The Trump administration continues to advocate for Tesla without restraint.
In a twist of events, the White House seems to be adopting a blend of carrots and sticks in an attempt to win Americans over to Tesla. Purchase the car and the stock, officials suggest, and those caught damaging charging stations might find themselves labeled as "terrorist thugs," according to President Donald Trump's recent statements.
This unusual affection for Tesla from the administration is just one of numerous instances that have ethics experts scratching their heads. Hui Chen, an anti-corruption expert and former federal prosecutor, explains, "This endorsement of a domestic brand in a competitive market is unconventional, to say the least."
Trump's comments, made on Friday, portrayed acts of vandalism against Tesla showrooms and vehicles as more concerning than the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. He implied that such vandals were terrorists, stating, "When I looked at those showrooms burning and those cars... exploding all over the place, these are terrorists."
However, it's crucial to note that vandalism isn't generally considered an act of terrorism, despite the dramatic stretch of the word's meaning. Vandalism is indeed a crime; however, as Chen points out, labeling vandalism against Tesla in this specific context as an act of terrorism is misguided at best.
The administration's consistent message: Tesla is special and deserves special treatment. However, any gains for Tesla's business would directly benefit CEO Elon Musk, who also happens to oversee an unofficial department aiming to slash federal services and employment rolls.
Last week, Trump staged a live Tesla ad on the White House's South Lawn, subsequently offering Tesla shares a sharp but short-lived boost. While it's common for the US government to support domestic industries, they rarely single out one business as consistently as they have with Tesla, an American company with numerous domestic competitors.
The Tesla propaganda reached a boiling point on Wednesday when, as Tesla's stock plunged, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick went on Fox News to urge viewers to buy Tesla's "cheap" stock. This incidence appears to violate government ethics rules and possibly offer misleading investment advice, with Tesla shares still trading at 60 times its projected 2026 earnings, according to Fortune.
Lutnick's Tesla comments didn't yield the desired results, as Tesla's stock fell 1.7% in premarket trading following his appearance. Critics argue that this seems more like the White House attempting to help one of its senior members rather than an honest endorsement.
When reached for comment, the White House, Commerce Department, and Tesla did not immediately respond.
What's troubling:- Public officials using their positions to endorse specific products or services for personal or financial gain.- The pattern of conflicts within the Trump administration, with instances of promoting companies like Tesla and Starlink Internet.- The potential for government officials' endorsements to lend credibility and influence public perception, creating an unfair advantage for those companies.- The financial benefits that could arise from promoting specific companies, potentially leading to conflicts between public service and personal interest.- The involvement of private leaders like Elon Musk in White House events, which could create opportunities for private influence.
[1] U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE). (n.d.). Standards of Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.oge.gov/web/oge.nsf/oig/standards%20of%20ethical%20conduct[2] Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). (2021). Watchdog group sues Trump administration for Tesla bailout info. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.crew.org/2021/07/watchdog-group-sues-trump-administration-for-tesla-bailout-info/[3] Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). (2021). Tesla shocks who's who of the military-industrial complex. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.crew.org/2021/03/tesla-shocks-whos-who-of-the-military-industrial-complex/
- The unusual endorsement of Tesla by the White House, as seen in Trump's statements and Howard Lutnick's appearance on Fox News, raises questions about potential conflicts of interest, given that any gains for Tesla's business would directly benefit CEO Elon Musk.
- The White House's consistent message backing Tesla, including public statements and staged ads, might be in violation of government ethics rules, as it appears to offer misleading investment advice and lend credibility to the company, creating an unfair advantage.
- Critics suggest that the White House's support for Tesla may not be an honest endorsement but rather an attempt to help one of its senior members, possibly Musk, leading to conflicts between public service and personal interest, as seen in the pattern of promoting companies like Tesla and Starlink Internet.
