Maureen Dowd: Trump is a pro at quid pro quo
When
Donald Trump
was headed for the Republican nomination in the summer of 2016, I took Carl Hulse, our chief Washington correspondent, to Trump Tower to meet him.
Trump didn't know anything about the inner workings of Washington. He proudly showed us his 'Wall of Shame' with pictures of
Republican candidates
he had bested. His campaign office had few staffers, but it overflowed with cheesy portraits of him sent by fans: one of him playing poker with Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon and Teddy Roosevelt, and a cardboard cut-out of him giving a thumbs-up, flanked by Reagan and John Wayne.
As we were leaving, Hulse warned Trump drily, 'If you ever get a call from our colleague Eric Lipton, you'll know you're in trouble.'
'Eric Lipton?' Trump murmured.
READ MORE
The president probably knows who Lipton is now, because the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times investigative reporter is tracking Trump on issues of corruption as closely as the relentless lawman in the white straw hat tracked Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.
Lipton and the Times' David Yaffe-Bellany were on the scene at Trump's Virginia golf club on Thursday night as the president held his gala dinner to promote sales of $TRUMP, the meme coin he launched on the cusp of his inauguration. (Melania Trump debuted hers two days later.)
Trump has been hawking himself in an absurdly grandiose way his whole life. But this time, he isn't grandstanding as a flamboyant New York business-person. He's selling himself as the president of the United States, staining his office with a blithe display of turpitude.
Protesters at the golf club shouted, 'Shame, shame, shame!' but there is no shame in Trumpworld. Trump asked guests, who were whooping with joy at the president who allowed them to purchase such primo access by essentially lining the pockets of Trump and his family, if they had seen his helicopter.
Protesters outside a private dinner with president Donald Trump and buyers of his cryptocurrency at his golf course in Virginia. Photograph: Elizabeth Frantz/The New York Times
'Yeah, super cool!' gushed a guest.
Buyers flew in from China and around the world, scarfing up a fortune in $TRUMP — some had millions of dollars worth — to procure the 220 seats at the dinner.
'It was a spectacle that could only have happened in the era of Donald J Trump,' Lipton and Yaffe-Bellany wrote. 'Several of the dinner guests, in interviews with the Times, said that they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Trump and US financial regulations.'
Pan-seared influence peddling with a citrus reduction. The prez is a pro at quid pro quo.
Trump Inc.'s money grabs were taking place against the background of the president pushing through his 'big, beautiful bill' extending a tax cut for the rich while slicing billions from programmes that help poor people stay alive
Trump's press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, rebutted criticism on Thursday, saying, 'The president is attending it in his personal time. It is not a White House dinner.'
But he flew to Virginia on Marine One. He gave his remarks from a lectern with the presidential seal. And some of the crypto crowd Friday got a tour of the White House (Lipton took his post outside the fence).
With more than a dozen lucrative deals for his family and partners, the Times article said, 'Mr Trump is estimated to have added billions to his personal fortune, at least on paper, since the start of his new term, much of it through crypto.'
The corruption is seeping across the Potomac.
Donald Trump Jr and investors are opening a pricey private club in Georgetown called Executive Branch, where business and
tech moguls
can cozy up to administration big shots.
[
Trump and the Irish tech bros: How the 'crypto president' is winning over Silicon Valley
Opens in new window
]
The notorious $400 million (€351 million) gift for the president from the Qataris, a luxury jumbo jet, has arrived in San Antonio. This alluring 'pre-bribe,' as Saturday Night Live dubbed it, instantly wiped out Trump's old concerns that 'the nation of Qatar, unfortunately, has historically been a funder of terrorism at a very high level.' (Accepting the plane was sort of like a terrorist fist-bump, the same kind a Fox News host bizarrely accused the Obamas of making with each other.)
Other foreign leaders got the message that emoluments were welcome. In an Oval Office meeting where Trump continued to relish his role as protector of the white patriarchy, the South African president jokingly told the American president, 'I'm sorry I don't have a plane to give you.' (This might be the line that best sums up the Trump presidency in the history books.)
