For some time, speculation abounded that if Donald Trump won the presidency, the luxury hotel that he opened in the Old Post Office Pavilion–mere blocks from the White House–could be a massive conflict of interest waiting to happen. Indeed, as early as two weeks after Trump’s upset win, foreign diplomats were reportedly making noises about staying at the hotel in hopes of gaining access to Trump.
Well, it looks like that Trump is milking this for all it is worth, and bigly. According to Mexico’s former ambassador to the United States, the State Department is leaning hard on foreign dignitaries to stay at the Trump International Hotel Washington when they’re on official business in this country.
On Tuesday afternoon, Arturo Sarukhan, who served as Mexico’s ambassador to the United States from 2007 to 2013, detonated a bombshell on Twitter.
Kakistocracia: ex funcionario EU me dice q Protocolo DptoEstado fue instruido a enfatizar a gobs? usar HotelTrump p/ viajes oficiales a DC
— Arturo Sarukhan (@Arturo_Sarukhan) October 31, 2017
Translation:
“Kakistocracy: ex-US diplomat tells me that StateDept Protocol was told to stress that foreign governments use TrumpHotel f/official travel to DC”
The word “kakistocracy” refers to a government run by the worst elements of society. This isn’t just hyperbole on Sarukhan’s part. It was thrown around frequently by a number of Trump critics in the weeks after Trump’s upset victory. For anyone who has struggled to keep pace with the almost daily outrages from this White House, it’s more than apt to describe this administration as a kakistocracy on steroids.
Sarukhan spelled out a situation that sounds like something we’d expect from a Third World country. Remember, folks, when Trump took office, he retained controlling interest in his real estate empire–including the consortium that leases the Old Post Office Pavilion from the General Services Administration and operates the hotel. While he turned over control of his real estate interests to a trust overseen by his sons, all the money those properties own still flows into his bank account.
In other words–for all of his talk of draining the Washington swamp, Trump has allowed his own swamp to overflow several times over. And Trump spent two-plus years blasting Hillary Clinton for supposedly being corrupt? Stones, meet glass house.
Moreover, if the State Department is strongarming foreign dignitaries into staying at Trump’s hotel, it would be an accessory to a blatant violation of the Emoluments Clause, which states that government officials cannot accept gifts from foreign powers without permission from Congress. The clause is found in Article 1, section 9 of the Constitution.
“No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”
A number of ethics experts have argued that Trump violated that clause from the moment he took office by continuing to allow the proceeds from his deals with foreign governments and state-owned businesses to flow into his coffers. Indeed, one of those experts, former Bush 43 ethics counsel Richard Painter, contended that Trump should have gotten rid of his Washington hotel in order to comply with the Emoluments Clause.
On the face of it, this situation could not be more straightforward. If a foreign official were to stay at a Trump hotel in order to curry favor with Trump, that stay would be the very definition of a “present” to Trump. Moreover, according to ThinkProgress’ Ian Milhiser, numerous dictionaries from the late 18th century define “emolument” as a “profit or gain” from a business transaction. In this case, any profit Trump makes from foreign dignitaries staying at his hotel would qualify as an emolument.
American Oversight, a recently-formed nonpartisan government watchdog group, quickly recognized it was potentially looking at a textbook case of overflowing the swamp.
Former Mexican Ambassador to the US says State Department has been told to recommend Trump hotels. We will be FOIAing this. (h/t @Z_Everson) https://t.co/ch0wzTFFtF
— American Oversight (@weareoversight) October 31, 2017
On Wednesday, American Oversight asked the State Department to provide any and all communications suggesting that foreign dignitaries stay at Trump properties, as well as any communication between the State Department and the Trump Organization.
If Sarukhan’s claim is even half true, then a lot of people need to be fired. Careers have been ended over situations far less egregious than this. If anyone subject to Senate confirmation were involved–that is, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson or any undersecretaries–it would be an impeachable offense. And of course, if Trump were to accept any proceeds from foreign dignitaries being pushed to stay at his hotel, it would be yet another cause to impeach him.
It is well established that officials in executive departments can be impeached if they are subject to Senate confirmation. In 1876, when Secretary of War William Belknap was impeached for taking kickbacks in return for lucrative military trading post contracts in what later became Oklahoma. Belknap knew that he faced almost certain impeachment and removal, and resigned before the House took up the articles of impeachment.
Nonetheless, the House unanimously impeached him. However, a number of Senators felt that with Belknap’s resignation, they no longer had jurisdiction. As a result, while all five articles returned a majority in favor of conviction, the votes were well short of the two-thirds required for conviction.
Regardless, if it does turn out that this outrageously corrupt and outrageously illegal decision was made at the undersecretarial or secretarial level, Trump shouldn’t be the only one to face impeachment. This sort of thing may be tolerated in the Third World, but must not be tolerated here. Period.
(featured image courtesy Wyn de Vanter, available under a Creative Commons BY-SA license)
