidents had failed on.

Trump's campaign spectacle was an entertainment tour de force, which received unprecedented news coverage and free advertising for Trump.

In all the publicity he got, Trump avoided serious thinking by the voters about Trump's past history and the possible consequences in their consideration of Trump as a Presidential candidate.

Trump had fame in his previous life, and there were voluminous news stories over 30 years about Trump's business and personal life.

To the extent there were bad things about Trump's past that were not in the public record, Trump knew what those bad things were, and some Trump associates also possibly knew. To the voters, these were unknowns.

In the 2016 Republican primaries, the other Republican candidates, possibly because they were cowed by Trump, did minimal attacking of Trump about his past history.

In the general election, there was also minimal attacking of Trump by Hillary Clinton about Trump's past history.

Any attacking of Trump about bad things in his past history done by the other Republican candidates or by Hillary Clinton could, as indicated, not include things that were not in the public record (or found by "oppo" research).

While Trump's business experience had great appeal to many voters, those voters probably gave little serious thought about the possibility that Trump had done nefarious things in his business career, and those could be a problem if Trump won the election and bad things came to light after Trump took office.

Risk of bad things coming out after election
The 2016 election had potentially serious adverse consequences for Trump, his supporters and the country if there were unknown bad things from Trump's past history, and, if Trump should win, those bad things came to light after the election.

Bad things from Trump's past history coming out after the election could lessen Trump's moral authority to lead the country as President and reduce the country's trust in Trump. This would be exacerbated if Trump lied and tried to cover up to keep bad things from his past coming out.

Bad things from Trump's past could be used by Trump's political opponents to attack him, and those attacks could impair Trump's ability to carry out his agenda. That would negatively affect Trump's supporters, who wanted Trump's agenda to be carried out.

The attacking of Trump by his opponents for Trump's past misdeeds would divert Trump and Congress from carrying out their functions in the operation of the Federal government. Division in the country would also increase from Trump's supporters defending Trump and his past misdeeds, and Trump's opponents attacking Trump for those past misdeeds. This increased division would be especially acute if Trump lied and tried to cover up to keep the bad things from coming out, Trump supporters supported Trump notwithstanding his lying and covering up, and Trump's opponents increased their attack about past misdeeds due to Trump's current lying and trying to cover up.

The foregoing would happen in the environment that there would be immensely more intensive and broad ranging scrutiny of Trump's past history that would be carried out by the media and by Trump's political opponents.

Trump knew of all the bad things in his past that could come to light after the election. Trump further knew of the above potentially serious adverse consequences for Trump, his supporters and the country if those bad things from Trump's past came out. Those were risks that Trump knowingly took for himself. He also took the risks for his supporters but Trump's supporters did not know of the risk that Trump took for them.

Bad things actually coming out
Bad things from Trump's past are now coming out, and the potential adverse consequences described above are now happening.

Trump can be expected to take the position that, no matter what bad things are in his past and no matter what comes out from his past, there is no recourse against him as President except for the voters to vote him out of office in 2020.

It can also be expected that such a position by Trump would be strenuously resisted by Trump's opponents, and the ensuing political battle would be exactly one of the potential adverse consequences resulting from bad things in Trump's past that come to light after the election.

As stated above, Trump, in running for President, knew of whatever bad things there were in his past and Trump further knew of the potentially serious adverse consequences for himself, his supporters and the country if those bad things from Trump's past came out. Those were risks that Trump knowingly took for himself . Trump also took the risks for his supporters and the country, but Trump's supporters and the country did not know of the risk that Trump took for them.

It can be expected that Trump will take the position that, as between himself and the country, it is the country that should bear all the costs and risk of what Trump consciously and knowingly subjected the country to, and that he Trump should be untouched by the harms he has caused for the country by his choice to run for President.

Time will tell how all of the foregoing plays out for the country.

Trump's conflicts of interest problem

[Trump's problems consist of wrongdoing from before election and wrongdoing after election. This blog entry discusses Trump's wrongdoing after the election. The blog entry Reckoning with Trump's past discusses Trump's wrongdoing from before the election.]

General problem of conflicts of interest
There is long standing understanding of the problem of public officials having conflicts of interest and the need for prohibitions, disclosure and other ways for avoiding or lessening the problem. Managing Conflict of Interest in the Public Sector

Public officials are supposed to act for public purposes and not to benefit themselves personally.

