Trump’s next two years could be a very uncomfortable ride

Democrats have reclaimed control of both chambers of Congress. Now comes the part Donald Trump might find considerably worse: accountability.

Donald Trump has spent much of his second presidency behaving as though congressional oversight were an inconvenience, the law an optional consideration and public accountability something reserved for his political opponents.

That arrangement is about to change.

The 2026 midterm elections delivered a resounding victory for the Democrats, who have secured control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. It is a significant political repudiation of the Trump administration and, perhaps more importantly, a warning that American voters are becoming increasingly uncomfortable with what is happening in their country.

For Trump, the consequences could be considerable.

For the first time during his second presidency, he will face a Congress capable of mounting serious investigations into his administration, his business interests, his associates and the decisions made by those occupying positions of public trust.

And Democrats aren’t short of questions.

Follow the money

One of the most significant areas of investigation will concern the financial interests of the Trump family.

Democratic lawmakers intend to scrutinise overseas business ventures involving Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, foreign investment relationships, cryptocurrency initiatives and the financial dealings surrounding Truth Social.

The question is relatively straightforward: have the financial interests of the Trump family benefited from the presidency, and have foreign governments or private interests found ways to gain influence through those business relationships?

There is nothing inherently wrong with a family operating legitimate businesses. However, when a family member occupies the most powerful political office in the world, the potential conflicts of interest demand considerably more scrutiny.

The American presidency should not be regarded as a family business opportunity.

The influence of corporate money

Another important area concerns the relationship between corporate donations, gifts and government decisions.

Democrats want to examine whether major corporations and wealthy individuals have received favourable treatment following financial contributions, gifts or other forms of political support.

That includes regulatory decisions, government contracts and defence procurement.

If companies have been able to purchase influence, or if government decisions have been made to reward political benefactors, Americans deserve to know.

Public office is supposed to serve the public interest. It is not supposed to operate as a loyalty rewards program for wealthy donors.

Were presidential pardons for sale?

Perhaps one of the more explosive investigations concerns the presidential pardon system.

Congressional investigators intend to examine allegations surrounding intermediaries, lobbyists and individuals who may have attempted to profit from access to presidential clemency.

The power to grant pardons is an extraordinary constitutional privilege. It exists to provide mercy and correct injustices, not to create another opportunity for political or financial favouritism.

If people have been exploiting access to the president, or offering influence over clemency decisions in exchange for money, the American public deserves a full accounting.

A presidential pardon should not become another commodity available to those with sufficiently deep pockets.

Tariffs, exemptions and political favours

Trump has repeatedly presented tariffs as an instrument of economic strength, arguing that they protect American industries and generate revenue.

But who benefits when exemptions are granted?

Democrats intend to scrutinise company-specific tariff exemptions, refunds and other trade concessions to determine whether particular businesses have received preferential treatment.

If an administration imposes tariffs on the grounds of protecting American workers, but subsequently provides exemptions to favoured companies, questions about transparency and consistency are entirely reasonable.

And if those exemptions were influenced by political connections, the questions become considerably more serious.

The Epstein files and the Department of Justice

Then there is Jeffrey Epstein.

The handling of Epstein-related records, the Department of Justice’s decisions, the treatment of financial institutions and the extent of information withheld from the public are all likely to attract renewed congressional attention.

Democrats, including incoming Judiciary Committee chair contender Jamie Raskin, intend to examine the administration’s handling of the files and related investigations.

There are also questions about possible connections between Epstein and foreign interests, as well as the treatment of Ghislaine Maxwell.

The public has a legitimate interest in knowing whether powerful individuals received preferential treatment, whether investigations were properly conducted and whether information has been withheld for reasons unrelated to legitimate legal or privacy concerns.

Nobody should be above scrutiny simply because they have powerful friends.

The cost of living cannot be ignored

But there is another issue Democrats cannot afford to overlook.

Americans are struggling with the cost of living, and an investigation into political corruption will mean very little to families who cannot afford their rent, healthcare, electricity or groceries.

Democrats have indicated that they intend to examine corporate practices and market consolidation across industries including energy, healthcare, housing and technology.

They will need to demonstrate that their return to power means more than exposing the conduct of the Trump administration.

Voters want accountability, certainly. But they also want practical improvements to their lives.

And Democrats will be judged on both.

A warning from history

There is, however, an important distinction between investigating alleged wrongdoing and establishing that wrongdoing has occurred.

Democrats will need evidence, not simply accusations. They will need to conduct investigations properly, respect due process and resist the temptation to turn every hearing into a political performance.

Trump will undoubtedly accuse them of conducting a political witch hunt. Indeed, the White House has already made clear that it regards Democratic investigations as a threat to the Trump administration.

But congressional oversight is not an act of political revenge. It is one of the fundamental responsibilities of a functioning democracy.

The incoming Democratic leadership, including Robert Garcia as the likely chair of House Oversight and Jamie Raskin as the likely chair of House Judiciary, will have considerable responsibilities.

They must demonstrate that the rules apply to everybody, including presidents, their families, political donors and corporate beneficiaries.

And they must remember that the American people did not simply vote for a change of parliamentary arithmetic. They voted for a change in direction.

The honeymoon is over

Trump still has the presidential veto, executive authority and two years remaining in office. Democrats will not have the numbers to override a presidential veto on their own, nor can they simply remove him from office through congressional investigations.

But they now possess something considerably more powerful than the ability to complain from the opposition benches.

They have the authority to investigate.

They can summon witnesses, demand documents, expose inconsistencies and require government officials to answer questions under oath.

For an administration accustomed to having considerable freedom of movement, that represents a substantial change.

The next two years could be dominated by congressional hearings, subpoenas and revelations about the conduct of the Trump administration.

Whether those investigations uncover criminal conduct, ethical failures or simply a catalogue of questionable decisions remains to be seen.

But one thing is certain: the president will no longer have the luxury of assuming that Congress will look the other way.

Donald Trump wanted to make America great again.

Perhaps the incoming Congress will begin by making accountability great again.