What Trump Officials Mean by “Never”

Attorney General Todd Blanche has firmly stated that he will not act independently of President Trump's wishes. When NBC's Kristen Welker inquired if he would comply with an order he believed to be unethical or illegal, Blanche confidently asserted, "The president will never ask me to do something unethical or illegal. He never has.

He never will." This phrase, "never has, never will," has emerged as a new rallying cry for the administration. In a recent statement, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly denied any engagement in conflicts of interest, asserting that "Neither the President nor his family has ever engaged—or will ever engage—in conflicts of interest."

Moreover, ProPublica's December report, which alleged that Trump had utilized the same mortgage-application fraud against political targets that he deems punishable by imprisonment, resulted in a spokesperson's declaration that "President Trump has never, or will ever, break the law." This stance is rooted in Trump's disregard for legal or normative boundaries in his abuse of power.

In certain instances, this unequivocal statement of never doing something illicit could be considered unremarkable or even reassuring. However, when the alleged misconduct is something that has consistently occurred, it takes on a different and more concerning tone. The administration's repeated usage of "never" can be likened to a company accountant publicly swearing that they would never use company funds for personal reasons, even though such behavior is commonplace.

The administration's use of "never" when applied to Trump's actions is particularly misleading. They know that pressuring government officials into taking action that goes against ethical and legal norms is something Trump would do, as demonstrated by his attempt to pressure Attorney General Pam Bondi last year. Furthermore, Trump's history of conflicts of interest is extensive, ranging from his early lawbreaking activities to his conviction for falsifying business records.

Despite these transgressions, the administration maintains that all of his actions are outside the realm of reasonable scrutiny. This brazen defense allows them to evade specific arguments and broadly declare the legitimacy of all their actions. This approach is a stark departure from previous administrations, where officials would either follow established norms or attempt to limit their actions' impact on the legal process.

In contrast, this administration embraces Trump's disregard for ethical and legal constraints, effectively framing his wrongful conduct as valid and justified.