Will Trump Pay a Political Price Now that He Has the Finances of a Guy in a Mob Movie Who Gets Whacked By Loan Sharks?

No, he won't. But why?

In 2016, Trump made at least one argument that was not total bullshit: His wealth made him less beholden to donors than other candidates. The idea that his opponents were, in his words, “totally controlled by special interests, lobbyists, and donors” was a key part of his populist pitch. Trump articulated this theory in his version of the Gettysburg Address: The timeless “bing bing bang bang booong” speech:

This argument kept the phrase “populist mogul” from being an oxymoron: Maybe the only way to be uncorrupted by the system was to be above it. Money matters in politics — being a politician is like being a Girl Scout in that your first, second, and third job is Fundraising Stooge. Trump argued that he could skip the money-grubbing and self-fund his campaign. And even though he ended up pulling a classic Trump bait-and-switch (84 percent of his 2016 funds came from donors — he is such a scamp!!!), his argument certainly felt true at the time.

Today, Trump is desperate for money. He just paid $91.6 million to E. Jean Carroll, owes New York another $454 million, and has unknown legal fees from his many trials. There’s a stock character in mob movies who get in a money hole, starts making desperation moves, and ends up getting whacked. Trump is now basically that guy. And soon, he could literally be that guy, because he’s having trouble getting loans from normal sources.