The news that Donald Trump’s old friend, fundraiser and head of his 2016 inaugural committee, Thomas J. Barrack, has been indicted on charges of failing to register as a foreign agent and lying to the FBI may not figure large in the vast universe of post-Trump-administration corruption inquiries. But the case has interested me for a specific reason.
If you read the indictment (or material previously revealed by the House Oversight Committee), you see Barrack’s first big test as a conduit for the United Arab Emirates concerned the Trump campaign speechwriting process in May 2016. According to the indictment, Barrack sent a draft copy of a Trump energy policy speech, through a co-defendant, to a UAE official asking for feedback. Barrack received a text message with proposed language from the UAE praising the de facto ruler of the nation, Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Zayed. Later that day, according to the indictment, Barrack sent back his revised draft of the speech, including the UAE input. Barrack heard from his associate: “They loved it so much! This is great!”
Barrack sent along his UAE-approved text to the Trump campaign. Zayed’s name was eventually removed, but the speech ended with a pledge “to work with our Gulf allies.” (Material from the Oversight Committee added the detail that Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, sent an email to Barrack confirming that the speech “has the language you want.”) Barrack received an email from a UAE official after the speech was delivered: “Congrats on the great job today.”
Barrack has pleaded not guilty.
This pat on the back, this attaboy, from a foreign government on a major campaign speech — as with so many things in the history of Trump-era corruption — is not normal. Not within the same Zip code, the same hemisphere, as normal.
The indictment goes on to detail a number of more serious charges against Barrack: obtaining information about foreign policy appointments and decision-making, acting as a back channel to the campaign, and promoting UAE foreign policy views. But sharing a presidential campaign energy speech with the government of the seventh-leading oil producer in the world, and finding a receptive audience for their input within a campaign, is a signal that corruption within the Trump inner circle was not only permitted but also assumed.
Maybe, just maybe, a pattern is discernible. Manafort, of course, pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy against the United States and obstructing justice (before Trump’s pardon). Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, initially admitted to lying about his foreign lobbying and about contacts with the Russian ambassador (before Trump’s pardon). Trump inaugural donor Imaad Zuberi pleaded guilty to violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and making illegal campaign contributions. Trump fundraiser Elliott Broidy pleaded guilty to conspiring to violate FARA (before Trump’s pardon). The Justice Department is investigating Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani for alleged illegal dealing with Ukraine. And Trump himself was impeached (the first time) for using his office to gain political favors from a foreign power.
What does all this add up to, other than providing more evidence that the United States was temporarily run by a sleazeocracy? The public damage of corruption is very real, because it is not just an indication of poor personal character. Those who take advantage of corrupt officials at the highest level believe they’re gaining a benefit. They view their marks as vulnerable and manipulable. When people in positions of trust cannot maintain the line between the standards of public conduct and the pursuit of private interests, that provides leverage for a foreign power. It becomes a source of American weakness.
Trump is the personification of that weakness. As president, he seemed not only unwilling but unable to draw a line between standards of expected conduct and raw personal wants. He defined the public good as his own success and gratification. Some of this problem was surely financial — there was little separation between the interests of Trump Inc. and the U.S. budget. But much of the filthy lucre given by foreign powers came in the currency of affirmed vanity.
Russia got Trump to publicly dispute his own intelligence agencies on the topic of aggressive Russian influence. The juvenile, praise-addled supreme leader of North Korea found it easy to manipulate the only world leader who was more juvenile and praise-addled. The Gulf States were masters at stroking Trump’s oversize self-regard. Ukraine might have gotten just about anything its leaders wanted if they’d had no principles and possessed the “goods” on Hunter Biden.
As the indictments for corruption in Trump’s inner circle continue to roll out over the next months and years, remember that the topic is not only personal venality. It is national vulnerability caused by weak and foolish men.
