By Gareth Vaughan
Under the leadership of President Donald Trump there's a danger the United States will become an autocratic nation, not unlike China, Saudi Arabia or Russia, and New Zealand should strive to avoid becoming the focus of Trump's wrath, suggests David Cay Johnston.
Johnston, a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist, co-founder of DCReport and journalism professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, spoke to interest.co.nz in a new episode of the Of Interest podcast.
Johnston first met Trump in Atlantic City in 1988, and has probed and written about the affairs of Trump for decades.
Domestically he says Trump's under pressure from his MAGA (make America great again) base with the economy not doing well, and over the Epstein files and the US attack on Iran. With the US mid-term elections looming in November, Johnston says checks and balances via the likes of Congress, the courts and the Constitution supposed to limit the President's power, are failing.
"The checks and balances system isn't working, plain and simple. He thinks he's the world's dictator. He hasn't consolidated his power even in the US, but that's his goal, totally consolidate his power. To be totally unaccountable, unfortunately," Johnston says.
But he says Trump's presidency could effectively be over if he loses control of the House and Senate in the mid-term elections, which is "weighing on his mind." Against this backdrop Johnston says voter intimidation and suppression is underway.
Asked how the Trump era may end, Johnston says he fears for US democracy.
"At the moment, the United States is a dictatorship. It is not fully consolidated, but it is a dictatorship. Whether we restore our democracy is not clear at this point. We may cease to be a democracy."
Johnston says opposition has emerged through the No Kings demonstrations, which he'll be watching closely over the coming US summer. These protests come against the backdrop of danger the US becomes "a huge autocratic nation, not unlike Xi's China, MBS's [Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud's] Saudi Arabia, [and] Putin's Russia."
"And that would be a terrible thing for the whole world."
For NZ, as a small, trading nation, Johnston suggests at this stage we ought to keep our heads down.
"The key objective is to not become the focus of Donald's wrath because he could say, 'well, I'm going to prevent anyone from moving to New Zealand or coming from New Zealand. I'm going to ban Air New Zealand. He could do all sorts of things to make trouble. So my fundamental advice would be just try to stay off his radar, go on living your lives."
In the podcast audio Johnston talks in more detail about why he believes Trump's tariffs are illegal, the US war with Iran, attack on Venezuela and other countries Trump could target, Trump and the Epstein files, the US economy, who Trump listens to and who influences him, the mid-term and primary elections and more.
Johnston previously spoke to interest.co.nz about Trump in 2016 and in 2018.
*You can find all previous episodes of the Of Interest podcast here.
21 Comments
All great stuff.
But remember, Trump (in the position he is in) is a symptom, not a cause.
He cannot assuage that angst, nor can anyone operating within the System, relieve the pressure.
He might be a symptom but ultimately not one to be ignored due to his various proclivities.
If I were having a bob each way I'd say America will end up in an official war status and he'll try to cement himself as leader for life.
Yes, the Trump regime is already looking at ways to game the mid terms, so there's going to be turmoil in the land of the free soon. If he succeeds, that's the end of democracy in the US. They gave it away so easily, and to such a tacky con man?
Guess that's what happens when greed is worshipped? Something the NZ political right has been trying to socially engineer into NZers the last couple of decades. Long live tall poppy syndrome!
When I worry about Trump's increasing attempts to steal elections, I take a look at Polymarket and see that the Republican's odds of winning the midterms and 2028 election just keep dropping. The wisdom of crowds thinks his efforts will fail.
We are only one declared emergency from never seeing another competitive election in the US. I can see Iranian terrorists roaming the streets before election time, they may plant the odd bomb at stragegic locations? Think Putins 1999 Russian apartment bombings? You are mistaken imagining there are rules applying here. There aren't!
Oh yes there's definitely a risk. But watching the odds, that risk seems to be slowly reducing, perhaps as they run out of time for slower tactics like redistricting and voter suppression laws.
On the apartment bombings, I can recommend the recent BBC podcast The History Bureau who did a series about them. Very interesting.
