We begin today’s roundup with an editorial at The New York Times on President Trump’s “self-dealing” presidency:
If Donald Trump thinks there’s nothing wrong with exploiting the presidency for his personal profit, he should read the Constitution.
That’s the argument plaintiffs made in a Manhattan federal court on Wednesday, in the first-ever lawsuit to accuse a president of violating the emoluments clauses — once-obscure constitutional provisions that the nation’s founders adopted to prevent corruption of public officials.
One clause prohibits officials from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever” from foreign governments unless Congress approves; another bars presidents from getting payments from federal or state governments other than their salaries.
At The New Yorker, Sheelah Kolhatkar adds her analysis on the cases against Trump:
The future of crew’s case could hinge on whether judges accept the group’s premise that the emoluments issue is creating a class of victims. The pages and pages of evidence submitted in the suit include details of Trump’s ownership in L.L.C.s; partnerships operating in at least twenty foreign countries; and the workings of the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., where news organizations have documented spikes in bookings by foreign diplomats “eager to curry favor” with Trump. The hotel recently hired a “director of diplomatic sales” to court this foreign-government consumer base, and has aggressively raised its prices since the election. crew contends that the elevated profit the hotel has reported is coming largely from foreign business. On Wednesday, in court, Deepak Gupta, an attorney arguing on behalf of crew who was previously litigation counsel for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, called the hotel “an emoluments magnet.”
Here is Peter Baker’s analysis on former presidents speaking out against Trump’s presidency:
Neither of them mentioned President Trump by name but two of his predecessors emerged from political seclusion on Thursday to deliver what sounded like pointed rebukes of the current occupant of the Oval Office and the forces of division that propelled him to power.
In separate and unrelated appearances, former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama both warned that the United States was being torn apart by ancient hatreds that should have been consigned to history long ago and called for addressing economic anxiety through common purpose. While not directly addressing Mr. Trump, neither left much doubt whom and what they had in mind.
Turning to policy, there’s quite a few pieces out there today on the GOP’s lack of achievements this session, despite controlling the White House, the Senate and the House. Max Boot has a must-read piece over at Foreign Policy:
The lobotomization of the Republican Party appeared complete last year when the same GOP paladins who had denounced Donald Trump as a “lunatic trying to get ahold of nuclear weapons” (Marco Rubio), as a bigot who was guilty of “the textbook definition of a racist comment” (Paul Ryan), and as a “narcissist,” “serial philanderer,” “pathological liar,” and “bully” (Ted Cruz) nevertheless endorsed him for the most powerful position in the world. Tragedy turned to farce (or is it the other way around?) after the emergence of the “grab ‘em by the pussy” tape on October 7, 2016. Republicans such as Sens. John Thune, Mike Crapo, and Deb Fischer called for Trump to leave the race on the grounds that he was unfit for office, only to change their minds and re-endorse him when it became evident that he was still polling strongly among base voters.
But the Republicans’ race to the bottom — to the absolute lowest moral and intellectual depths — wasn’t over last year, and it’s not over now. It’s still continuing, with even supposedly “normal,” “moderate,” “mainstream” Republicans increasingly echoing Trump’s know-nothing effusions. [...]
As I’ve explained before, I have my qualms about the Democratic Party, which is lurching to the left, but I am done, done, done with the GOP after more than 30 years as a loyal Republican.
Susan Milligan at US News:
It's not that the party's over for congressional Republicans. It's that they never really had one. Despite the rare advantage of trifecta control – winning the White House as well as keeping control of both chambers of Congress – Republicans in Washington are struggling, with little to show for their first nine months of one-party rule and heading into an unexpectedly competitive 2018 campaign season. And while the minority Democrats are frequently decried as the "obstructionists" keeping the GOP from delivering on its campaign promises, it's often been the Republican Party itself that has been the culprit.
Catherine Rampell:
Obamacare repeal? Dead.
Tax reform? Dead and demoted to tax cuts, now also on life support.
Republicans may have unified control of government, but they seem curiously incapable of getting major agenda items through.
But over at The Nation, Katrina vanden Heuvel warns to be wary of the Senate budget:
This week, Senate Republicans will seek to push through a budget resolution for the current fiscal year. The resolution provides guidelines for spending and tax cuts, with projections for the next decade. Although its provisions are destructive and absurd, it has the support of virtually all of the Republican caucus.
The resolution is designed to facilitate the passage of tax cuts with Republican votes only. The final package hasn’t been written yet, but Republican leaders have produced a “framework.” Its elements are perverse. We know that extreme inequality corrupts our democracy and impedes economic growth. As a detailed analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center makes clear, this bill will make it worse, with the top 1 percent pocketing over half of the tax cuts next year—and an obscene 80 percent by year 10.
On a final note, here is Eugene Robinson on Trump’s controversial behavior during his calls to Gold Star families:
For 12 days, Trump said nothing, not even a tweet, about the four Americans killed in action, and had no contact with the loved ones they had left behind. Pressed by reporters to explain his silence, Trump reacted by slandering his predecessors, especially President Barack Obama, falsely claiming that they, too, neglected to console the families of the fallen. […]
No one should expect him to grow in office. He’s 71. At that age, either you have compassion, self-knowledge and a conscience, or you don’t.