Tag: Trump

  • The No Impulse Control Doctrine

    So now we’re pretending that Trump has a worked-out policy or plan or organizing principle or something, and that the word for it is “flexibility.”

    As he confronted a series of international challenges from the Middle East to Asia last week, President Trump made certain that nothing was certain about his foreign policy. To the extent that a Trump Doctrine is emerging, it seems to be this: don’t get roped in by doctrine.

    Please. Laziness isn’t a “doctrine.” Empty-headedness isn’t a doctrine. Toddler-level impulsiveness isn’t a doctrine. Being totally random isn’t a doctrine. Breaking all the rules and stamping all over the porcelain isn’t a doctrine.

    “Our decisions,” Mr. Trump said in the Saturday address, “will be guided by our values and our goals — and we will reject the path of inflexible ideology that too often leads to unintended consequences.”

    That concept, flexibility, seems key to understanding Mr. Trump. He hates to be boxed in, as he mused in the Rose Garden last week while contemplating the first new military operation of his presidency with geopolitical consequences.

    “I like to think of myself as a very flexible person,” he told reporters. “I don’t have to have one specific way.” He made clear he cherished unpredictability. “I don’t like to say where I’m going and what I’m doing,” he said.

    He’s not making a serious argument there. He’s explaining how awesome he is. What he means by not having to have “one specific way” (such an elegant way to put it) is that he doesn’t want to do the work of figuring out what he thinks and what that tells him he should do. It’s so much easier to just do what you feel like in the moment and then praise yourself to an admiring world for being so “flexible.”

    That flexibility was a hallmark of his rise in real estate, and if critics preferred the word erratic, it did not bother Mr. Trump — it has since worked well enough to vault him to the White House. But now that he is commander in chief of the world’s most powerful nation, leaders around the world are trying to detect a method to the man.

    Well quite. He’s erratic, which is to say random. That’s because he’s lazy, ignorant, and thick. That’s all. Let’s don’t complicate it or big it up with talk of doctrine.

    “There is no emerging doctrine for Trump foreign policy in a classical sense,” said Kathleen H. Hicks, a former Pentagon official who is now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “There are, however, clear emerging characteristics consistent with the attributes of the man himself: unpredictable, instinctual and undisciplined.”

    There you go. That’s what I’m saying.

  • Acting impulsively

    The Times starts with the obvious: the photos were horrifying, with all that follows from that. Then it moves to the still obvious but all the more alarming.

    This time, though, a new American president was seeing the pictures and absorbing the horror.

    Donald J. Trump has always taken pride in his readiness to act on instinct, whether in real estate or reality television. On Thursday, an emotional President Trump took the greatest risk of his young presidency, ordering a retaliatory missile strike on Syria for its latest chemical weapons attack. In a dizzying 48 hours, he upended a foreign policy doctrine based on putting America first and avoiding messy conflicts in distant lands.

    You don’t want a president who acts on instinct, much less one with built-in readiness to act on instinct, much less one who prides himself on readiness to act on instinct. You don’t. You want one who is well aware that instinct can be wrong and that impulsive military action “on instinct” is a horrific idea – especially in someone who can fire the nukes.

    That’s true even if he did 100% the right thing in yesterday’s missile launch.

    Mr. Trump’s advisers framed his decision in the dry language of international norms and strategic deterrence. In truth, it was an emotional act by a man suddenly aware that the world’s problems were now his — and that turning away, to him, was not an option.

    “I will tell you,” he said to reporters in the White House Rose Garden on Wednesday, “that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me — big impact. That was a horrible, horrible thing. And I’ve been watching it and seeing it, and it doesn’t get any worse than that.”

    Well, it can get worse than that. There can be more victims, just for a start.

    But more to the point: this is not the first time. Where was he before? Yapping on Twitter, that’s where.

    t was difficult to reconcile the anguished president with the snarky critic of American engagement who, from the comfort of private life, advised President Barack Obama not to strike Syria after a chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus three years ago.