Trump replied breezily, 'I wish you did. I'd take it.'
Trump Inc.'s money grabs were taking place against the background of the president pushing through his 'big, beautiful bill' extending his obscene tax cut for the rich while slicing billions from programmes that help poor people stay alive.
'The guy promised to make American families more prosperous,' Barack Obama's former chief strategist David Axelrod said. 'He just decided to start with his own.'
In a galaxy long ago and far away, there was shame attached to selling your office. Sherman Adams, president Dwight Eisenhower's chief of staff, lost his job and ruined his reputation after he accepted a vicuña coat from a Boston textile manufacturer doing business with the federal government.
Trump has no reputable reputation to ruin. He's a snatch-and-grab artist.
'I think social media and Donald Trump's persona have numbed people to the idea that certain forms of behaviour are off-limits,' said Tim O'Brien, a Trump biographer. 'No institution has been able to rein in Donald Trump. He got impeached twice. Didn't matter, so Congress couldn't rein him in. He had all sorts of federal and state prosecutions that ended up going nowhere, so law enforcement couldn't rein him in. The media has been covering him as close as anyone could ever be covered, and the media couldn't rein him in. I think it makes people just sort of turn away and accept it as inevitable.'
Before he did his YMCA dance and scrammed early, the scamming Trump told the crypto enthusiasts at his golf club that he wasn't pushing crypto and bitcoin for himself.
'I really do it because I think it's the right thing to do,' he said.
In Trump's moral universe, the right thing to do is always the thing that makes him richer.
This article originally appeared in
The New York Times
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
3 hours ago
- RTÉ News
What powers is Donald Trump using to send troops to Los Angeles?
US President Donald Trump has invoked emergency powers to deploy US National Guard troops and active-duty marines to Los Angeles to quell protests against federal immigration raids. Here, we take a look at what powers Mr Trump is using to send these troops to LA. Is it legal? Mr Trump relied on a seldom-used law known as Title 10 to send an initial 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles. He has since ordered another 2,000 Guard members and 700 marines to the Californian city. National Guard troops are normally mobilised by a state governor and used domestically to respond to natural disasters such as floods or wildfires. Mr Trump, exceptionally, sent the troops to Los Angeles against the wishes of California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom. The last time a president defied a state governor to deploy the Guard was in 1965, when president Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights protestors. Title 10 permits National Guard federalisation in times of "a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States" but does not give the troops the powers to perform domestic law enforcement duties. The troops deployed to Los Angeles have been used so far only to provide security around federal buildings in the second-largest US city. Mr Newsom has accused Mr Trump of exceeding his authority by deploying the troops without his green light and has filed suit in federal court seeking to have the deployment declared unlawful. Insurrection Act Mr Trump would need to invoke the rarely-used Insurrection Act of 1807 to allow troops to expand their current role in Los Angeles, according to legal analysts. The Insurrection Act gives a president the authority to deploy the military domestically to perform law enforcement duties such as conducting searches and making arrests. The Insurrection Act was most recently invoked by president George H.W. Bush at the request of the then California governor to help put down riots in Los Angeles in 1992, that followed the acquittal of police officers involved in the beating of a Black motorist, Rodney King. It was used by president Johnson in 1968 to quell riots that broke out in the nation's capital and other cities following the assassination of civil rights leader, Martin Luther King Jr. Posse Comitatus Using the military domestically to conduct law enforcement activities is normally barred by another law, the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. The Insurrection Act lets a president sidestep the Posse Comitatus Act to suppress "armed rebellion" or "domestic violence" and use the armed forces "as he considers necessary" to enforce the law. William Banks, a professor emeritus of law at Syracuse University, said the Insurrection Act and waiving of Posse Comitatus has been infrequent because of a long US history of "leaving law enforcement to civilians". "To sum up the conditions where (the Insurrection Act) may be used, it's for when all hell breaks loose," said Mr Banks, co-author of the book: Soldiers on the Home Front: The Domestic Role of the American Military. "When state and local officials are unable to control civil affairs without federal involvement, the federal government may intervene," he said. "It's normally been requested by the state officials, and the president simply agrees and decides to send a federal force," he said. Mr Newsom has said repeatedly that there was no need for the deployment of the National Guard and marines and that the Los Angeles Police Department was fully capable of handling the unrest.
