Latest / INSIGHT TODAY / U.S. foreign policy seeks to 'enrich' Trump officials, says Pulitzer-winning journalist

Transcript

U.S. foreign policy seeks to 'enrich' Trump officials, says Pulitzer-winning journalist · INSIGHT TODAY

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump often pushes boundaries in plain sight. Some are
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: seeing another influence he's having in his second term that
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: can be hidden from the public eye. Anne Applebaum has
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: been reporting on the autocratic shift in American politics under Trump.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: The Pulitzer Prize winning author's latest cover story in this
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: month's Atlantic. tracks the reshaping of U.S. foreign policy. Once
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: geared to the promotion of democracy worldwide, Applebaum argues it
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: has now become a mechanism for private enrichment for Trump,
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: his inner circle, and his followers, even those in other countries.
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: Her story is called, as you saw, Empire of Grift.
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: We are very glad to have Anne Applebaum joining us now.
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: Good morning to you.
• 0:41
  Speaker 2: Good morning.
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: What is the point of U.S. foreign policy now?
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: Certainly, U.S.
• 0:47
  Speaker 3: Foreign policy is no longer what it was. This administration
• 0:50
  Speaker 3: does not see itself as the leader of a democratic
• 0:54
  Speaker 3: alliance dedicated to the promotion of democracy and the rule
• 0:57
  Speaker 3: of law around the world. Instead, it has goals that
• 1:01
  Speaker 3: are determined by others inside and around the administration. Some
• 1:05
  Speaker 3: of them are so-called civilizational goals to change the nature
• 1:10
  Speaker 3: of European governments, to dominate countries in the.
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: And also to use the power of U.S.
• 1:20
  Speaker 3: Government to enrich companies in, close to, and around the
• 1:26
  Speaker 3: Trump administration.
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: We see clear attempts to dominate, if not destroy, the
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: Canadian economy. Is it beyond that for this administration and
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: those in its circle?
• 1:39
  Speaker 3: So you've certainly seen some in the administration say, playing
• 1:43
  Speaker 3: around with Alberta's separatism. So you've had meetings in the
• 1:48
  Speaker 3: White House for the separatists. You had the Treasury Secretary,
• 1:52
  Speaker 3: Scott Besson, somehow entertaining the idea on.
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: A far-right podcast. You have the U.S.
• 1:59
  Speaker 3: Ambassador in Ottawa, you know, inviting separatists to July 4th demonstrations.
• 2:05
  Speaker 3: I mean, these are all games and tests to see
• 2:10
  Speaker 3: if the U.S. can help begin the process of breaking
• 2:13
  Speaker 3: up Canada. And I think that is with the goal
• 2:16
  Speaker 3: of absorbing all or part of Canada one way or
• 2:19
  Speaker 3: the other into the United States. I wouldn't say that
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: the whole administration is committed to that or everybody in
• 2:24
  Speaker 3: the State Department or everybody in the Republican Party, but
• 2:27
  Speaker 3: there's clearly an ideological fringe that is, and maybe not
• 2:31
  Speaker 3: so fringe, if you include the Secretary of the Treasury,
• 2:34
  Speaker 3: that is thinking about playing with and looking to.
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: Encourage that idea.
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: You don't know and we don't know who the next
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: president of the United States will be, assuming it is
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: whether it's a Republican or a Democrat. I think there's
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: growing acknowledgement in this country that the relationship between Canada
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: and the U.S. will never be the same. I wonder
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: at a diplomatic level, should anyone accept that there will
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: be a snapback to the way things once were? Or
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: is that forever ruptured, to use a word popular today?
• 3:07
  Speaker 3: I mean, there will be different phases and maybe there
• 3:10
  Speaker 3: will be a different kind of president next time.
• 3:13
  Speaker 2: But I would advise Canadians to.
• 3:16
  Speaker 3: Look at the fact that the ideas behind this administration,
• 3:20
  Speaker 3: the idea of imperial dominance, of creating some kind of
• 3:25
  Speaker 3: civilization with the MAGA movement at the center of it,
• 3:29
  Speaker 3: these ideas will remain part of American politics.
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: They're important politicians.
• 3:32
  Speaker 3: Who still believe in them in the Senate and The
• 3:35
  Speaker 3: vice president is one of them, for example.
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: He may be the next president.
• 3:38
  Speaker 3: And so assuming that they will just somehow go away,
• 3:41
  Speaker 3: I think would be a mistake. I mean, this is
• 3:43
  Speaker 3: now there is a part of the American political spectrum
