Public Servant? Hardly.

December 17, 2016

I continue to watch news unfold about the way in which Trump’s personal financial dealings will impact us as a collective nation, and it seems he is even less and less interested in even pretending that it matters to him what the impact will be, beyond his own bank account.  He refuses to divest himself in any meaningful way from his business empire.  Nobody’s buying, “It’s going to be run by my kids, so I will have no part in running the company.”  Throughout his campaign he held events, housed offices, and booked rooms for events at his own properties at a considerable mark-up, essentially having his campaign (public) pay his business (private) exorbitant amounts of money.  He has refused to divest himself of his reality show, where he will remain an executive producer and by extension will maintain a financial relationship with NBC, who will have to weigh broadcasting decisions, including news about the President-elect (and eventually, President) through the lens of that relationship.  He has already made quite a public showing (via Twitter, naturally) of going toe-to-toe with Boeing because of inflated costs of building Air Force One, and makes no qualms about calling out any business that he personally feels doesn’t fall in line with his bottom line.  Finally, because his youngest son is still in school, Melania and Barron will continue to live in New York, with frequent stays by Trump as well, essentially at least doubling America’s price tag for security, as a full detail will have to be maintained on a full-time basis on both coasts.  Who pays that price?  We do, of course.

Naturally, there will be arguments in favor of each of these business decisions of his.  “Why should he have to give up the empire he built?”  Well, his job now is one of public servant, though I sincerely don’t think he understands the full implication of that concept.  If one can curry favor with Trump by being willing to fork out the money to hold events at hotels he owns, there is a built-in potential for financial reciprocity in lobbying, political support, etc. there—a pay-to-play sort of relationship that will always potentially be part of the equation.  The same concept applies to NBC maintaining a financial relationship with him.  How can a media outlet, who is responsible for reporting news and being part of our checks-and-balances in the public system (no doubt that this has become a major function of our news media), maintain a semblance of objectivity in reporting negative news about someone in whom they have a great stake in helping remain financially successful?  And Boeing? Why NOT call out excessive price tags on businesses who do commerce with the government?  I get that argument—of course I do.  Except for the kind of money he is making on his own business holdings at the expense of his campaign coffers, and in future—at the expense of the American people.   Melania and her son choosing to stay in New York because of his schooling is understandable—she wants him to continue on in his current private school.  So be it.  But if I were offered a job across the country and I wanted my spouse and my kids to stay in their current location, I wouldn’t expect my future employer to foot the bill for it.  What employer would agree to such terms?  Trump knew what a win would entail, including the relocation of his family.  If that was not his intention, he himself should pay the extra cost of choosing to maintain a separate residence and all the security detail and additional expense that comes along with it—not me.  Not the American tax dollars.

You know what though?  All of the financial intertwinings of Trump and our taxpayer dollars are just the tip of the iceberg.  They are disturbing and worrisome, but in reality, only the beginning of what we must be vigilant about.  His international diplomacy policies, his human rights policies, his domestic policies—these are even more worrisome, and follow the same pattern of being in service to Donald Trump the man, and not Donald Trump the public servant.  Trump’s inability—or flat out lack of desire—to divest himself of his own personal gains for the greater good is the most problematic issue we face.  His business transactions continue to be symbolic of the greater issue at hand that should be a red flag: Donald Trump’s desire to rule this land is not—has never been—about ‘Making America Great Again’ or about ‘fixing what’s wrong’.  His desire to rule remains a desire to rule.  Period. A desire to continue to build power and wealth to the one person who matters to him—Donald.