It's not a deal; it's extortion

Remember The Art of the Deal? This is the title of Trump’s first book (co-authored by Tony Schwartz), published in 1987. It was designed to paint Trump as a master negotiator. At the time of publication, the word “deal” didn’t have a negative connotation for me. That’s no longer the case.

I haven’t read that book, nor do I care to; but in retrospect, I now see the overriding relevance of “dealmaking” to our president. His history demonstrates an orientation to dealmaking that we should all recognize for what it is. It’s not dealmaking in the traditional sense. It’s extortion, and it’s gotten out of hand. Trump deals come with a caveat: If you don’t bend the knee and accommodate to Trump’s demands, he’s going to crucify you.

Perhaps the first time the public got a glimpse of that approach was with Trump’s interaction with Volodymyr Zelensky, when Trump asked Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. This conversation happened on July 25, 2019, shortly after the OMB had put a hold on $141 million of aid to Ukraine that the State Department had requested – a funds freeze that extended until September 11. Although Trump characterized his conversation with Zelensky as “perfect,” that representation hardly stands up given the fact that after the Trump-Zelensky conversation but before those funds were reinstated, US officials (with the involvement of Rudy Giuliani) pressured Zelensky to announce the commencement of investigations that Trump had asked for, even to the extent of drafting an “acceptable statement.”

Ultimately those funds were restored in September – not because Zelensky agreed to making the announcement, but rather because the House Intelligence Committee’s demanded to see a previously unpublished whistle blower’s report on this meeting, and the contents of that report were bound to become public. Ultimately these developments led to Trump’s first impeachment, which served to thwart Trump’s effort to shake down Zelensky. Since then, Trump has expanded his shake-down targets to include the press, all our trading partners, private law firms, major universities, and most recently, two private citizens who had worked in the first Trump administration who’ve had the temerity to cross Trump by publicly challenging claims of the 2020 election being stolen. Who knows who’s next. In all cases, Trump’s objective has been to coerce these entities into making concessions.

Two high level efforts put the press in the cross hairs. The first had to do with a suit Trump filed against ABC news for defamation. ABC newsman George Stephanopoulos reported that Trump had been found liable for raping E. Jean Carroll. In fact, the jury’s verdict was on the charge of sexual assault – not rape. Whether Trump would have prevailed in court will never be known as ABC elected to make a $15 settlement to put the issue behind them. Settlement or payoff?

The second instance was one in which Trump sued 60 Minutes, charging that the program edited the responses of Kamala Harris in an interview, in such a way as to bolster her chances of winning the election, at Trump’s expense. This dispute has yet to be resolved, but the parties are in mediation. Undoubtedly, 60 Minutes is poised to bend the knee. The only question is, “How far?”

Let’s not kid ourselves. The free press is a primary safeguard against governmental abuse and overreach. To think that Trump’s dealmaking in this arena won’t have a chilling effect is naïve, to say the least.

Moving on to the law firms that have been subject to executive orders that would severely limit cases or clients that these law firms would be able to handle: Increasing numbers of such firms have buckled. The common denominators of their “deals” are (1) commitments to do pro bono work in Trump-approved areas and (2) allowing some form of oversight by the administration of the firms’ hiring and recruitment practices with the aim of dismantling practices deemed (by the administration) to be in support of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI). Beyond the explicit requirements, these accommodations will inevitably compromise these firms’ willingness to challenge the authority of the administration or otherwise hold the government accountable for possible transgressions.

The concessions being asked of the universities may not be quite as tied to Trump’s personal interests, but they’re no less disturbing. For a president who’s claiming to return the authority for education to the states, his executive orders relating to these universities are quite an over-reach. The short-sightedness about terminating research grants for projects that are currently underway is staggering. Many if not most of the research projects at our most acclaimed research institutions can’t be restarted after an interruption, making any money spent on such projects thus far money wasted. Perhaps more importantly, innovations and medical breakthroughs that might have come from that research will inevitably be delayed, if they’re ever bought to fruition. I don’t know if our extortionist in chief is the brilliant architect of these policies; but he is the president, and the buck stops there.

And finally, turning to these anticipated “deals” with respect to tariffs: Supposedly, within the next 90 days, Trump is going to be assessing prospective deals on a case-by-case basis. It takes months or even years to iron out legitimate trade deals. Trump and his mouthpieces, however, expect the American public to believe that he can credibly restructure our trading arrangements with scores of countries, individually, in a matter of three months.

What’ll it take to “negotiate” lower tariffs? Sponsorship of a golf tournament at a Trump property? A purchase of Trump meme coins? Maybe a new Trump hotel in one of the capital cities? Or perhaps it’ll be as simple as a direct cash payouts, like all the big tech companies in the US managed to arrange coincidently with Trump’s inauguration. The opportunity for corruption that the “deals” provide are staggering.

Making America great again? I don’t think so. I credit Trump with coming up with what may be one of the greatest political slogans of all time. Too bad, like so much of what Trump says, it’s a blatant lie.