Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

President Trump? How about Don Donald?

Opinion

Donald Trump
Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Goldstone’s most recent book is "On Account of Race: The Supreme Court, White Supremacy, and the Ravaging of African American Voting Rights."

On Aug. 8, in a scene that could have been lifted from the CBS series “FBI,” a team of federal agents, some wielding automatic weapons, descended on the sprawling, opulent home of an alleged crime lord to execute a court ordered search warrant in an attempt to retrieve documents that would provide incontrovertible evidence of his misconduct. What made the scene unusual was that the target was not a Mafia kingpin but rather a former president of the United States.

In the wake of the raid, Republican leaders predictably screamed “Unfair!” and “Persecution!” although Donald Trump was being investigated for the same sort of crime, and on a much larger scale, for which they had spent years vilifying Hillary Clinton. Still, it was somehow fitting that a man who for some time has been likened to a gangland boss was finally being treated like one. And Trump’s reaction was in character. He blamed venal FBI agents and self-serving prosecutors, expressing similar outrage as previous victims of overzealous law enforcement, such as John Gotti. In addition, two days after the raid, he took the fifth during a deposition in New York – serious “Godfather” behavior.


With this latest indication that laws are not things Trump pays a good deal of attention to, except perhaps to find ways to ignore them, many on the left have been wondering if now, after years of overlooking every show of contempt for the rules and for democracy, conservatives will finally recognize that their hero is precisely what a previous conservative icon, Richard Nixon, falsely denied being — a crook.

Sorry, liberals. Conservatives already know. The problem is not a lack of awareness, or even a lack of caring. The problem is that many Trump’s supporters like that he’s a crook.

To appreciate Donald Trump’s criminal allure, one must look back almost a century to the career of Boston’s James Michael Curley. The subject of the book and the film “The Last Hurrah,” Curley, whose political life spanned almost a half-century, served four terms as mayor of Boston, four terms in Congress, and one disastrous term as Massachusetts governor, during which time he was openly and almost gleefully corrupt.

Curley didn’t always get away with it. His last stint as mayor was interrupted in 1947, when he was sent to jail for mail fraud, this after being accused of any number of other crimes, including bribery and accepting bribes, all of which bothered his supporters not one whit. Curley had been in jail before, convicted of fraud in 1904, and while ensconced in his cell, he was elected to the city’s board of aldermen. He was released from his second prison term only five months into an 18-month sentence, after supporters convinced President Harry Truman that he was in such ill health that he might not survive. Returning home, Curley was greeted by thousands of cheering supporters while a brass band played “Hail to the Chief.” Curley, fit as a fiddle, lived another 11 years.

But the secret to understanding Curley — and Trump — comes not from his behavior, but from his supporters. During Curley’s tenure in politics, Boston was a deeply divided city. The working class were mostly first- or second-generation Irish Catholics and, in the early decades of the 20th century, Boston’s working class toiled for very long hours at very low pay and endured constant maltreatment from their employers, many of whom were middle- and upper-class old-line Protestants. Living conditions for the working poor in American cities in the early 20th century were appalling: Housing was substandard and overcrowded; health care was primitive or nonexistent; air and water quality almost a guarantee of disease; crime rampant; and, in Boston, Irish immigrants were generally treated as sub-human. One of the only city institutions from which they were not barred was the jails.

Curley attacked all of those injustices with unflagging ardor. As a more recent Boston mayor, Ray Flynn, wrote in the Boston Herald, “You cannot overstate all the things Curley did, particularly in his first two terms, to improve public health, hygiene, sanitation and safety for the poor, the immigrants and the working class in the city of Boston.” And the poor loved him for it. They could not have cared less if, as Trump might have put it, he had shot someone dead in the middle of Beacon Street.

It was not just the tangible improvements that made Curley so beloved. His supporters exulted every time he stuck his thumb in the eyes of the upper-class elites, which he made certain to do regularly. Curley bullied, cajoled, threatened, sweet-talked, oiled palms, and manipulated city or state laws to get what he wanted for his constituents, making sure there was always a bit of spillover for himself.

And so, as with Trump, Mayor Curley’s supporters not only accepted that he was dishonest — they reveled in it. He might be a crook, but he was their crook.