    “President Obama, do not attack Syria,” Mr. Trump said on Twitter in September 2013. “There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your ‘powder’ for another (and more important) day!”

    And it is not easy to square Mr. Trump’s empathy for the victims of a single chemical weapons attack with his refusal to take in thousands of Syrian refugees from years of strife that have turned that country into a charnel house. Relaxing that policy did not come up in the president’s deliberations over striking Syria, his advisers said.

    Because that’s not his “instinct” – and that’s one reason “instinct” is not enough, as well as being often the wrong thing entirely.

    The president’s advisers insisted his decision was guided by strategic considerations. They were clearly uncomfortable with the suggestion that Mr. Trump was acting impulsively.

    Yes, I’m sure they were, but it’s very obvious that he was.

    Mr. Trump’s aides described a deliberative process, with meetings of the National Security Council, presentations of military options by the Pentagon and a classified briefing for Mr. Trump held under a tent erected in Mar-a-Lago to secure the communications with Washington. They spoke of phone calls to American allies, consultations with lawmakers and the diplomatic engagement that would follow the Tomahawk cruise missiles.

    What is clear, however, is that Mr. Trump reacted viscerally to the images of the death of innocent children in Syria. And that reaction propelled him into a sequence of actions that will change the course of his presidency. Mr. Trump’s improvisational style has sometimes seemed ill suited to the gravity of his office. In this case, it helped lead him to make the gravest decision a commander-in-chief can make.

    “I now have responsibility, and I will have that responsibility and carry it very proudly, I will tell you that,” the president said of Syria on Wednesday. “It is now my responsibility.”

    I watched him say that last night. I watched it with disgust. It’s not an occasion for him to display his vanity and self-obsession yet again.

  • So much for a culture of respect for the dignity of every human being

    Rebecca Traister has thoughts on Trump’s endorsement of the goodness of Bill O’Reilly.

    Where even to begin, except with a reminder that we are now five days into April, a month Trump has designated “National Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month”? The decree he signed on March 31 read in part: “We recommit ourselves this month to establishing a culture of respect and appreciation for the dignity of every human being.”

    More like National Sexual Assault Promotion Month, or Year or Presidency.

    Trump’s commitment to public, performed displays of white-male dominance is so complete that he seems to view even fake nods to respecting women as some kind of sign of weakness. When he’s forced to offer one — like the Sexual Assault Awareness Month decree — he has to make up for it by holding a meeting surrounded by the other white guys in his inner circle and defending his friend Bill O’Reilly, a man whose job it has been, as part of his work at Fox News, to make Trump’s presidency, and contemporary victories by the right wing, possible.

    If Fox News had never existed, neither would the Trump presidency.

    Women colleagues are “bimbos,” according to Trump’s top advisor Steve Bannon, who was accused of referring to a former co-worker as such in a suit that also alleged that he openly discussed his female colleagues’ “titties” and once promised to take a safety report written by a female co-worker and “ram it down her fucking throat.”

    “Good” people.

  • Donnie defends his bro

    Trump adds another item to his scumbag-CV by defending serial harasser and bully Bill O’Reilly.

    Speaking in the Oval Office, Donald J. Trump praised Mr. O’Reilly as “a good person” and declared, “I don’t think Bill did anything wrong,” days after The New York Times reported that five women had received settlements after making harassment claims against him.

    Of course he doesn’t. He doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with sexually assaulting women. He does it himself and boasts about it to friendly bros, so of course he doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with it.

    Few have spoken out publicly in support of the Fox star. The president had no qualms.

    “Personally, I think he shouldn’t have settled,” Mr. Trump told Times reporters in a wide-ranging interview. “Because you should have taken it all the way; I don’t think Bill did anything wrong.”

    “I think he’s a person I know well,” Mr. Trump said. “He is a good person.”

    What is a “good person” in Trump-brain? Someone who flatters Trump, and bullies women. Sterling character!

    The president is a well-documented fan of Fox News, sitting for interviews with its prime-time hosts and conferring privately by phone with Rupert Murdoch, the network’s executive chairman.