The advice is logical. The smaller the profile the smaller the target. It is an entirely unappetising scenario but it nonetheless, is the reality. America has allowed the ambitions and avarice of its political parties and their associates to overcome natural justice and threaten the wellbeing of the people themselves. Therefore it is almost impossible to see redress or reinstatement of traditional values to be forthcoming from any government. The whole damn shooting box is too big and out of control now.
"It is almost impossible to see redress or reinstatement of traditional values to be forthcoming from any government"
Traditional values? This is what MAGA wanted from Trump. He gave them overturn of Roe v Wade, he gave them bibles in schools, he removed uncertainty about who could use what toilet, he gave them armed militia in the streets, he deported anyone with darkish looking skin, and they were ecstatic.
He sold signed copies of the God Bless the USA Bible, for a bargin basement price of only US$1000. His version of the bible even included the US constitution, words as irrelevant to Trump as the rest of the tome. 47 is an Apostle of God himself........apparently?
MAGA are happy to trade democracy for "traditional values", as long as these guardians of christian virtue wave bibles around. These guardians can raid US wealth, they can raid other countries wealth, they can corrupt everything they touch, they can kill and maim in the name of self entitlement, they can even wreck the habitability of the planet for a dollar.
I'm sure there are members of our own coalition government that would happliy trade our freedoms for MAGA "values"! I don't see them having relationship issues with Trump. We've promised to mine ourselves, we've promised LNG markets, Luxon has Donald on speed dial. As long as we are contributing to the Trump dynasty wealth fund, Donald will love us!
That is you interpretation of traditional values, and basing it too, on Trump’s platform. I had in mind going back much further and at a much more modest level of the American society. For instance Kennedy’s presidency and his “ask not what” speech. Yes, yes I know his old man was a bootlegger, corrupt and bought the election but nevertheless the message was a good message and reflective of a time of far greater political and personal values than what’s on offer today. To qualify my opinion I can only offer that when we lived there just over twenty years ago, in a blue collar semi rural township, there still existed much representation of that quality, we found the people to be delightful to be amongst. A patient, tolerant and polite community. We had experiences with our neighbours fitting for a Christmas winter scene on the cover of the old Saturday Evening Post. The friendships we made are everlasting but on our return visits we have noted that that environment is steadily reducing. I hope that explains better, what I was alluding to in terms of the traditional lifestyle of the unassuming American family.
I tend to agree that for a country like NZ avoidance is the best approach. China might be calculating differently though.
I really recommend this podcast/interview on dealing with HCPs (high conflict personalities). Trump is clearly an extreme case, but it will ring true when thinking about work colleagues etc. They basically conclude the same, as unfair as it is, that avoidance of becoming a 'person of blame' is usually the best approach
Xi is highly underrated by the West. My own reckons on that is we believe that we are culturally superior and smarter than China therefore don't take China seriously enough - which is deluded and wrong-headed.
And let's be realistic. Most Aotearoans don't give a rats about China, except for the opportunity to sell them something at a profit to support our own lifestyles. Culturally, we're far more like the U.S., whether we like the fact or not.
We can't say much either way about Xi's abilities, because they haven't really been tested thus far. Although we can ascertain there are problems regarding the filter an autocrat has in terms of dismissing advice which doesn't sit comfortable with them. And rolling purges of military heirarchy.
Most Aotearoans don't give a rats about China
Again, you seem to be ignorant of most people, everywhere. If I were going to have a wager, I'd say the average Kiwi is more attuned to other cultures and nations than most global citizens. Not by any active choice, but by our relatively minnow nature and higher degree of multiculturalism than most.
One thing you have to also remember is the Chinese government is really only there for Han Chinese. And we can see this by their tendency to annex regions, kill off their populations and replace them with Hans.
We can't say much either way about Xi's abilities, because they haven't really been tested thus far. Although we can ascertain there are problems regarding the filter an autocrat has in terms of dismissing advice which doesn't sit comfortable with them. And rolling purges of military heirarchy.
You can't say much P because you don't really know. Therefore, look at what you do know: Aotearoa relies on China as an export market. And that is related to China's economic growth since Xi took office in 2012. China wears the pants in the relationship. Not Aotearoa.