• 3:46
  Speaker 3: that that supports this and they're going to be there
• 3:49
  Speaker 3: for some time.
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: And some have made the analogy that there's not a
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: lot of difference between the Republicans in the U.S. Congress
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: and those who are faithful in the Chinese People's Congress
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: to the Communist Party, that they lost their no stamp.
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: They only have the yes one, and that's their only job.
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: There's no scrutiny. Is that republicanism today? Is the takeover
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: by MAGA permanent?
• 4:14
  Speaker 3: So it's true that the controls over the party, which
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: is something that American presidents never had, are much.
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: More powerful than they were before.
• 4:22
  Speaker 3: So they, you know, the president somehow controls funding for
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: Senate campaigns and congressional campaigns. And also the president's influence
• 4:31
  Speaker 3: over social media means that he can organize kind of
• 4:35
  Speaker 3: smear campaigns against people. People can find themselves under assault
• 4:39
  Speaker 3: on Twitter, on YouTube or on on other forms of
• 4:43
  Speaker 3: social media. And that kind of control, that ability to
• 4:46
  Speaker 3: manipulate both the media atmosphere as well as money does
• 4:51
  Speaker 3: give the president a new level of power. And it's
• 4:54
  Speaker 3: true that you've seen very few Republicans willing to buck it.
• 4:57
  Speaker 3: And those who do have sometimes lost their seats. So
• 5:02
  Speaker 3: that's a big transformation in American politics. And it also
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: means that Congress, which is supposed to be the branch
• 5:09
  Speaker 3: of government that controls and blocks and monitors the president
• 5:13
  Speaker 3: has at least for the last year and a half not.
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: Been doing its job.
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: I do want to go back to your cover piece
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: in the Atlantic Empire of Grift. What are the ways
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: in which the circles around the U.S. president are making money?
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: To what degree? And with money, of course, comes power.
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: What do they do with that power?
• 5:33
  Speaker 3: So it's a very wide range of things, ranging from
• 5:36
  Speaker 3: the president has a cryptocurrency company that lots of foreigners
• 5:40
  Speaker 3: have invested in, often anonymously. We don't necessarily know who
• 5:43
  Speaker 3: they are. Their payments into the company constitute a kind
• 5:47
  Speaker 3: of bribe. So there are influences over the president that
• 5:50
  Speaker 3: we don't know. There are also people around the president
• 5:53
  Speaker 3: who are acting in a de facto diplomatic capacity, like
• 5:56
  Speaker 3: Steve Witkoff, one of his former real estate partners, and
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. who are not diplomats, they're not
• 6:03
  Speaker 3: bound by codes of government ethics, who have big conflicts
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: of interest. They have their own investments, for example, in
• 6:10
  Speaker 3: the Middle East, their own interests, or friends and colleagues
• 6:14
  Speaker 3: who have interests and investments in Russia, and yet they
• 6:17
  Speaker 3: are negotiating with those countries. Those pretty profound break with
• 6:22
  Speaker 3: the way the United States did diplomacy, at least since
• 6:25
  Speaker 3: 1945 and probably in the 20th century. There have been
• 6:29
  Speaker 3: also arrangements whereby the U.S. government helps particular companies do deals.
• 6:35
  Speaker 3: And sometimes it turns out that Trump's family or other
• 6:38
  Speaker 3: friends and.
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: Colleagues have interests.
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: There was one in Kazakhstan that was revealed a few
• 6:45
  Speaker 3: weeks ago, and I'm sure there are many others. So
• 6:48
  Speaker 3: this is definitely administration which keeps those interests in mind
• 6:54
  Speaker 3: when it's doing.
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: Other kinds of diplomacy. Trump family interests.
• 6:57
  Speaker 3: Interests, whether it's in Vietnam or the Middle East. The
• 7:01
  Speaker 3: Lutnik family interests, the Commerce Secretary's family has also been
• 7:05
  Speaker 3: reflected in a few places.
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: All of that is now part of and connected to U.S.
• 7:10
  Speaker 3: Foreign policy in ways that are, you know, if you
• 7:14
  Speaker 3: could find one or two examples of this kind of
• 7:16
  Speaker 3: thing in the past, this is now common practice and
• 7:19
  Speaker 3: it's on a completely different scale from anything we've ever
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: seen before in American history.
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: Anne Applebaum, I wish I had an hour with you.
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: I don't. This has been fascinating. Thank you very much
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: for making great use of the time we did have.
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: Thank you.
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: That is Anne Applebaum.