Kicking up to the Don
Sep 4, 2019 10:38:53 #
Article by Elie Honig
As a federal organized crime prosecutor, I learned that the mafia uses a practice known as "kicking up" or "paying tribute" to the boss. Essentially, all members of a mafia family must make sure that some of their earnings end up in the boss' pocket. From the member's point of view, "kicking up" is a way to show respect, curry favor, and reinforce the hierarchical power structure. From the boss's point of view, it's a way to get rich.
The "kicking up" model works well for the mafia, and now a political version of it seems to be catching on within the Trump administration. Vice President Mike Pence has decided to stay at Trump's golf resort in Doonbeg, Ireland, during an official visit to Dublin (over a one-hour flight away, so not particularly close or convenient). On Tuesday, Pence's chief of staff remarked that the decision was made on Trump's suggestion. The Vice President's office later stated, "at no time did the President direct our office to stay at his Doonbeg resort."
Pence reportedly will personally pay all expenses for family traveling with him, and the United States government will use taxpayer money to pick up the costs for Pence and his security detail. No matter how you cut it, Pence's decision to stay at Trump's hotel will put money in Trump's pocket.
Not to be outdone in the "posterior osculation" category (as Paul Begala colorfully put it), Attorney General William Barr reportedly will spend more than $30,000 of personal money to throw a private holiday party at the Trump International Hotel in Washington DC. Barr's defenders argue that he first tried to book two other DC hotels. But, of course, there are dozens of luxury hotels in DC that Barr could have chosen instead of one owned by Trump's company. Apologists can nibble at the margins, but there is no escaping that Barr's choice to patronize a Trump property, like Pence's, will put thousands of dollars in Trump's pocket.
This trend of high-ranking federal officials choosing to pay thousands of dollars to use Trump's private properties is problematic on two levels. First, the payments could violate the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, which prohibits federal government officials from accepting (1) "any present, emoluments, title or office" from any foreign country or (2) any income beyond official salary from any American state or the federal government. There already is pending litigation under the Emoluments Clause over Trump's receipt of revenue from foreign leaders who have stayed at Trump properties. Trump's receipt of income directly from the federal government to cover Pence's stay at the hotel presents another potential violation of the Emoluments Clause.
Second, the decisions by Pence and Barr to patronize Trump's private business raise vexing precedent and serious ethical questions. Do other high-ranking federal officials need to take notice and follow suit? Will they be punished or disfavored if they don't throw a couple bucks Trump's way? Is there some implicit understanding that Trump will favor those who pay? Even if the answer to all of these questions is "no," the appearance itself is terrible; the American public rightly will wonder if ethical lines have been blurred, and that in itself is problematic.
Barr's decision is particularly baffling. The attorney general is supposed to be independent and stand above politics, but Barr looks weak and sycophantic to Trump. While Barr sought the advice of DOJ ethics experts, at a minimum this creates a terrible appearance of him currying favor with Trump -- the person who appointed Barr, and the only person who can fire him. When I worked at the Justice Department, employees were trained not to sell a child's Girl Scout cookies in the office, to prevent even the appearance of mixing personal finance with Justice Department business. Compare that to Barr cutting a personal check for reportedly $30,000 to a Trump business and you can see the magnitude of the ethical problem.
Both Pence and Barr had plenty of options available. Yet they both conspicuously chose to go with Trump properties. Trump will get a little richer, and the integrity of our government will take another loss
As a federal organized crime prosecutor, I learned that the mafia uses a practice known as "kicking up" or "paying tribute" to the boss. Essentially, all members of a mafia family must make sure that some of their earnings end up in the boss' pocket. From the member's point of view, "kicking up" is a way to show respect, curry favor, and reinforce the hierarchical power structure. From the boss's point of view, it's a way to get rich.
The "kicking up" model works well for the mafia, and now a political version of it seems to be catching on within the Trump administration. Vice President Mike Pence has decided to stay at Trump's golf resort in Doonbeg, Ireland, during an official visit to Dublin (over a one-hour flight away, so not particularly close or convenient). On Tuesday, Pence's chief of staff remarked that the decision was made on Trump's suggestion. The Vice President's office later stated, "at no time did the President direct our office to stay at his Doonbeg resort."
Pence reportedly will personally pay all expenses for family traveling with him, and the United States government will use taxpayer money to pick up the costs for Pence and his security detail. No matter how you cut it, Pence's decision to stay at Trump's hotel will put money in Trump's pocket.
Not to be outdone in the "posterior osculation" category (as Paul Begala colorfully put it), Attorney General William Barr reportedly will spend more than $30,000 of personal money to throw a private holiday party at the Trump International Hotel in Washington DC. Barr's defenders argue that he first tried to book two other DC hotels. But, of course, there are dozens of luxury hotels in DC that Barr could have chosen instead of one owned by Trump's company. Apologists can nibble at the margins, but there is no escaping that Barr's choice to patronize a Trump property, like Pence's, will put thousands of dollars in Trump's pocket.
This trend of high-ranking federal officials choosing to pay thousands of dollars to use Trump's private properties is problematic on two levels. First, the payments could violate the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, which prohibits federal government officials from accepting (1) "any present, emoluments, title or office" from any foreign country or (2) any income beyond official salary from any American state or the federal government. There already is pending litigation under the Emoluments Clause over Trump's receipt of revenue from foreign leaders who have stayed at Trump properties. Trump's receipt of income directly from the federal government to cover Pence's stay at the hotel presents another potential violation of the Emoluments Clause.
Second, the decisions by Pence and Barr to patronize Trump's private business raise vexing precedent and serious ethical questions. Do other high-ranking federal officials need to take notice and follow suit? Will they be punished or disfavored if they don't throw a couple bucks Trump's way? Is there some implicit understanding that Trump will favor those who pay? Even if the answer to all of these questions is "no," the appearance itself is terrible; the American public rightly will wonder if ethical lines have been blurred, and that in itself is problematic.
Barr's decision is particularly baffling. The attorney general is supposed to be independent and stand above politics, but Barr looks weak and sycophantic to Trump. While Barr sought the advice of DOJ ethics experts, at a minimum this creates a terrible appearance of him currying favor with Trump -- the person who appointed Barr, and the only person who can fire him. When I worked at the Justice Department, employees were trained not to sell a child's Girl Scout cookies in the office, to prevent even the appearance of mixing personal finance with Justice Department business. Compare that to Barr cutting a personal check for reportedly $30,000 to a Trump business and you can see the magnitude of the ethical problem.
Both Pence and Barr had plenty of options available. Yet they both conspicuously chose to go with Trump properties. Trump will get a little richer, and the integrity of our government will take another loss
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.