TRUMPWORLD AND BEYOND

A World of Sycophants and Enablers

Listen

0:00

Make no mistake. As gifted as Trump is in his way, he could not have been successful in a vacuum. He needed assistance and help to become president of the United States.

History matters. Events are not random. The election of Barack Obama on November 4th, 2008, was a bellwether event that resounded worldwide: the election of the first African American president in the history of the United States. Whatever his politics, the mere fact that he was elected was a significant event and gave immense hope not only to the American people but to the world as a whole, illustrated by the fact that democracy and American democracy, in particular, had been able to deliver such a result barely 45 years after Martin Luther’s King famous “I have a dream” speech. What an achievement and a testament to American society’s strength, maturity, and vitality. An example of the free world. Remember the headlines of the world’s newspapers as the Times of London illustrated: “The new world. America elects Barack Obama, its first black president”.

Unfortunately, the backlash to Obama’s historical election was swift and pernicious. He was depicted as an ape and other such flagrant racist imagery. His faith was questioned (maybe he was a Muslim, after all?). His legitimacy was challenged through the so-called “birther movement” championed within the Republican party. Still, in his typical fashion, Trump co-opted what started as a fringe conspiracy theory and made it his own. So much so that he was able to gain traction and attract attention to himself, allowing him to consider an actual presidential campaign seriously. His political instincts were spot on as he also understood that there was a backlash to Obama’s historic election, a backlash fuelled by old-fashioned racism. The birther movement championed by Trump gave legitimacy to those who wanted to find a way to channel their racism and challenge Obama.

Adding insult to injury, Obama’s very public takedown of Trump at the now infamous 2011 White House Correspondents Association dinner gained a lot of attention as it was also concurrent with the successful raid and subsequent killing of Bin Laden. The juxtaposition of the shaming of Trump and one of the finest hours of Obama’s presidency did not serve Trump well. Trump himself has always maintained that this was not a reason for his deciding to run for president and that he was honoured to be the butt of Obama’s jokes (he was far less gracious about Seth Meyers jokes), and from a factual perspective, it is true that Trump had already considered a presidential run in the past.

Nonetheless, the narrative soon took on a life of its own, setting the stage for what was to happen after that. The politics of the far right historically thrive on the politics of shame and vengeance, and Trump’s humiliation, whether real or imagined, is an essential reference point in Trump’s access to power. Incidentally, during Obama’s last White House Correspondents dinner in April 2016, he also made a series of jokes about “The Donald”, but as Trump was not physically present at the time and as it was in the middle of the primary battle for the Republican nomination, such attention served Trump very well.

Be as it may, the timing of Trump’s presidential campaign arrived at an auspicious moment. The Republican party saw the end of the Obama presidency as a unique opportunity to regain the presidency after gaining complete control of Congress in the 2014 elections. Mitch McConnell’s refusal to allow a full hearing before the Senate of Obama’s nominee to fill a seat in the Supreme Court after Antonin Scalia’s passing in March 2016 was a political move that had far-reaching consequences. After the successful election of Trump in 2016, a conservative named by the new President Trump, namely Neil Gorsuch, filled the vacant seat, the first of three successful nominations for Trump.

The continued policy of total obstruction followed by the Republican party during Obama’s second term, illustrated by the refusal to vote on Obama’s Supreme Court nomination, hardened the political landscape and made bipartisanship the mother of all evils. Combined with the vilification of the Democrats and President Obama in person with more and more extreme language, it set the stage for the advent of Donald Trump, who famously declared during the 2016 Republican Convention, “I alone can fix it”.[i]

The momentum was clearly in the Republican’s favour, and with the advent of the so-called Tea Party movement in 2009 in response to Obama’s election, the Republican party was shifting towards the right and by the time of the 2016 election cycle, the Freedom Caucus under its then Chairman Jim Jordan lent its full support to the Trump campaign. Subsequently, during the first years of his administration under the newly elected chairman Mark Meadows at the beginning of December 2016, the Freedom Caucus played a fundamental role in building and strengthening Trump’s base in the Republican party.

When Trump kicked off his presidential campaign in June 2015, most, if not all, observers and political analysts didn’t give him any chance of success. Given his unorthodox rhetoric and habit of going against virtually all established rules of political campaigning, his opponents for the 2016 nomination expected him to disqualify himself by his unruly behaviour.

