Anything but divestiture poses threat

People who keep saying “I’m really smart” usually aren’t.

People who frequently say “trust me” probably shouldn’t be.

So when President-elect Donald Trump says anything remotely akin to “conflict of interest,” understand that he’s talking about legalities not ethics, semantics not morality, appearances not realities.

He doesn’t seem to understand that ethics isn’t something you have; it’s something you do.

And the only ethical thing for Trump to do before taking office is to totally divest himself of his global businesses and put the proceeds into a true blind trust.

The value of that trust would immediately swell, because capital gains he realizes from selling his businesses would be exempt from taxes under a law passed to encourage financially successful people to enter government service. The provision is necessary so they can avoid the reality or the appearance of acting out of financial self-interest instead of the good of the country.

Trump’s Cabinet appointees are required by law to divest, but as Trump keeps reminding us, presidents aren’t. Thus, he will start his administration breaking a custom adhered to by all but three presidents since World War II.

It has always been clear that Trump doesn’t mind breaking the china – in fact, he seems to relish it. But Americans have a right to expect a full-time president whose every action and word, every ounce of energy and waking moment, are focused on doing what he thinks is best for the country.

Those obligations cannot be waived simply because Trump divesting from his companies all around the globe would be complex, inconvenient and, perhaps, costly.

Last week, Trump canceled an announcement, scheduled for Thursday, of how he would withdraw from leadership of the companies, leaving them in his children’s hands.

That would not be even close to divestment; it would be simply a leave of absence. So long as he or his immediate family members retain any financial interest in the companies, and the companies might benefit from government action or non-public information, he’s not only ethically and morally in the wrong, he’s also on shaky constitutional ground.

Trump has said, and we’re sure to hear it often, that the American people knew throughout the campaign (because he kept reminding us) that he was very rich and had companies all around the world, “and they voted for me anyhow.”

Actually, most voters didn’t choose him, and most of those who did likely assumed he would abide by basic ethical standards. But he won the presidency – and the moral obligations that come with it. Unless he truly divests, the minute he is sworn in he arguably will be in violation of the Constitution’s ban against presidents receiving money or anything of value from foreign governments or state-owned entities.

For instance, when Trump’s grandiose Pennsylvania Avenue hotel opened this year in Washington, D.C., multiple foreign governments rushed to book rooms and plan special events, immediately improving the hotel’s (and the Trump family’s) bottom line.

And the details of most of his ventures are not known, so if he digs in against true divestiture, “from Day One” as election winners are fond of saying, he and every American will be living in a constant storm of legal and ethical controversy and in the shadow of potential scandal and possible impeachment.

That’s no way to start making “America great again.”

This story was originally published December 20, 2016 at 5:01 AM with the headline "Anything but divestiture poses threat."