Irish Times
10 hours ago
- Irish Times
US woman awoke in Boston hotel to ‘somebody on top' raping her, jury in Dublin firefighter trial told
The Boston woman who claims she was raped by a Dublin firefighter told a US court she woke up in a hotel room to find 'somebody on top of her' raping her. The 29-year-old attorney testified for a second day in the trial of Terence Crosbie (39) in Suffolk superior courthouse in Boston on Tuesday. She claimed she was raped by Mr Crosbie, who was visiting the US city with the Dublin Fire Brigade, while his colleague slept in a shared hotel room. Mr Crosbie (39) was arrested on rape charges over St Patrick's Day weekend last year. He denies the charges and has pleaded not guilty. READ MORE His accuser previously testified to meeting Liam O'Brien at The Black Rose bar on March 14th, 2024. Mr O'Brien and Mr Crosbie had flown into Boston with their fire brigade colleagues to march in Boston's St Patrick's Day parade. The complainant testified on Tuesday that she didn't know Mr O'Brien was sharing a room when she returned with him from the bar to the Omni Parker House hotel after an evening of dancing. She testified that she and Mr O'Brien had consensual sex and then she went to the bathroom. When she came back from the bathroom, she said Mr O'Brien was asleep 'taking up the majority of the bed' and was snoring loudly, so she slept in the other bed, getting under the covers naked with the bathroom light still on. She told the court in tears that she 'woke up to somebody on top of me' and they were raping her. 'This person was taller than Liam and was not bald and I could hear Liam snoring,' she said. The trial had previously heard that Mr O'Brien, unlike Mr Crosbie, was bald. She testified that Mr O'Brien snored 'continuously' throughout the alleged assault. She testified that the man, later identified as Mr Crosbie, also disparaged Mr O'Brien while assaulting her. She claimed that while Mr Crosbie was having sex with her, he said: 'I know you want this; [Mr O'Brien] can't even do this for you – what a loser.' 'What are you doing?' she said she asked Mr Crosbie when she realised what was happening. 'I also did say: 'Stop!'' she told the court. She said she felt Mr Crosbie's weight on top of her and tried to get away, eventually managing to manoeuvre her legs off the side of the bed and break free. She testified that Mr Crosbie continued to follow her around the hotel room, trying to kiss her. She said she was able to collect her clothes and went to the bathroom. Mr Crosbie tried to get in and 'was jiggling the handle' after she locked the door, she told the court. She then left the hotel and texted a friend at 2:18am about the alleged assault , according to testimony. 'I hate everyone,' she wrote. 'What the f**k is wrong with people.' She told her friend that she woke up and a guy was having sex with her, 'telling me I wanted it and telling me how pathetic it was that his friend couldn't give that', the court heard. She then walked home and took an Uber taxi to a hospital. On cross-examination by Mr Crosbie's defence team, she was asked about her level of intoxication, psychiatric medication and alleged discrepancies in her accounts to medical staff, law enforcement and the grand jury. Defence attorney Daniel C Reilly asserted that she walked rather than ran out of the hotel, as stated previously. The woman replied that this was a 'figure of speech'. Mr Reilly questioned the complainant repeatedly about her accounts of the lighting in the hotel room and noted that her testimony did not include details about the defendant's birthmarks or tattoos. 'But again, you didn't notice any body marks or tattoos,' Mr Reilly said. 'I was trying not to look,' the complainant said. The trial continues in Boston.