The Curley/Trump parallel has one serious divergence, however. Unlike Curley, Trump has no loyalty to those he claims to represent. Curley was one of his own constituents, a man who had felt the same sting of bigotry as had they, and he represented them because he felt they deserved to win for once. Trump, on the other hand, has spent his life sneering contemptuously at those in whose interests he claims to work. He would sell them out in a second.

In this, Donald Trump shifts away from populist politician and back to Mafia don. Those who deal with genuine underworld figures quickly learn never to underestimate their capacity for betrayal, vindictiveness and treachery. Conservatives who blindly obey the dictates of Donald Trump will find that out the second his interests conflict with theirs.


Read More

Texas Capitol building

Texas Capitol, Austin

Texas GOP’s Closed-Primary Push Hits Pause. The Next Fight Is in Austin

Austin, Texas—A federal court effectively told the Republican Party of Texas Friday that—at least for now—if they want primary elections closed, they will have to convince their members in the legislature to do it. This puts the matter on hold until the 2027 legislative session.

It wasn’t a dismissal. The court did not rule on the constitutionality of Texas’ open primary system. Instead, US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk paused the GOP’s lawsuit, stating that the Legislature may soon take steps to close the state’s primary elections on its own.

Keep ReadingShow less
First Amendment being torn

First Amendment text of the US Constitution ripped in half -- Freedom of Speech , Religion or Press unconstitutional concept

Getty Images

Lawsuit Says Press Access Is Essential to Democratic Accountability

When POLITICO, CNN, and MS NOW announced Monday that they were filing a federal lawsuit to restore their reporters’ access to the White House, they challenged more than the sudden and unexplained revocation of press credentials. They underscored a fundamental constitutional principle: a free press does not operate at the government's discretion.

According to their joint statement, the outlets are seeking urgent relief after the Secret Service denied their reporters entry to the White House complex on Saturday and confiscated their credentials. The action followed recent stories by these outlets examining the administration’s handling of classified documents and raising questions about transparency related to policy meetings. They wrote, “Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists’ credentials because it objected to our reporting. Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from government interference.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Cropped shot of a group of people joining their hands in solidarity

A new union political director explains why labor membership has halved since 1983 even as public approval hits record highs—and what's driving the gap.

LumiNola/Getty Images

The Ongoing Fight for Bread and Roses

Last Monday, I started a new job as the political director for IBEW 569, a local electrical workers' union based here in San Diego. In talking to friends about what I’m doing–while learning, fast, in real time, how to do the job myself–it occurred to me that there’s actually quite a knowledge gap in society today regarding an understanding of what unions are and what they’re supposed to do. So let’s get into it.

A union is, at its core, a group of workers who agree to negotiate together instead of alone. One worker asking a boss for a raise has almost no leverage. A thousand workers asking together hits different. That leverage of teamwork, that collective bargaining, is how the overtime pay, workplace safety standards, and employer-sponsored health insurance all came to exist in this country. None of it was handed down out of corporate goodwill. Fair wages (bread) and dignity (roses) were won, often at real cost. In 1890, the average workweek for manufacturing employees and building tradesmen was around 100 hours or more. Workers in Chicago who rallied for an eight-hour workday faced police violence, but we have that and weekends now because people were willing to lose their jobs, and sometimes their lives, to organize for it.

Keep ReadingShow less
A woman sitting down and speaking with a group of people.

Research shows Americans see political opponents as more extreme than reality. Learn how closing this 'perception gap' can restore civil discourse.

Getty Images, Luis Alvarez

Closing Perception Gaps Strengthens the Whole Democracy Ecosystem

Perception gaps — misunderstandings about our fellow Americans across the political spectrum — are damaging the fabric of our country. Correcting these gaps is essential to preserving the kind of democracy that respects free speech, individual dignity, and civic responsibility.

At their core, perception gaps reflect a tendency to see those in the other party as more extreme and worse than they actually are. Too often, Americans assume their political opponents are more hostile, closed-minded, dishonest, or even supportive of political violence and rule-breaking than in reality. These caricatures drive fear and division.

Keep ReadingShow less