If public officials have conflicts of interest, there is a risk that they will make decisions and take actions for their personal benefit in violation of what they are supposed to do.

Further, the mere existence of conflicts of interest engenders distrust of the public official, because the public cannot know with certainty that the public official is acting for public purposes and not for personal benefit. This distrust can metastasize to such an extent a public official does not have trust of the voters needed to make and carry out difficult decisions in his public office.

The best solution to the conflict of interest problem is for there not to be conflicts of interest, which can be done by prohibiting them or insulating them by the use of "blind trusts" so the public official does not know what will benefit himself personally.

Disclosure of conflicts of interest is also a tool, but it is not as good a tool as prohibition.

The worst case is where the public official has conflicts of interest and hides the conflicts of interest.

Exemption of President
18 U.S.C. Section 208 is the general Federal law prohibition on Federal officials having conflicts of interest.

Section 202, however, provides an exemption for the President, the Vice President, any Member of Congress, or a Federal Judge.

Until Donald Trump, U.S. Presidents have been sensitive to, and taken steps to avoid, their having conflicts of interest, and Presidential conflicts of interest have not presented a problem for the country before Donald Trump.

Trump controversially started out his Presidency with an attitude and actions that he legally could have any conflicts of interest he desired, and that he would in fact have and pursue personal benefits  for himself and his family from an extensive set of conflicts of interest.

For news stories and commentary on this, see Brennan Center for Justice, "Strengthening Presidential Ethics Law", by Daniel I. Weiner, December 13, 2017;
Emory Corporate Governance and Accountability Review "Conflicts of Interest and the President: Reviewing the State of Law in the Face of a Trump Presidency" ; POLITICO "Trump owes ethics exemption to George H.W. Bush", by Josh Gerstein, November 23, 2016: and LAW & CRIME,
"Trump is Right, Conflict-of-Interest Rules Don’t Apply to Him",
by Rachel Stockman  November 23, 2016

Past two years
The past two years have evidenced great untoward consequences for the country growing out of Trump's attitudes and actions to keep his conflicts of interest while President and pursue personal benefits for himself and his family from those conflicts of interest.

This has included instances of Trump hiding his conflicts of interest and lying.

Perhaps the leading, most egregious instance to date is the Trump Tower Moscow matter. This was hidden for two years, and information about it, and the consequences from it, are still unfolding.

While Trump had a legal right to pursue his business interests during the time he was running for President, this was a precursor "conflict of interest" that, in the course of two years, morphed into a huge trust problem for Trump and the country.

The precursor "conflict of interest" was that Trump as a candidate may have been secretly doing and saying things to curry favor with Putin in order to advance his Trump Tower Moscow project, and those things were damaging to the country while Trump was helped personally.

For example, Trump alone in the summer of 2016 was questioning national intelligence about Russian interference in the 2016 election. The country's intelligence apparatus is important for national security, and it is important that the country have a legitimate faith in the apparatus so that actions taken based on the apparatus have the support of the country. If Trump undermined that faith by what he said in the 2016 election in order to serve his private interests, that would be very bad for the country and it would engender huge distrust of Trump if this was found out after he became President.

To the extent Trump was currying favor with Putin before the election, after Trump won, he was potentially compromised and subject to blackmail by Putin by reason of what Trump did before the election.

This then gets immensely exacerbated if Trump got Cohen to lie to Congress about the Trump Tower Moscow project.

The upshot of the foregoing is huge damage to the country's trust in Trump, and, if Trump is willing to do the foregoing in service of his private interests and to protect himself, the distrust spills over to many other actions of Trump and what other things Trump may be willing to do to protect himself.

Currently, legitimate questions can arise as to whether Trump's summit with Kim this week is to further U.S. national interest or to distract from Mueller. If Trump is willing to get Cohen to lie to Congress, Trump himself may lie by saying he has removed the North Korea nuclear threat, when in fact it has not been removed.

Kim is presumably aware that Trump is weakened by widespread distrust of Trump in the United States and Kim potentially can take advantage of the distrust in whatever agreement is made at the summit.

During the past two years Trump has had many other conflicts of interest that are harmful to the country in the way described above.

Republican complicity
For two years the Republicans have enabled Trump's conflicts of interest and increased the problem for the country of Trump's conflict of interests.

The Democrats won the House of Representatives in the 2018 election and should endeavor to undue the damage that the Republicans have done in enabling Trump's conflicts of interest for two years.