A case in point was his attack on John McCain in July 2015, declaring that “He’s not a war hero”.[ii] Immediately after that, all the Republican candidates for the nomination attacked him and claimed that he was unfit to be commander-in-chief, but to no avail, as such rhetoric served Trump by attracting attention to himself. This pattern would repeat itself throughout the nomination campaign. They recognised that he was generating a lot of controversy. Still, they believed this would not translate into real political support and votes and that he would never win the Republican nominee campaign.

Ultimately, they were too concerned with each other and declined to attack Trump in unison. As he continued to face an ongoing split field, Trump's chances increased as time went by.

Trump’s unique personal campaign style was also crucial to his success in 2016. Initially considered childish and somewhat silly, using nicknames for his opponents was a very effective tactic. Trump was able to caricature each of his opponents in an accessible and relatable manner, thus defining them in the eyes of the voters.

There were underlying political reasons for Trump’s surprise victory in 2016. One of the main reasons was Trump’s focus on immigration, which struck a chord with blue-collar white voters. The Democrats' loss of this demographic was fatal for Clinton, who most probably underestimated Trump and made the mistake of treating half of Trump’s voters as “deplorable”.[iii] The late intervention of the FBI Director in the campaign also played a role.

However, Clinton failed to dispel Trump's caricature of her. The “crooked Hilary” moniker proved costly, and Clinton’s relative absence on the campaign trail, particularly in the Midwest, was a fatal mistake.

Trump’s victory in 2016 was a genuine surprise even for himself, and he was not prepared for winning the election. But once he walked through the doors of the White House, he was only at the beginning of his populist revolution.

At this juncture, it is worthwhile asking what the main elements of Trump’s political philosophy are. On which basis was he first elected in 2016, and was he able to deliver on his promises?

Trump’s main rallying cry for his 2015-2016 campaign was “Make America Great Again”, a slogan he stated he had invented, whereas in reality, he “borrowed” it from Ronald Reagan, who had first used it in 1980.

He combined it with “America First”, a philosophy that harkens back to President Wilson’s initial desire to keep America out of the First World War, which later developed very quickly from an isolationist creed to an anti-immigration platform. It became very popular with the fascist sympathisers in the US in the 1930s, personified by Charles Lindbergh. Right from the outstart, with his first speech at the launch of his campaign in 2015, Trump set the stage in straightforward but clear terms.

Given the historical context of both phrases, it shouldn’t have been too difficult to see where Trump’s political beliefs lay; they were staring us in the face. His emphasis on taking a firm stance on immigration, using highly controversial language against immigrants right from the start and promising “to build a wall” clearly positioned him on the far right of the political spectrum.

He was not the only politician to defend such views. Still, with the rhetoric mentioned above and his genius of political marketing, he was able to capture the souls and minds of a significant part of the American population, in particular, the blue-collar, non-college-educated working class feeding on their sense of grievance of having been left behind in the modern world. Trump was also encouraging and taking advantage of the backlash against the election of the first African American president and legitimising what, in reality, was fundamental racism.

This philosophy was a source of pride in Trump’s inaugural address: “From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land. From this moment on, it’s going to be America first.”[iv]

Trump had wanted to run for president for many years. His political beliefs are not based on years of conviction, as he was initially a Democrat supporting Bill and Hilary Clinton in the 1990s and 2000s. He saw a presidential run as a tool to promote his brand and himself first and foremost—it was more a case of “Trump first” rather than “America first.”

However, despite a lack of experience in politics and with less than a professional structure and organisation to support him throughout his campaign, he was supported and helped by key people from the fringes of American politics, one none more critical than Steve Bannon. Bannon provided Trump with a strong foundation for his political program and gave real power and structure to Trump’s populist and alt-right instincts (not to mention much need funding through his connections to the far-right donor base).

Bannon officially joined Trump’s campaign in August 2016 and immediately pushed Trump to focus on the opposition and Hilary Clinton. Without Bannon’s support and intellectual firepower, it is fair to say that Trump would not have been elected. Trump hates anybody overshadowing him and will always maintain that he is the sole architect of his success. It was no surprise that after joining the administration as Chief Strategist, Bannon was pushed out in August 2017. Nonetheless, nobody can take away Bannon’s role as the first enabler of Trump – the first of many to come.

The traditional Republican party was slow to accept Trump into its fold. There always was an underlying belief that he would not have what it takes to be elected. When Trump won the nomination, after having relentlessly shamed and destroyed his primary opponents, they understood too late the strength of Trump’s unorthodox approach to politics and his appeal as an outsider and a self-made successful billionaire, however true that was.

