Donald Trump's claim that he was "attacked more than anybody in the history of our country" and that "the great Al Capone was attacked only a small fraction of what I was attacked" is highly subjective and not factually accurate.
In the annals of American history, few figures are as synonymous with crime and corruption as Al Capone. The notorious gangster, who ruled Chicago’s underworld during the Prohibition era, built an empire on violence, intimidation, and illegal activities.
But what if Capone had moved from the world of organized crime to the Oval Office? How would his leadership style compare to that of Donald Trump, the 45th and foolishly re-elected as 47th president of the United States, whose tenure has been repeatedly marked by chaos, controversy, legal battles, and a distinctively authoritarian (if not criminal) approach to politics?
Al Capone: From Criminal Empire to the White House?
Al Capone, known for his ruthless control over Chicago’s criminal underworld, was far more focused on maintaining power through illegal means than pursuing political office. His crimes, including bootlegging, gambling, and violent intimidation, made him a household name in the 1920s. But if Capone had risen to the presidency, would he have adjusted his methods to fit the role, or would his criminal tendencies have persisted?
Given Capone’s ability to navigate corrupt systems and exert influence over local political figures, there’s a possibility he might have moderated his tactics once in power. His ability to leverage his wealth and influence within the criminal world was impressive, but the presidency would require more than just brute force and bribery. In all likelihood, Capone would have had to adjust his operations to avoid direct criminal involvement in his presidential actions. He may have played a more subtle hand, using under-the-table deals to maintain control without the need for open violence or criminal enterprises.
While we’ll never know for sure, Capone's presidency could have been a dark but restrained version of leadership — at least in comparison to his violent reign over Chicago. He would likely have utilized his understanding of corruption to play the system without relying on overt violence, aligning more with backroom deals and manipulation.
Donald Trump: A Presidency Defined by Division and Controversy
Donald Trump’s presidency, on the other hand, is known for its bold, public approach to leadership — often defined by inflammatory rhetoric, divisive policies, and legal and ethical controversies. Unlike Capone, who kept his criminal actions largely hidden from the public eye, Trump’s actions were frequently front-page news. His presidency was marked by inflammatory statements, aggressive actions against perceived enemies, and frequent clashes with the media, the judiciary, and political opponents.
A key comparison between Trump and Capone lies in their use of intimidation. Trump has been criticized for fostering a climate of division, particularly through his rhetoric. From accusing the media of "fake news" to using social media as a tool to attack critics, Trump relied heavily on psychological manipulation and the cultivation of fear — both of which are tactics Capone mastered in his own criminal network. Trump’s supporters, many of whom echoed his hostile sentiments, even engaged in violent actions, most infamously on January 6, 2021, when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol, an event that many critics argue Trump helped incite.
While Capone might have been a more covert figure in politics, Trump’s approach was front and center, often invoking legal and ethical questions. The Capitol insurrection and subsequent legal issues surrounding Trump’s presidency, including multiple lawsuits and investigations, mirror the chaos and lawlessness Capone embodied in his crime syndicate. Unlike Capone, who might have been constrained by the legal framework of the presidency, Trump seemed to thrive in the chaos, pushing boundaries that sometimes appeared designed to challenge the very systems that held him accountable.
Capone’s Relations with Foreign Powers vs. Trump’s Ties to Russia
One area where Capone and Trump differ markedly is in their interactions with foreign powers. Capone was a domestic figure, focused on local influence and illegal enterprises. He didn’t concern himself with international politics, let alone forge relationships with foreign leaders. His criminal dealings were confined to American shores, and while he might have used international connections in his bootlegging trade, he was primarily concerned with keeping power within the United States.
Trump, however, cultivated controversial relationships with foreign leaders, most notably Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump’s interactions with Putin were often seen as too friendly or even compromising, leading to widespread speculation about whether Trump’s policies were influenced by his admiration for the Russian leader. This contrast between Capone’s narrow focus on domestic criminal enterprise and Trump’s broader international political engagements highlights a key difference in how the two would have conducted foreign policy as president.
The Legacy of Trump’s Leadership and Its Parallels to Capone
In evaluating whether Capone would have made a better president than Trump, we must consider what type of leadership we are comparing. Capone’s leadership was grounded in manipulation and violence, but once in a position of formal authority, he might have recognized the necessity of tempering his methods to fit the role. Trump’s leadership, on the other hand, was defined by a tendency to amplify his controversial and divisive tactics. Where Capone might have toned down his criminal activities in a bid for legitimacy, Trump enhanced his combative and polarizing approach, frequently pushing the limits of the law and political norms.
While it’s difficult to definitively answer which would have been “better,” Capone’s reign might have been quieter, more calculated, and less publicly chaotic, whereas Trump’s presidency left a lasting mark on American democracy, for better or worse, with his brand of unapologetic bravado.
Conclusion: A Study in Power and Influence
In the end, both Al Capone and Donald Trump represent the complex nature of power and influence in America. While Capone’s rise to power was through illegal and violent means, Trump’s presidency was defined by a different type of intimidation, grounded in politics, media, and law. Would Capone have been more restrained in office? Perhaps, but the fact remains that both figures used their influence to manipulate, divide, and control — each in their own way.
Ultimately, the comparison between Capone and Trump reminds us that the ways power is wielded — whether through crime, politics, or both — can leave a deep and lasting impact on the nation.
Compiled with aid of ChatGPT