Irish Examiner
11 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
US marines deployed to LA have not yet responded to immigration protests
US marines that deployed to Los Angeles on orders from President Donald Trump have not yet been called to respond to the city's immigration protests and are there only to protect federal officials and property, a commander said. The 700 marines and another 2,000 US National Guard troops were sent to LA on Monday, escalating a military presence that local officials and governor Gavin Newsom do not want and that the police chief says makes it harder to handle the protests safely. Marine Corps Gen Eric Smith told a budget hearing on Capitol Hill that the battalion has not yet been sent to any protests. The marines were trained for crowd control but have no arrest authority and are there to protect government property and personnel, he said. Mr Trump doubled the number of Guard troops being deployed soon after the first wave of 2,000 began arriving on Sunday following days of protests driven by anger over the President's enforcement of immigration laws that critics say are breaking apart migrant families. The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor. This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward… — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 9, 2025 The demonstrations continued on Monday but were far less raucous, with thousands of people peacefully attending a rally at City Hall and hundreds more protesting outside a federal complex that includes a detention centre where some immigrants are being held following workplace raids across the city. The protests in Los Angeles, a city of four million people, have largely been centred in several blocks of downtown and a few other spots. At daybreak on Tuesday, guard troops were stationed outside the detention centre, but there was no sign of US marines. Obscene slogans were directed at Mr Trump and federal law enforcement remained scrawled across several buildings. The US marines have been deployed (AP) At the Walt Disney Concert Hall, workers were busy washing away graffiti on Tuesday morning. In nearby Santa Ana, armoured vehicles blocked a road leading to federal immigration and government offices. Workers swept up plastic bottles and broken glass near buildings sprayed with graffiti. Mr Trump has described Los Angeles in dire terms that Mayor Karen Bass and Mr Newsom say are nowhere close to the truth. They say he is putting public safety at risk by adding military personnel even though police say they do not need the help. Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell said in a statement that he was confident in the police department's ability to handle large-scale demonstrations and that the Marines' arrival without coordinating with the police department would present a 'significant logistical and operational challenge'. Senior politicians reacted with dismay to Mr Trump's move (AP) Mr Newsom called the deployments reckless and 'disrespectful to our troops' in a post on the social platform X. 'This isn't about public safety,' the governor said. 'It's about stroking a dangerous President's ego.' The protests began on Friday after federal immigration authorities arrested more than 40 people across Los Angeles and continued over the weekend as crowds blocked a major road and set self-driving cars on fire. Police responded with tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades. Demonstrations spread on Monday to other cities nationwide, including San Francisco and Santa Ana, California, as well as Dallas and Austin, Texas. Authorities in Austin appeared to use chemical irritants to disperse a crowd that gathered near the state Capitol. The Trump Administration's escalation and provocation in California inflames tensions and incites violence. Now, the President of the United States said he would arrest a sitting American governor just for disagreeing with these actions. This is a hallmark of authoritarianism… — Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) June 9, 2025 Texas governor Greg Abbott posted on social media that more than a dozen protesters were arrested. The Pentagon said deploying the National Guard and Marines costs 134 million dollars (£98.8 million). That figure emerged just after US defence secretary Pete Hegseth engaged in a into a testy back-and-forth about the costs during a congressional hearing. Mr Hegseth said the department has a budget increase and the money to cover the costs, and he defended Mr Trump's decision to send the troops, saying they are needed to protect federal agents doing their jobs. Meanwhile, Democratic members of California's congressional delegation on Tuesday accused the President of creating a 'manufactured crisis' with his orders to send in troops. Mr Trump came under sustained criticism (AP) Nancy Pelosi contrasted Trump's actions with his handling of the January 6 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol when law enforcement officers were beaten. 'We begged the president of the United States to send in the National Guard. He would not do it,' Ms Pelosi said. California's attorney general Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit over the use of National Guard troops following the first deployment, telling reporters that Mr Trump had 'trampled' the state's sovereignty. He sought a court order declaring Mr Trump's use of the Guard unlawful and asking for a restraining order to halt the deployment. The President said the city would have been 'completely obliterated' if he had not deployed the Guard. US officials said the marines were needed to protect federal buildings and personnel, including immigration agents. A convoy of buses with blacked-out windows and escorted by sheriff's vehicles arrived overnight at a Navy facility just south of LA. Despite their presence, there has been limited engagement so far between the Guard and protesters while local law enforcement implements crowd control.