I'd say the average Kiwi is more attuned to other cultures and nations than most global citizens
Being able to work your way around a Thai menu doesn't make you cosmopolitan P. At least, alongside Aussie, we've evolved somewhat from the white trash of Asia as coined by Singapore’s founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.
You can't say much P because you don't really know
I can make a fairly sound educated guess based on what we know about autocrats in general, the operations of the CCP, and the actions of Xi.
Therefore, look at what you do know: Aotearoa relies on China as an export market. And that is related to China's economic growth since Xi took office in 2012. China wears the pants in the relationship. Not Aotearoa.
You'd expect so, they're a much bigger country.
But it also blows holes in the mythos of a Chinese long game. They only found that success after exhausting their own indigenous way of state craft, and adopting the same industrial economy that everyone else moved to years earlier. Their long game has been terrible for centuries.
You've mentioned being a fan of the Socratic method but your approach and rationale is the exact opposite.
OK. You could say that China has achieved more in recent modern history than the U.S. and the Anglosphere. And a few examples stand out to me. An infrastructure surplus - something that the U.S. or any of the Anglosphere nations cannot claim to have achieved. For ex, over the past 20 years, China has added on the order of 80,000–90,000 km of national railway, including about 40,000–50,000 km of high‑speed rail. Compare that to the U.S., which has added essentially no net rail mileage and total route‑km have been flat to slightly declining.
You could say that China has achieved more in recent modern history than the U.S. and the Anglosphere
Yes, that is because up until 40+ years ago they were barely industrialized.
The English developed this model and then it's rolled across the world for 150 years. The later you adopt, the shinier your toys are. So for instance:
An infrastructure surplus
When America rolled out rail in the 1800s, they also had an "infrastructure surplus". Although you could also call that "over investment", because they built too much and many of their rail firms went under.
So the 2026 equivalent is China building too much high speed rail that can't pay for itself. They have repeated the same mistake.
Most of your arguments seem to live in a very small vacuum of time and understanding. While ironically trying to claim its everyone else in the dark.
So essentially you believe infrastructure deficits are better than surpluses? Why? Infrastructure surpluses are seen as desirable across East Asia as they're seen as necessary to socio-economic development. Infrastructure is seen as a strategic input like steel or human capital, not just a technical service, so temporary under‑utilisation is tolerated as an investment in future competitiveness. Even institutions such as ADB, ERIA, World Bank and govts argue that infrastructure deficits are a binding constraint on sustaining growth, so large upfront public investment is warranted even if it creates localised surpluses.
So essentially you believe infrastructure deficits are better than surpluses?
You sorta totally missed my point. China today is similar to England or the US 150 years ago. But you usually only do your mass industrialisation and build out once.
So China got to supplant Japan, who did their big development post WW2. Or the likes of Vietnam overshadowing Thailand, because again, there's about a 30 year difference in development schedule.
But going back to infrastructure "surpluses". You want an adequate amount of infrastructure with the ability to scale it if need be. If you overbuild, it's actually a liability, unless you're going to have population increasing over time - is that the case for China?
Infrastructure surpluses are good for h'holds and society. Without a doubt.
That's not a truism at all. It totally depends what you are using it for.
I have seen many 8 lane highways, airports and other pieces of infrastructure built with little or no patronage, and none in the foreseeable future. That's a surplus, and also a liability. Someone has to pay for the construction and maintenance of something that is receiving very little utility.
Johnston's Trump-focused books and commentary are adversarial rather than detached. He should realize that as a journo, his emotive language leads people to question his bias, even if his claims and might be factual and his allegations well founded. Using the word 'dictator' repeatedly doesn't convince me that Trump is actually a dictator.
People will say Johnston's credibility and reputation are supported by his time at NYT and decorations like the Pulitzer Prize. Important to remember how the Seymour Hersh faced significant criticism from the woke for his work on Nord Stream. And it's obvious why: people didn't like the narrative.
Amongst all the moral outrage about him, how is it possible that the US political establishment is seen as less attractive than Trump by enough voters to turn him into president?
That one gives me real pause, and makes me wonder who is going to show up here, given the diminishing levels of trust in mainstream parties and government in general.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.