But Trump also took care to let voters know that, as far as he was concerned, electric vehicles belong on the GOP’s party’s list of villains, too.....

That, of course, was before the election. Now that the president is in the White House, however, he claims he’s going to purchase an electric vehicle for himself. CNBC reported:

President Donald Trump shared his intent to purchase a Tesla on Tuesday to support Elon Musk as the electric vehicle maker’s sales and share price face pressure from the CEO’s foray into global politics, most notably as head of Trump’s cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency.

In an online item published shortly after midnight, the president claimed that “Radical Left Lunatics” are “trying to illegally and collusively boycott Tesla.” Trump added, “I’m going to buy a brand new Tesla tomorrow morning as a show of confidence and support for Elon Musk, a truly great American. Why should he be punished for putting his tremendous skills to work in order to help MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN???”

At this point, we could talk at some length about the fact that it’s not “illegal” for consumers to boycott a company — a fact Trump ought to know, given that he’s launched a wide variety of boycotts. We could also talk about the degree to which Elon Musk’s “skills” are anything but “tremendous.”...

Imagine a scenario in which a hyper-wealthy campaign donor helps put a politician in the White House. Soon after, the politician rewards his benefactor with unprecedented governmental power and authority, seemingly indifferent to the megadonor’s expansive conflicts of interests.

Then imagine these circumstances help spark a public backlash against one of the donor’s businesses, which contributes to a sharp decline in the value of the company’s stock.

At that point in our little hypothetical, the beneficiary of the hyper-wealthy campaign donor’s generosity decides to use the power of his unique position to issue a testimonial of sorts to publicly endorse the contributor’s business.

Under normal circumstances, such a scenario would be described — at a minimum — as an ethics nightmare, if not outright corruption. And yet, here we are.