Trump's Sleazy $1 Billion Shakedown of Oil Execs Gives Dems an Opening

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Ever since Donald Trump descended that golden escalator in 2015, a central tenet of his bond with his supporters has been a simple promise to them: I have seen elite corruption and self-dealing from the inside, and I will put that know-how to work for you.

-snip-

A new Washington Post report that Trump made explicit policy promises to a roomful of Big Oil executives—while urging them to raise $1 billion for his campaign—is a powerful story in part because it wrecks what’s left of that mystique. In case you didn’t already know this, it shows yet again that if Trump has employed that aforementioned knowledge of elite corruption and self-dealing to any ends in his public career, it’s chiefly to benefit himself.

That counter narrative is a story that Democrats have a big opportunity to tell—if they seize on this news effectively. How might they do that?

For starters, the revelations seem to cry out for more scrutiny from Congress. Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who has been presiding over hearings into the oil industry as chair of the Budget Committee, says it’s “highly likely” that the committee will examine the new revelations.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-sleazy-1-billion-shakedown-100000671.html

[LetMyPeopleVote]

1. Trump's pitch to Big Oil execs sparks Senate Democrats' attention

Will Senate Democrats hold hearings into Donald Trump's controversial pitch to oil industry executives? It's “highly likely,” one key member said.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-pitch-big-oil-execs-sparks-senate-democrats-attention-rcna151943

The New York Times’ Jamelle Bouie responded soon after, “I’m obviously angered by the blatant disregard for the planet and its inhabitants. But I’m also struck by the in-your-face brazenness of Trump’s reported quid pro quo. This is more than the hint of corruption; it is the overpowering scent of the rotting corpse of corruption. It is influence trading of the sort that would embarrass a Boss Tweed or a Roscoe Conkling, whose 'honest graft' came with at least the pretense of pursuing the public good.”.....

Have the revelations opened the door to possible scrutiny on Capitol Hill? In the Republican-led House, no. In the Democratic-led Senate, maybe. The New Republic’s Greg Sargent reported:

For starters, the revelations seem to cry out for more scrutiny from Congress. Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who has been presiding over hearings into the oil industry as chair of the Budget Committee, says it’s “highly likely” that the committee will examine the new revelations.

“This is practically an invitation to ask more questions,” the Rhode Island Democrat told Greg, describing this as a “natural extension of the investigation already underway.”

The New York Times’ Jamelle Bouie responded soon after, “I’m obviously angered by the blatant disregard for the planet and its inhabitants. But I’m also struck by the in-your-face brazenness of Trump’s reported quid pro quo. This is more than the hint of corruption; it is the overpowering scent of the rotting corpse of corruption. It is influence trading of the sort that would embarrass a Boss Tweed or a Roscoe Conkling, whose 'honest graft' came with at least the pretense of pursuing the public good.”

Have the revelations opened the door to possible scrutiny on Capitol Hill? In the Republican-led House, no. In the Democratic-led Senate, maybe. The New Republic’s Greg Sargent reported:

For starters, the revelations seem to cry out for more scrutiny from Congress. Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who has been presiding over hearings into the oil industry as chair of the Budget Committee, says it’s “highly likely” that the committee will examine the new revelations.

“This is practically an invitation to ask more questions,” the Rhode Island Democrat told Greg, describing this as a “natural extension of the investigation already underway.”

Whitehouse added, “The phrase that instantly came to mind as I was reading the story was ‘quid pro quo.’” Referencing both the Post’s report and the aforementioned Politico article, the senator concluded, “Put those things together and it starts to look mighty damn corrupt.”

All things considered, I think it’s fair to say that Senate Democrats have exercised extraordinary restraint — by some measures, too much — in not holding committee hearings in response to every episodic development surrounding the former president. While the likes of House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan have reached for their gavel in response to meaningless Fox News segments, Democrats in the upper chamber have been far more measured about chasing assorted Trump scandals.