    Mr. Trump has bragged to associates that he now refers to Mr. Murdoch, one of the world’s most powerful media moguls, by his first name, according to a person who is friendly with both men.

    With both autocrats.

    But the president has a particular rapport with Mr. O’Reilly, whose hectoring braggadocio and no-apologies nostalgia for a bygone American era mirror Mr. Trump’s own.

    The hectoring braggadocio is why I hate both of them with a passion.

    O’Reilly on the other hand is not stupid, so he and Trump don’t have that in common.

    It is remarkable for a sitting president to weigh in on sexual harassment allegations from the Oval Office, especially allegations at the center of a churning controversy. But Mr. Trump’s advice to his friend on Wednesday — that Mr. O’Reilly “shouldn’t have settled” — was consistent with the never-back-down ethos of a president, and former real estate magnate, who relishes the counterattack.

    Well…it’s consistent with being a terrible narcissistic asshole who can never ever admit to being wrong either factually or morally. It’s consistent with being a shallow unthinking empty suit who thinks no one in the world matters as much as he does.

    Fox News has often provided cover for Mr. Trump as the president navigated a host of early controversies. Mr. Trump’s kind words for Mr. O’Reilly on Wednesday seemed a reciprocal gesture of sorts, from a leader who values loyalty.

    Loyalty to him. He doesn’t care about loyalty to anyone else.

  • He thinks it’s going to be the biggest story

    Donnie did an interview with the New York Times this morning – the failing New York Times as he genially calls it. I wonder why he bothers giving interviews to failing newspapers. I think I would stick to nonfailing newspapers if I were prezeedent.

    The interview is as stupid as you’d expect, and stupider. I wonder what it’s like being Maggie Haberman or Glenn Thrush and trying to ask him questions as if he were a reasonable adult.

    President Trump said on Wednesday that he thought that the former national security adviser Susan E. Rice may have committed a crime by seeking the identities of Trump associates who were mentioned on intercepted communications and that other Obama administration officials may also have been involved.

    See what I mean? He just casually says that stupid shit as if it were normal.

    “I think it’s going to be the biggest story,” Mr. Trump said in an interview in the Oval Office, declining repeated requests for evidence for his allegations or the names of other Obama administration officials. “It’s such an important story for our country and the world. It is one of the big stories of our time.”

    It’s as if they’d interviewed a toddler. They solemnly quote his ridiculous babbling, because they have to.

    Mr. Trump criticized media outlets, including The New York Times, for failing to adequately cover the Rice controversy — while singling out Fox News and the host Bill O’Reilly for praise, despite reports this week that the veteran conservative commentator settled five lawsuits filed by women claiming sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior. The president then went on to defend Mr. O’Reilly, who has hosted him frequently over the years.

    “I think he’s a person I know well — he is a good person,” said Mr. Trump…

    “I think he shouldn’t have settled; personally I think he shouldn’t have settled,” said Mr. Trump. “Because you should have taken it all the way. I don’t think Bill did anything wrong.”

    Of course he doesn’t. He thinks big shouty rude men have an absolute right to sexually assault women.

     

  • De-operationalizing the operation

    Another shakeup in Trumpland. Hey they’ve been there more than two months now, it’s totally normal to have 47 shakeups in such a long period of time. Bannon is out of that job he should never have been in in the first place.

    President Trump reshuffled his national security organization on Wednesday, removing his chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, from a top policy-making committee and restoring senior military and intelligence officials who had been downgraded when he first came into office.

    The shift was orchestrated by Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, who was tapped as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser after the resignation of Michael T. Flynn, who stepped down in February after being caught misleading Vice President Mike Pence and other White House officials about his contacts with Russia’s ambassador.

    See? Totally normal. Everything going very very smoothly, smoothlier than any president you’ve ever seen before, very very very smoothly.

    General McMaster inherited an organizational scheme for the National Security Council that stirred protests because of Mr. Bannon’s role. The original setup made Mr. Bannon, the former chairman of Breitbart News, a member of the principals committee that typically includes cabinet-level officials like the vice president, secretary of state and defense secretary.

