Credible Charges

Today’s deluge of Donald Trump-Jeffrey Epstein revelations reminded me of a January 1994 Washington Post editorial in which the Post called for the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate a land deal on which the Clintons had lost money more than a decade earlier “even though – and this should be stressed – there has been no credible charge in this case that either the president or Mrs. Clinton did anything wrong.”^[1]

I’ve thought about that editorial often during the Trump era. Countless examples of flagrant corruption, law-breaking, potential treason, and just generally antisocial behavior by Trump, all infinitely more troubling than losing $50,000 on a real estate deal, have come and went without the Washington Post – or any comparable media, political, or civic institution – calling for an independent investigation. It’s a striking contrast to how eager institutions like the Post were to back investigations of previous Democratic presidents, even in the absence of so much as a credible allegation of wrongdoing.

There are a lot of reasons for the fact that the corporate news media has been reluctant to push for the kinds of consequences – from investigations to resignation – for Trump misdeeds they backed during Democratic institutions. One is that the perverse reality that these news organizations and the people who lead them are both conservative-leaning and liberal-identifying, and their misconception of their own biases causes them to tilt even further to the Right. I won’t belabor that point today; I’ve written often and at great length about it.

Another factor is the belief that it’s pointless for news companies to call for something – whether an independent investigation, resignation, or impeachment – that they know Trump and the Republicans who control our government will reject. They (correctly) think they can influence the behavior of Democratic politicians, so they try to do so. They don’t think they can influence the behavior of Republican politicians, so they don’t press for the same kinds of accountability they demand from Democrats.^[2]

This way of thinking is deeply wrong. For one thing, there is value in saying clearly what should happen even if it is unlikely to pass. There is value in saying certain things are unacceptable, even if you likely cannot stop them. The refusal to do so helps us sink further into the abyss. For another: Autocrats like Donald Trump who lack popular support for their corrupt and damaging practices rely on the perception of inevitability. The assumption that nothing can ever change, that they cannot be held accountable, that they can get away with anything, is self perpetuating. When news companies throw in the towel or outright align themselves with Trump, they signal to judges that they face no reproach for doing the same. Judges send the same signals to prosecutors, corporations to universities, universities to think tanks, and so on.

So: It is clear that neither the Trump administration nor his Republican allies in Congress can be trusted to investigate and tell the truth about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. A truly independent investigation is necessary. And we already know enough about Trump to know that resignation and impeachment are the least of the consequences he should face, for a wide variety of wrongdoing. There can be no accountability and no way out if we are unwilling to say these things. And institutions that don't understand that or aren't willing to act on it aren't worth saving. We're going to have to build new ones instead.