I am trying to parse out which of the crimes of Donald Trump would merit imprisonment if he had never run for president. Prior to running, his were mostly financial shenanigans that were minor compared to the large scale fraud that Wall Street committed which damaged the global economy for a number of years - intentional mislabeling and repackaging of bad mortgage debt. No - Trump’s major crimes are related to running for and being president. But the actual crimes - paying off a sex worker with campaign funds; failing to properly deal with Russian efforts to assist him - those actual crimes are again minor compared to the massive flaws of his character - flaws which are not a crime, but have wreaked major damage and suffering via his arbitrary and capricious decrees. His incitement of violence might be be a crime - but it is only relevant in the context of his position. Otherwise it would just be the ranting of someone's cranky grandpa or a fringe skinhead leader.
His braggadocio about being above the law while a candidate - I could shoot someone and still get elected - may have been made true when he became president. But there is no actual law that a sitting president should not be indicted – it’s merely Justice Department policy that was formalized when Nixon was in office. Trump and his appointees have flouted and re-written many policies.
Trump’s possible violations of the emoluments clause of the Constitution may also be a crime. But again, any possible and specific violations are minor compared to his shifting of the notions around how a democracy should function. One of the founding principles of the United States was to create a form of government that could be a step forward from monarchy and despotism. But for a segment of the population, the problem has not been monarchy or dictatorship; their perception of the problem is that they themselves are not the king, queen, or dictator. The system of the United States has allowed a great number of capable people to rise up like kings, queens, or dictators – within their private realms. As long as their courtesans are freely consenting partners, what happens in the private realm is a matter between consenting adults. The issue is drawing the line between the private realm and the public sphere, especially when it comes to government or government protection of practices. And this is where the United States version of democracy historically has tried to rise above the whims of monarchy and dictatorship with the notion of the rule of law. Even many monarchies have been rendered toothless by the notion of the rule of law, though their royalty still profits handsomely.
Part of the problem is for most of the population, the law is something inflicted upon them rather than being seen as a structural necessity for civilized society. For some minds, possession of a weapon trumps any law, because it’s really just a jungle out there. The law is trivialized by every software consent form and seen as mostly a tool for those who can afford an attorney – or when an attorney smells blood and recognizes when there is money to be made. So the goal for some is not to improve the law, but dream of the day when a team of attorneys can make them above the law. Until that day, possession of a firearm will suffice. Trump is a hero for that mentality.
That mentality believes democracy means majority rules*. It doesn’t understand the caveat that rules cannot take away the rights of unpopular minorities. It believes that a slim majority somehow translates into a mandate from the people. In less developed democracies, winning means that one family stops stashing away the country’s wealth and another family starts the officially sanctioned looting. The relatives of Donald Trump aren’t socking away taxpayer dollars (ok, maybe in a few situations they actually are); rather, they’re using their positions to cement the position of their private business interests – see how superior that is to say, the oligarchs of Russia or the family members of Chinese revolutionaries?
So Donald Trump is the hero of a very specific component of the American Dream; which is that anyone can be above the law if they have enough money. But even in that category, with a Justice Department saying he's immune and a majority of Senators cheering his bravado, he's been bested by... O.J. Simpson?
*or the majority of a dysfunctional electoral college?
No comments:
Post a Comment