from above article of Jan. 12, 2017 A warning to the Trump administration
Donald Trump’s nominees are already in danger. Trump already has a reputation for deliberately fostering conflicts and rivalries among his subordinates. Somehow he survived despite this behavior in the boardroom, and naturally thrived on it in his reality television career—many viewers turn in to see conflict, not cooperation. But in the White House, it will be a disaster. Enemies will seek to undermine their rivals, and that will mean leaks, investigations (by journalists if Congress shirks its duty), and potential criminal indictments even if the Justice Department turns a blind eye. (Not just one but two of Nixon’s attorneys general ended up going to jail, so a compliant Department of Justice isn’t protection.)
Trump’s own potential conflicts are too numerous to list, and while the president is exempt from some conflicts of interest laws, it’s not a blanket immunity, especially for things in the Constitution like the Emoluments Clause. (How many of us had even heard of that clause before this election? I only knew of it vaguely as a prohibition of elected officials to accept Titles of Nobility while still in office—Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush’s British knighthoods came after they left office and Dwight Eisenhower’s were awarded before he became president for his leadership in World War II, for which he nevertheless needed congressional authorization at the time since he was still serving in the military.)
But as I mentioned before, his nominees are at great personal risk if their nominations are rushed through before FBI or Office of Government Ethics review. A conflict that is revealed after they take office could result in criminal indictments. And while President Trump could pardon them for criminal violations (but not civil acts), that only applies to federal charges, not those filed under other state laws, should there be any. And how many pardons can he issue before his own support erodes? Yes, some of his most rabid supporters won’t care (but still want to seek criminal charges against Democrats who didn’t even commit any crimes). But his winning edge in the states that pushed him over the Electoral College top came from a lot of undecided voters who broke for him in the final week (or eleven days, specifically) but won’t stay loyal if scandals grow. (Already, “voted for you Trump“ on Twitter reveals a lot of his disgruntled voters telling him they voted for him but want him to stop tweeting, vet his nominees with proper ethics review, address the Russian hacking issue, and other expressions of disappointment.)
If they were wise, Trump’s nominees and appointees should insist on an Office of Government Ethics review before taking office for their own legal protection.