Despite winning the nomination, Trump almost lost all hope of being elected with the infamous Access Hollywood tape episode that erupted on October 7th, 2016, one month before the election. The scandal was such that from one day to the next, Trump lost practically all support from the Republicans who ran for cover collectively so as not to be associated with Trump (even though officially key supporters such as Vice President nominee Mike Pence and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell did not call for his resignation), so much so that only Rudy Giuliani was prepared to defend Trump publicly on TV immediately after the publication of the tape.

Any other politician wouldn’t have survived. But Trump refused to buckle under pressure and counter-attacked immediately during the second presidential debate that took place two days later, attempting to deflect attention by attacking Bill Clinton on his supposed nefarious track record with women, going so far as to invite to the event the women who had accused the previous president of misconduct.

Trump also got a helping hand on October 8th, when Wikileaks published leaked emails from Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta. This was not the first time that Wikileaks had published such sensitive information: on July 22nd, a similar collection of emails from the DNC was released.

The US government formally accused Russia of conducting cyberwarfare and interfering in the US election hours before the October 8th leak. The potential involvement of Russia in supporting Donald Trump’s presidential bid became even more critical in the aftermath of the 2016 election, as illustrated by the Muller investigation. Trump’s positive attitude toward Russia and his continued support of Vladimir Putin, whom he holds in high esteem both before being elected president and, more importantly, during his presidency, have always been most unusual for an American president going against all precedent. Russian support for Trump, whether public or covert, given the pro-Putin stance advocated by Trump, has always been highly suspicious and remains so to this day.

The recent developments in the sham attempt by the Republicans to impeach President Biden have once again drawn attention to the continued threat of Russian intervention in the 2024 campaign. The supposedly “highly credible” star witness trumpeted by the Republicans, a certain Mr Alexander Smirnov, has been charged by federal prosecutors for lying to the FBI, and it turns out he has close links to Russian intelligence.[v] 

Even with the covert support of Russia and the army of Russian trolls working on social media to help Trump get elected in 2016, the chances of success were slim. Trump relied on his instincts that the American people were yearning for change and were looking for an outsider as a new champion. The Republican party, which was already being transformed by the Tea Party and moving inexorably to the right in combination with the avowed “politics of obstruction” initiated by Mitch McConnell, set the stage for a figure such as Trump, who, like all best showmen, was able to seize the stage and take advantage of the moment dramatically.

Resistance to his rise was minimal on the Republican side as soon as Trump gathered momentum and methodically eliminated his challengers one by one through sheer bluster, uncanny street-fighting skills, instincts and smarts, and a previously unseen level of self-confidence in the face of adversity. Surrounded by family and a tight-knit circle of sycophantic true believers, the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement became the defining force in US politics.

The more traditional Republican politicians, such as Senator Jeff Sessions from Alabama (who was the first Senator to support Trump), flocked to Trump as bees (or wasps) to honey primarily for political expediency, with Mitch McConnell approvingly looking on from his lofty position as Majority Leader in the Senate. A new form of brash politics was the name of the game. Supporting Trump was seen as a means for many to implement a much-desired far-right government, prioritising the nomination of arch-conservative judges at all levels, most notably at the Supreme Court level. And boy did the judicial gods smile on Trump, giving him not one, not two, but three chances to nominate a Supreme Court Justice.

As Trump was unprepared to serve as president, he had no plans to staff his administration. Although the ex-Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, had run his transition team and had come up with a detailed plan and list of potential candidates, all of his excellent work was thrown in the dustbin due to the influence of Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Jared Kushner had a severe problem with Christie as he was the prosecutor who had charged his father, Charles Kushner, and negotiated a plea deal in 2005 with him, under which the elder Kushner pleaded guilty to 18 counts of illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion, and witness tampering. Kushner Senior was sentenced to two years in prison. It shows you that blood runs thicker than the national interest.

Trump had to start from scratch, and naturally, he turned to family as his first source. His daughter and her husband, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, were hired as senior white house advisors despite not having any prior government experience or relevant experience. It was not unheard of for presidents to hire family members (John F. Kennedy famously named his brother Robert as Attorney General). Still, in Trump’s case, nepotism was clearly at play here. In theory, hiring them was illegal following anti-nepotism regulations that four previous presidents had scrupulously followed based on a 1967 law that had passed in Congress.[vi] Kushner’s lawyer was instrumental in reinterpreting the statute that referred to appointments in an “agency” and successfully argued that the provision did not cover the president’s office as it was not an “agency”.

While serving in the White House, Jared Kushner was tasked with numerous responsibilities, notably brokering peace in the Middle East, pursuing diplomacy with countries such as Mexico and China, leading an “Office for American Innovation”, and overseeing fundraising. During the COVID pandemic, he was given the vital role of procuring medical supplies, which he promptly outsourced to private-sector volunteers with even less experience than he had in this essential area. His efforts were not successful.[vii] 

The wide range of responsibilities would have already represented a tremendous burden for the most seasoned political experts, but the younger Kushner needed to gain experience in spades. No matter, he was family, and what matters to Trump above all else is loyalty, not to the United States or the Constitution but to himself.[viii]

Ivanka Trump often accompanied her father on international travels. She raised eyebrows on several occasions, notably at G20 summits, when her interactions with world leaders were met with frank surprise and sometimes irritation that was difficult to hide.[ix] When Trump crossed the demarcation line in the demilitarised zone between South and North Korea, a noteworthy moment in its own right, Ivanka was right behind and graced North Korea with her presence.

One of the most memorable and unusual scenes of a presidency that counted many took place at the first meeting of Trump’s entire cabinet on June 12th 2017. Trump opened the meeting and demanded praise from the attendees, and for over twenty minutes, all of the cabinet members duly expressed in the most subservient manner possible their support to Trump, with a few exceptions of people who still had the remnant of a spine and who deflected as best as possible. This scene was immediately made available to all networks and cable TV.[x] One can only imagine what they offered Trump as birthday gifts two days later.

This episode demonstrates the importance of flattery to Trump and his constant need for praise. It is impossible to imagine such a ridiculous display of allegiance taking place in any other Western liberal democracy, as such antics are more the hallmark of authoritarian regimes. It is good that ridicule has never killed anyone, but failure to express the right degree of servitude has. Just ask Mr Kim Jong Un, Trump’s loving penpal.

As described above, not all initial people who joined Trump’s administration were inexperienced or morally challenged sycophants. Several eminent specialists in their respective fields and men who could boast stellar careers in the US military were part of the administration. Individuals such as Defence Secretary James (Jim) Mattis, Secretary of State  Rex Tillerson, an erstwhile CEO of ExxonMobil and John Kelly, who served first as Secretary of Homeland Security and then as Chief of Staff, come to mind as the so-called “adults in the room”.

They saw it as their duty to serve the United States and the Constitution to the best of their abilities and not to the president personally, believing they could compensate for Trump’s lack of experience and knowledge in critical areas. They were not the only ones who tried to prevent  Trump from steering the ship into an iceberg but to no avail. Despite promising to hire the “best and the brightest”[xi] during his campaign, many, if not all, of the adults couldn’t stay the course and were forced out of the administration one way or another. Trump devised a handy method to appoint “acting” cabinet members to avoid having them confirmed by the Senate.

The interesting question is why some people could survive working for Trump and his family members as Ivanka and Kushner played an essential role behind the scenes, always seeking to promote themselves, often at the expense of anybody they saw as a threat, which happened to be most people.

Despite frequently firing people and getting tired of them after initially incensing them,  there never was a lack of candidates to fill dead men’s shoes. Once again, we can turn to Hannah Arendt, who analysed this question in great detail while examining totalitarianism’s inner workings. In essence, it is not power that corrupts; it is the aura of power:” Its glamorous trappings, more than power itself, attracts”.[xii] Tellingly, she adds an important observation that is all the more relevant today: that the central figure of totalitarianism, i.e., in our case, Trump, was already corrupt long before attaining power.

The same logic applies to the members of the Republican party in Congress who did not seek to join the administration. For people such as Mitch McConnell, they wanted to use Trump to implement their political agenda. Political expediency was and still is the primary motivator for politicians to unashamedly renounce previous views, even if it means adopting new positions in stark opposition to their original opinions that were anathema to them.

Two cases immediately come to mind: Congresswoman Elise Stefanik and newly elected Senator J. D. Vance, author of “The Hillibilly Elegy”, who once declared that Trump was “the American Hitler” but who has become one of his most staunch supporters.[xiii] Both politicians are currently vying for the role of vice president. That explains it all.

Fear of Trump’s base also explains why so many Republicans refuse to express publicly their disdain for Trump. However, in private conversations off the record to journalists, they are not shy about expressing such opposing views.[xiv] American politicians seek re-election every two years in the House of Representatives and every six in the Senate. Even if they are elected in a traditionally safe red state seat, if they alienate Trump, they take the risk of enduring the wrath of his core supporters (not to mention Trump’s anger) and suffer defeat in the primaries to a Trump-approved alternative. Most politicians are not known for their courage and prefer to succumb to political cowardice to protect their seats, even at the country’s expense.

The notion of loyalty to Trump was apparent at the beginning of his presidency. It became even more of an issue after the 2020 election and during the transition period that should have been a peaceful power transfer. On January 6 2021, many Trump supporters expressed their horror and dismay and publicly disowned Trump, only to change their minds very quickly as they were confronted with the risk of having to endure the wrath of the Trump base.

Thankfully, some politicians dare to understand that what matters is loyalty to the Constitution and to the country, not to one man, however popular he may be amongst his base. Every Stefanik and Vance has a  Liz Cheney and an Adam Kinzinger, who have the moral core to distinguish between good and evil and are prepared to take the right action to defend the country, even when it means sacrificing their political careers.

As Arendt skilfully wrote, “Total loyalty is possible only when fidelity is emptied of all concrete content, from which changes of mind might naturally arise.”

[i]  Politico Staff : "Full text: Donald Trump 2016 RNC draft speech transcript”, Politico, July 21, 2016, www.politico.com/story/2016/07/full-transcript-donald-trump-nomination-acceptance-speech-at-rnc-225974

[ii]  Catherine Lucey and Steve Peoples: ”Trump on John McCain: ‘I like people who weren’t captured’”, AP News, July 19, 2015,  https://apnews.com/article/id-cde31d2fa3a244d29de77b31a59b799a

[iii]  Katie Reilly: ”Read Hillary Clinton’s ‘Basket of Deplorables’ Remarks About Donald Trump Supporters “, The Time Magazine, September 10, 2016, https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript/

[iv] INAUGURAL CEREMONY; Congressional Record Vol. 163, No. 11

[v] Martin Pengelly: ”Russia-linked Biden accuser charged with lying? Who cares, Republicans say”, Guardian, February 22, 2024, www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/22/alexander-smirnov-russia-republicans-biden

[vi]  Greg Price: “Trump Put Ivanka and Jared In The White House After Past Presidents Were Told it Was Unlawful”, Newsweek, October 3, 2027, Newsweek, October 3rd 2017, www.newsweek.com/trump-ivanka-jared-kushner-nepotism-676743

[vii] Doug Mills: ”How Kushner’s Volunteer Force Led a Fumbling Hunt for Medical Supplies”, The New York Times, Published May 5, 2020, updated May 10, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/us/jared-kushner-fema-coronavirus.html

[viii] Paul Waldman: ”What Trump really means when he demands ‘loyalty’”, The Washington Post, February 1, 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/02/01/what-trump-really-means-when-he-demands-loyalty/

[ix] Rym Momtaz and Nahal Toosi: ”French say oops on viral Ivanka moment”, Politico, July 1, 2019, www.politico.com/story/2019/07/01/france-ivanka-trump-reaction-1392084

[x] “President Donald Trump Is Praised — By The Cabinet He Appointed “, The New York Times, https://youtu.be/JCMigZq0_zE?si=IgZOG7YiKSOBx6Ly

[xi] Gary A. Garfield: ”What happened to the ‘best and most serious people’?”, The Hill, April 5, 2018, https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/381364-what-happened-to-the-best-and-most-serious-people/

[xii] Arendt, “Home to Roost: A Bicentennial Address”,1975

[xiii] Nick Evans: “Vance wondered whether Trump was ‘America’s Hitler,’ says former roommate sharing screenshot“, Ohio Capital Journal, April 19, 2022, https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/04/19/americas-hitler-old-j-d-vance-message-turns-up-in-heated-senate-primary/

[xiv] Sarah Ellison: ”Republicans have ‘concerns’ about Trump — but won’t let reporters quote them by name about it”, The Washington Post, December 11, 2020, www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/republicans-anonymous-private-concerns-media/2020/12/10/301e98a6-2e75-11eb-bae0-50bb17126614_story.html