PAY DIRT

What Trump-Era Cronyism Is, and What It Isn’t

Let’s examine in more detail Matt Schlapp’s response to The Daily Beast story about an obscure piece of legislation recognizing a Massachusetts Indian tribe.

Welcome to Pay Dirt—exclusive reporting and research from The Daily Beast’s Lachlan Markay on corruption, campaign finance, and influence-peddling in the nation’s capital. For Beast Inside members only.

My Daily Beast colleague Jackie Kucinich and I published a story Wednesday on a fairly egregious bit of Trumpian cronyism, and its main antagonist’s response to the story merits examination for the things it can tell us about influence-peddling in the Trump era.

Our story looked at Trump’s tweeted opposition to an obscure piece of legislation granting federal recognition to the Mashpee Wampanoag Native American tribe in Massachusetts. House Democrats had brought the bill to the floor under a procedure reserved for uncontroversial pieces of legislation expected to pass without significant opposition. Trump’s tweet derailed the whole thing, and Democrats were forced to pull the bill before the vote, anticipating significant Republican resistance.

So why did Trump weigh in on this seemingly uncontroversial, obscure piece of legislation? Well, as we reported, one of his top advisers, Matt Schlapp, is a lobbyist whose clients include a Rhode Island gaming company that would compete with the Mashpee Wampanoags’ planned casino, and has vehemently opposed the legislation for that reason.

After we published our story, Schlapp, the husband of White House strategic communications director Mercedes Schlapp, tweeted a statement on the resulting controversy. We think it’s worth examining that statement in more detail.

“The attempt to circumvent the established legal process to create a new Indian casino in Massachusetts is a terrible idea and proper legal protocols must be followed. That is why I am pleased to devout time and effort to stopping this casino,” Schlapp wrote. “My wife and I follow the law, and she had no role in my advocacy. The implication that this president marches to the beat of any drum other than his own is an absurd assertion.”

First of all, the “established legal process” here is the process created by the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. In other words, it’s a process created by Congress, and therefore one that Congress can modify at any point. Doing so isn’t circumventing anything; it’s simply basic legislative prerogative.

As for Mercedes Schlapp, we have no evidence that she was involved in promoting her husband’s client at the White House. We do know that Matt Schlapp never reported lobbying the White House on behalf of any client of his firm, Cove Strategies, until Trump hired his wife. We also know that he did lobby the White House on behalf of Twin River Management, the client that opposes Mashpee Wampanoag recognition.

Finally, Schlapp’s suggestion that Trump simply can’t be influenced by third parties—and that it’s “absurd” to suggest he can—is laughable on its face. If that were true, Schlapp’s firm wouldn’t be seeing the boom in business that it is.

He is correct that Trump makes decisions based entirely on his own whims and impulses. But that is why the lobbying services of those close to him are so valuable. The Matt Schlapps of the world know how Trump ticks, and their business model is premised on exploiting that on behalf of their clients.

In the case of the Mashpee Wampanoag, it likely was not a coincidence that both Schlapp and Trump—in tweets barely an hour apart—invoked Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) in opposing the legislation.

The president does indeed march to the beat of his own drum. And those who understand that beat, can tailor their advocacy to it, and have the presidential access to put that personalized advocacy in action are very valuable to special interests in the Trump era. Yesterday’s events show exactly why.

See more of our coverage in your search results.

ADD THE DAILY BEAST ON GOOGLE

Lachlan MarkayReporter

Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast here.