This opinion piece by Kevin Liptak at the CNN website this weekend is a great example of the way that Donald Trump’s malfeasance makes nonsense out of attempts at journalistic balance. While the preponderance of incidents and details in the article makes it clear that Trump has been the main actor in freezing relations between the current and preceding presidents, Liptak finds himself unable to say this outright, or to give the proper label of perniciousness to Trump’s actions towards Obama. Attempting to summarize the downward spiral from the high point of Obama’s efforts to welcome Trump and Trump’s description of their “warm” ties, he writes that “Once Trump was installed in office, however, things progressively soured, culminating in Trump’s March tweets accusing Obama of ordering surveillance of Trump Tower.” But to say that “things progressively soured” is like describing Germany’s invasions of its European neighbors during World War II by saying “a lack of peace progressively spread across the continent." As the actual details in the CNN article make clear, there was one person doing the souring, and that was Donald Trump.
And of course “soured” turns out to be the key miswording here, because it serves to downplay the unprecedented and frighteningly serious main event: that Donald Trump accused Barack Obama, without a shred of proof, of wiretapping his campaign. Whatever tensions may have existed between the two men up to that time, Trump’s unfounded accusation of an arguably impeachable offense was an obvious attempt to sully and degrade his predecessor’s reputation; was, in fact, a de facto declaration of war against Barack Obama. So when the article notes that “Neither has made any real attempt to reconcile after Trump accused Obama of ordering wiretaps at his skyscraper in New York,” we’re left to scratch our heads in wonder. How, exactly, might there be reconciliation? Donald Trump has accused Barack Obama of a tremendous crime, and has refused to back down. How on earth could they “reconcile” while this slander stands? “Reconcile” suggests that some of the onus is on Obama to reach out to Donald Trump, but nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, this grave lie leveled against Obama makes it necessary for Obama to have absolutely no relationship to Trump, because to do so would suggest that there is something normal or non-shocking about Trump’s lie that might still allow space for a relationship between the two.
So when the article ponders that “it’s unprecedented for a sitting president and his predecessor to eschew the faintest of ties,” it hammers home a cluelessness about its topic, and the fact that the deterioration in relations has been orchestrated by one particular party in the relationship. In point of fact, the decisive “unprecedented” event is for a sitting president to accuse a former president of high crimes and misdemeanors, without evidence and with clear intent to distract from his own personal wrongdoing. After such an event, the lack of relations can better be described as “obvious” or “a no-brainer.” We need look no further than Trump’s conversations with former FBI Director James Comey to comprehend the peril of deceit and slander in which anyone who speaks to Trump places him- or herself. And now that Trump faces the increasing possibility of legal peril based on the Russia investigation, it seems like common sense would call for Obama to steer clear of giving Trump advice or counsel, even were the president to ask him, out of the risk of having even the most tangential association with this tainted presidency.
And to be totally clear: even before Trump made his decisive accusation against Obama, Trump had not contacted Obama since Trump’s inauguration, and it is obviously on the sitting president to reach out to a predecessor, not for the predecessor to rush forward to offer unwanted advice to his successor. The article notes that Trump has in fact not reached out to any other former presidents since taking office, which points to a larger isolation and arrogance that, again, is less about the Trump-Obama conflict and more about the character of the Oval Office’s current occupant.
Finally, the article notes the “long and bitter history” between Obama and Trump, but without making clear that it’s Trump who years ago started the tension between the two men, with another unprecedented act: accusing then-president Obama of not being an American citizen. Trump’s self-appointment at the head of the birther movement was a racist, despicable action. I can barely imagine the equanimity and self-control that kept Barack Obama from expressing anger at Trump’s denigrating birther slander, though he clearly did enjoy insulting Trump at the 2011 White House correspondent’s dinner. But that decisive evening of Trump-roasting only proves the point: Trump started a fight against Obama, not the other way around — a fight that from the very beginning was built on a foundation of racism and lies, and likely continues now because the reality is that Obama represents a competence, intelligence, and commitment to our democracy that serves as a daily reminder of Trump’s incompetence, recklessness, and authoritarian inclinations.
In a larger sense, this CNN piece is another example of how Trump tends to corrupt everything he touches, including news coverage. In our opinion, the article fails to take into account the seriousness of Trump's past and present accusations against Obama, which leads to an inaccurate, pox-on-both-their-houses spin on the two men's relationship. An honest, clear-eyed article would have taken the reality of Trump's basic culpability as its premise, and would also have acknowledged another basic point that should be obvious to all by now: Trump really doesn't seem to have relationships with anyone, if a relationship is understood to involve some sort of give and take and some acknowledgment of commonality. Rather, Trump seeks to dominate everyone he meets; and those he can't dominate, like Obama, become the enemy. This is a difficult place for journalism to be, not to mention a hideous pass for our country. But it's a disservice to the public to act like this president isn't as abnormal as he truly is.
