Given everything that’s happened in American politics over the last decade, it’s easy to forget one of the staples of the 2016 presidential campaign. As laughable as it might seem in hindsight, Donald Trump told voters that he saw the political establishment as a corrupt cesspool that he’d clean up in ruthless fashion.
Indeed, as far as the then-Republican candidate was concerned, he was the only candidate who could complete this necessary task — in part because he was a political outsider who had literally zero experience in public service and in part because his considerable personal wealth would immunize him to the demands of the donor class.
It led Trump to promise Americans he would “drain the swamp.”
A decade later, amid frequent allegations of White House corruption and reports that the president is profiting from his office in unprecedented ways, that vow has become the punchline to a sad joke. And it’s striking to see the problem spreading in systemic ways as the first year of the Republican’s second term comes to an end.
The New York Times reported this week on the nearly $2 billion raised by Trump and his allies since the president won his second term — a staggering sum for an incumbent who can’t run for re-election — which in turn “hints at a level of transactionalism for which it is difficult to find obvious comparisons in modern American history.”
Just as important are the benefits extended to these generous donors after they wrote their checks. From the article: To shed light on what has been a largely opaque fund-raising apparatus, The New York Times conducted a comprehensive investigation. It relied on previously unreported documents and public campaign finance filings, as well as interviews with dozens of people who are familiar with the solicitations or are involved in the fund-raising. It traced a large portion of the funds raised — more than half a billion dollars’ worth — back to 346 donors who each gave at least $250,000. It also found that more than half of them have benefited, or are involved in an industry that has benefited, from the actions or statements of Mr. Trump, the White House or federal agencies. The Times, whose report has not been independently verified by MS NOW, conceded that it’s “not possible to prove that any of the donations directly led to favorable treatment from the Trump administration,” though it added that “many of the deep-pocketed individuals and corporations who have given large sums have a lot riding on the administration’s actions, raising questions about conflicts of interest.” The article is worth reading in its entirety, but to fully appreciate the scope of the underlying concern, consider this detail: Of the 346 contributors who donated at least $250,000, at least 197 of them — more than half — have benefited, or are in industries that have benefited, from policies and actions taken by the president and his administration. “Those include pardons, favorable regulatory moves, the dropping of legal cases, access to the president and more,” the article noted. If you’re a voter who genuinely believed Trump’s “drain the swamp” rhetoric ahead of Election Day 2016, I have some very bad news for you.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post
Recommended
