Trump’s Whataboutism to Accept Dirt on Opponents from Foreigners Sets Risky Precedence

How many of us can relate to when a child is accused of some misdeed or wrong, they often mount a defense that begins by blubbering, “B-b-but wha-what-what-about what Johnny did?” Known as “whataboutism,” it’s way to distract and then evade responsibility from a misdeed. It also shifts attention to some completely unrelated indiscretion supposedly committed by someone else. But more than children, authoritarians and dictators are the ones who savor the rhetorical technique to distract and escape wrongs and liability. Consequently, and as someone who behaves as a juvenile authoritarian, some warn President Donald Trump is no different.

Indeed, Democratic and Republican lawmakers were “astonished” by the president’s claim during an ABC News Interview with George Stephanopoulos that taking foreign “dirt” was routine. (Only most Republicans were too afraid to admit it.) Whereas Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, the lone Republican, called it “unthinkable” to accept information from a foreign government to influence elections, Democrats pushed backed calling his statement incredulous. They also warned it was the reason he’s holding up a series of new election security bills for 2020. Like 2016, he’s betting that Vladimir Putin and Russia will again “aspire” the President Trump to get re-elected. (1)

Politics of “Dirt”
In the interview, Trump equated information gathered from foreign actors to opposition research-the standard practice of a politician digging up damaging information on an opponent. “It’s not an interference, they have information” said Trump, adding that, “I think I’d take it. If I thought there was something wrong, I’d go maybe to the FBI-if I thought there was something wrong.” It entailed stating that it wasn’t wrong to listen to damaging information from foreign countries about political rivals. He then emphasized: “When you go and talk, honestly, to congressmen, they all do it, they always have, and that’s the way it is. It’s called oppo research.”

Many lawmakers immediately declared that this was not the norm and against the Constitution and federal election campaign laws. His assertions have also put him at odds against national security professionals within his own administration. In fact, Trump said his FBI Director, who disagreed with him, was “flat out wrong.” Even then, Trump continued to appear unbothered by the political discord in his interview, saying that he would be open to any and all dirt on potential rivals. He moreover downplayed the idea that such a move by another foreign agent would amount to election interference or a breach of America’s election and campaign laws.

Trump’s #1 Mentor: Putin
In the meantime, his nemesis, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, said that, “Once again, over and over again, the president doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong.” She may be right. To be sure, Trump has repeatedly dispensed whataboutisms to criticize his own country. Just recall one of many interviews on Fox News when Bill O’Reilly attempted to draw an unambiguous distinction between Russian and American systems by declaring, “Putin is a killer.” Trump responded with a classic red herring, a whataboutism by claiming: “There are a lot of killers. You got a lot of killers. What, you think our country is so innocent?”

It’s no wonder Trump said this. Whataboutism Putin’s favorite technique too. In fact, it originated in the Soviet Union to discredit an opponent’s position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. According to the Guardian, when Putin is questioned about his woeful human rights record, he frequently responds with a whataboutism to America’s history and racial discord. During the Cold War, the line, “They lynch negroes,” even became a Soviet catchphrase. (2) Whataboutisms were also used by Adolf Hitler in comparing the Final Solution to the Armenian Genocide and America’s Genocide against Native Americans.

Favorite Targets of Trump’s Whataboutism
But these kinds of whataboutisms, that because America has its own history of injustice it’s wrong to accuse any other country of injustice, or that all lawmakers accept dirt from foreign agents, is just the start. His favorite whataboutisms are usually saved for Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Democrats. Whenever he’s criticized about his illegal executive orders or arms sales to dictators he says: “B-b-but wha-what-what-about what Barack Obama did?” The same goes for allegations over money laundering, racism, or sexism. He seems to always point to Clinton or at least one Democrat who’s done the same. It consequently serves to distract and evade-at least for his base.

Once again, Pelosi may be right when she called out Trump’s juvenile authoritarianian behavior about accepting dirt on political opponents. Saying that, “Everybody in the country should be totally appalled by what the president said…,” she added: “This one borders on so totally unethical but he doesn’t realize it.” Pelosi then went on to compare how the House was doing “a methodical approach” to uncovering wrongdoing in the White House. It included investigating, litigating, and getting to the truth to hold everyone accountable and to ensure no one is above the law. Her call for Republicans to stop covering for Trump will probably be ignored.

Whataboutisms Slippery Slope
Although we’ve all committed whataboutisms, psychologists note that by the time adulthood arrives it usually stops. That is if maturity sets in. They also warn that for a leader to display the juvenile instincts of whataboutism is risky, even destructive. Indeed, it’s been used as an excuse to commit some of the world’s greatest atrocities which were mentioned. Imagine too President Trump justifying the use of nuclear weapons because that’s what Harry Truman did when he dropped two atomic bombs on Japan. Or declaring martial law because that’s what Abraham Lincoln did. (He’s already dabbled in Internment Camps and Forced Relocations.)

Just as bad is when there’s no whataboutism. History shows that the same juvenile authoritarians who can’t think of any counteraccusations usually imagine them. It’s a way of justifying any transgression, whether it be conspiring with a foreign entity to rig an election or committing mass murder. To be sure, Alternet.org just reported that at least a dozen Republican congressional campaign used materials stolen from Democrats by Russian hackers during the 2016 election. In the meantime, get ready for a whataboutism regarding Dwight Eisenhower or George H.W. Bush. Whereas the former toppled Iran’s democratically elected leader, the latter fought a proxy war.

It included an eight-year tanker war in the Persian Gulf.

Dallas Darling is the author of Politics 501: An A-Z Reading on Conscientious Political Thought and Action, Some Nations Above God: 52 Weekly Reflections On Modern-Day Imperialism, Militarism, And Consumerism in the Context of John’s Apocalyptic Vision, and The Other Side Of Christianity: Reflections on Faith, Politics, Spirituality, History, and Peace. He is a correspondent for www.WN.com. You can read more of Dallas’ writings at www.beverlydarling.com and www.WN.com/dallasdarling.

(1)Miller, Greg. The Apprentice: Trump, Russia and the Subversion of American Democracy, New York, New York: Harper Collins, 2018. p. 224.

(2) Sorgatz, Rex. The Encyclopedia Of Misinformation. New York, New York: Abrams Publishers, 2018., p. 238.