Nixon’s Enemies List Redux under Trump

It was reported yesterday the President is asking Homeland Security to track bloggers, media etc. who have the ability to influence negatively thoughts toward his administration. This is akin to Richard Nixon’s enemies list which is due directly to his paranoia that people were out to get him. Ironically, it was Nixon’s zeal toward guarding against his paranoia that caused his downfall.

It should be noted that paranoia goes hand-in-hand with narcissism. Trump has an unhealthy dose of both, which is a key reason he wants sycophants all around him. As he has a hard time with criticism, he attacks all critics usually via personal attacks. Like Nixon, his paranoia, lying and denigration will bring him down.

Part and parcel with this are his continuing attacks on The Washington Post and other media because they dare speak the truth. It has gotten so bad, he is attacking Amazon because Jeff Bezos owns both, to the chagrin of the US Chamber of Commerce. The Post is also being defended by the editor of The New York Times who is calling  the President on the carpet.

Last time I checked, Trump is President of the United States. This is not a kingdom or dictatorship. It is a Republic. We have every right to tell the President and members of Congress that we disagree with them. We have every right to demand they stop lying and start doing their job.

If the President cannot handle the fire, then maybe he should get out of the kitchen.

If it looks like a duck…

After a quite detailed investigation by David Fahrenthold of The Washington Post, several questions have been raised about The Trump Foundation. Unfortunately, we need to spend more time on these questions than the story is being given in short news cycles by main stream media.

I want to set aside the fact that Trump has not made recent contributions of his own money and likes to use other people’s money, while taking credit and accolades for the Foundation’s donations. I also want to set aside what the news is focusing most on and that is the buying of a portrait for personal use, which is illegal, if true.

What I want to focus on is the $25,000 donation made to the political campaign of the Florida Attorney General. The donation was received four days after an article appeared in a Florida newspaper revealing the Florida AG was considering charges against Trump University. After the timing of the donation, no charges were brought against Trump University. It should be noted there are three outstanding class action lawsuits against Trump University for alleged misrepresentation that began before the Trump campaign, which will continue whether he wins or loses the election. I guess the Florida claimants are not worthy of helping.

The AG denies this donation was buying influence as has the Trump campaign. Trump has admitted (after the investigation pointed it out) that the political donation from his Foundation was illegal and has made restitution, but there is more to it than that.

First, the donation was incorrectly noted on the Trump Foundation tax return as being made to a non-political group, which would have made it legitimate, if true. The campaign says this was an administrative error. Yet, it seems too coincidental that a later admitted illegal donation was incorrectly noted as a donation to a legitimate non-profit entity on the tax return.

Second, Trump’s son said his father intended to make that donation from his own funds and he signs a lot of checks, so it slipped through the cracks. Since Trump likes to use other people’s money, I have a hard time with that, but let’s set that aside for the important issue.

To me, the heart of the matter is the timing of a $25,000 donation to the Florida AG. Irrespective of its source, Trump sent a check to the AG at the time she was considering charges against Trump University. It has been noted while the check arrived four days after the article appeared, it was dated before the date of the article. I would not be surprised by gamesmanship, be it his backdating the check or being apprised of the forthcoming article or consideration of charges. I have no proof of this, but suggest that more investigation is at least warranted.

Yet, the AG’s decision to not press charges was made after the receipt of the check. Plus, Trump has bragged in debates, speeches and on the campaign trail about his buying influence with political donations, yet he denies it was done here.

Well, let me just say what I believe to be true, without proof, but on the basis of the above and his self-professed nature. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck.