Brazen rule: Trump’s art of open corruption

I will never forget when I realised that Donald Trump had fundamentally changed how Americans think about political scandals.

It was September 2019, shortly after Trump released the memo of his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. There, in black and white, was one of the clearest examples of an improper quid pro quo I’d ever seen.

Zelenskyy said Ukraine wanted to buy Javelin anti-tank missiles. Trump replied, “I would like you to do us a favour,” demanding investigations into a debunked conspiracy theory blaming Ukraine for 2016 election interference — and into Joe and Hunter Biden.

Then came the moment of transformation: Trump called the call “perfect” — and never stopped. Republicans either echoed him or fell silent. It was as if he had rewritten the old saying “It’s not the crime, it’s the cover-up” into something new: If there’s no cover-up, there must not be a crime.

If one word defines Trump’s second administration, it’s brazen. His self-dealing isn’t hidden; it’s flaunted.

He accepted a private jet from Qatar to serve as a new Air Force One — later designated for his presidential library — then granted Qatar an American security guarantee by executive order. Qatar, notably, has long backed Hamas and invested heavily in U.S. influence campaigns.

Trump also pardoned crypto billionaire Changpeng Zhao, whose company reportedly boosted the Trump family’s new stablecoin venture, raising its market value from $127 million to $2.1 billion.

In September, The New York Times detailed how the UAE struck a multibillion-dollar crypto deal with the Trump family and Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Middle East envoy. Two weeks later, the White House granted the UAE access to rare, advanced computer chips.

And The New Yorker’s David D. Kirkpatrick reported that Trump and his family have earned $3.4 billion from their time in office.

But Trump’s corruption isn’t just financial. He is weaponising the legal system — pardoning his allies and punishing his enemies in plain sight. He freed violent January 6 rioters, forced out a U.S. attorney who refused to prosecute James Comey or Letitia James, and replaced him with someone who promptly filed charges against both.

Then, Trump commuted former Republican Rep. George Santos’s remaining prison sentence, praising his “Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!”

Yet, remarkably, Trump’s defenders don’t deny his conduct — they celebrate it as “transparency.”

Sen. Markwayne Mullin told CNN, “President Trump is very open and transparent with the American people, and he speaks his mind. That’s what his supporters love about him.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson went even further when asked about Trump’s crypto deals: “The Bidens did their stuff behind curtains. Whatever President Trump is doing is out in the open. They’re not trying to conceal anything.”

It’s an astonishing argument — as if a bank robbery isn’t a crime if the thief smiles for the camera.

Whether by instinct or design, Trump has discovered two truths about his most loyal supporters: they will rationalise anything he does, and many don’t understand the law. Few Americans grasp how foreign policy, the Justice Department, or ethical boundaries in government actually work. When Trump acts in the open, supporters assume legality.

Last month, I attended the “No Kings” protest in Chicago. The city was tense after ICE raids and talk of deploying the National Guard. Republican leaders predicted violence, but what I saw was peaceful — even festive.

One sign stood out: “You try to fit it all on a sign.”

That line captures the essence of Trump’s presidency. His corruption is so vast, so overt, that it’s difficult to summarise.

Worse, its very openness makes it harder to stop. The brazenness itself disarms accountability.

Now, Trump’s behaviour is escalating. He has ordered executions of alleged drug traffickers without due process and is positioning U.S. military assets near Venezuela without congressional approval.

But who needs Congress — or the law for that matter — when the president is in command? Even when it comes to matters of war and peace, MAGA defers to the man who tells them exactly what they want to hear.

@The New York Times