Presidential Displeasure

Prez to U.S. Attorney:
"You're Fired!"

   Evidence is piling up that there were, in fact, improper relationships between Donald Trump, his staffers, and foreign political and business entities before and after Election Day.
   Several days ago, government monitors asked U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, whose jurisdiction in New York City includes Trump Tower and Wall Street, to investigate whether Trump violated the Constitution by accepting benefits from foreign powers.
   On Thursday, conservative talk show host Sean Hannity called on the president to "purge" holdovers from the previous administration and remove "saboteurs" from the Justice Department who were allegedly leaking documents intended to harm Trump.
   As if on cue, the next day Trump demanded resignations from 46 U.S. attorneys, effectively immediately. Bharara refused, and Trump's response was: "You're fired!"
   It's not uncommon for presidents to replace multiple appointees when a new administration takes office, but typically the replacements are spread out over time, especially when there are continuing investigations. But to demand that all leave immediately is an extraordinary move.
   Moreover, Trump had already asked Bharara, a Democrat, to stay on as U.S. attorney in Manhattan to continue working on important cases. Bharara has a reputation for being strong on prosecuting corruption no matter where found.
   All of this raises the key question of whether the president's many business interests in America and around the world may be running afoul of U.S. law and the constitutional ban on accepting benefits of any kind from any foreign power.
   Already, members of the Trump team have been accused of frequent contact with Russian officials before and after the election, and there are strong indications that the meetings were more than social or business calls.
   Meanwhile, the Irish Times in Dublin carried a report from its Beijing correspondent that the government of China has granted 38 new Trump trademarks, which will enable the U.S. president to expand his range of businesses using his name in that country.
   An attorney for the Trump Organization said the group has been "actively  enforcing its intellectual property rights in China for more than a decade," according to the Irish Times report, and these new trademarks are part of that effort.
   However, the newspaper also noted that the trademarks were granted by the Chinese government with unusual speed, which experts said raised the issue of conflict of interest between the president and business interests in China, as well as a violation of the U.S. Constitutional ban known as the emoluments clause.
   Having a conflict of interest -- potential or real -- is not in itself a bad thing. But acting on that conflict, to the detriment of others you supposedly represent, can easily fall into the trap of being illegal, unethical, or even treasonous.
   Now there are increasing questions from journalists, academics and government officials as to the propriety of using an official government position -- such as the presidency -- to tout the products and services of Trump-related businesses.
   Ignoring the questions, ejecting journalists who ask the questions, and even firing prosecutors charged with enforcing laws, does not make the questions go away.
   It does, however, heighten the curiosity of more citizens, voters, and lawyers who see more and more smoke and ask, where's the fire?
   So if there is collusion between the current administration and foreign powers with interests that conflict with American ideals and practices, it's time to investigate and stomp out the fire.