    Hey look, just because Bannon is a total flake and alt-right tool and wifebeater doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be a big noise in National Security. It’s all part of the swamp-drainage project.

    A new order issued by Mr. Trump, dated Tuesday and made public on Wednesday, removes Mr. Bannon from the principals committee, restores the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and intelligence director and also adds the energy secretary, C.I.A. director and United Nations ambassador.

    A senior White House official presented the move as a logical evolution, not a setback for Mr. Bannon.

    Oh a “logical evolution” is it – you mean from doing something completely crazy and dangerous to not doing that? Usually presidents skip the doing something completely crazy and dangerous part but whatever, I’m sure they know best.

    He had originally been put on the principals committee to keep an eye on Mr. Flynn and to “de-operationalize” the N.S.C. after the Obama administration, this official said on condition of anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. This official said that process had been completed.

    To keep an eye on Flynn? Then why was Flynn there? If he needed an eye kept on him, why was he there? Oh and also, who is keeping an eye on Trump?

    I have no idea what “de-operationalize the N.S.C.” is supposed to mean.

    With drunks at the wheel, it’s a matter of chance whether or not we run into a tree.

  • The hell with fair pay, says Trump

    Of course he did.

    On March 27, Trump revoked the 2014 Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces order then-President Barack Obama put in place to ensure that companies with federal contracts comply with 14 labor and civil rights laws. The Fair Pay order was put in place after a 2010 Government Accountability Office investigation showed that companies with rampant violations were being awarded millions in federal contracts.

    In an attempt to keep the worst violators from receiving taxpayer dollars, the Fair Pay order included two rules that impacted women workers: paycheck transparency and a ban on forced arbitration clauses for sexual harassment, sexual assault or discrimination claims.

    “Arbitrations are private proceedings with secret filings and private attorneys, and they often help hide sexual harassment claims,” said Maya Raghu, Director of Workplace Equality at the National Women’s Law Center. “It can silence victims. They may feel afraid of coming forward because they might think they are the only one, or fear retaliation.”

    Mandatory arbitration clauses are increasingly used in employment contracts, said Raghu, who added that banning the process was an important step forward for victims of workplace harassment or assault.

    Many learned about forced arbitration clauses for the first time just last year through the Fox News sexual harassment case. Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson dodged her own contract’s arbitration clause by directly suing former CEO Roger Ailes rather than the company. Ailes’ lawyers accused Carlson of breaching her contract, and pressed for the private arbitration to try to keep the story out of courts and the public record.

    A new lawsuit filed Monday by Fox News commentator Julie Roginsky joined a growing list of accusations against Ailes, and claims Roginsky faced retaliation “because of plaintiff’s refusal to malign Gretchen Carlson and join ‘Team Roger’ when Carlson sued Ailes,” NPR reported.

    By overturning the Fair Pay order, Trump made it possible for businesses with federal contracts to continue forcing sexual harassment cases like Carlson’s into secret proceedings — where the public, and other employees, may never find out about rampant sex discrimination claims at a company.

    Of course he did. He’s part of Team Harasser, after all.

    Blumenthal told NBC News that Trump’s overturning the Fair Pay order sends women’s rights in the workplace back “to a time best left to ‘Mad Men.’”

    “These coverup clauses render people voiceless — forcing them to suffer in silence, suppressing justice, and allowing others to fall victim in the future,” said Blumenthal. “At a time when the fight for equal pay continues, Trump also moved to eliminate paycheck transparency and leave workers to negotiate in the dark.”

    The other result of Trump’s executive order on federal contractors was lifting a mandate on paycheck transparency, or requiring employers to detail earnings, pay scales, salaries, and other details. The Fair Pay order Trump overturned was one of the few ways to ensure companies were paying women workers equally to their male colleagues.

    Well they’re women. They don’t deserve equal pay. They’re inferior.

  • Have you heard of Susan B. Anthony?

    The White House published Trump’s remarks at the “Women’s Empowerment Panel” the White House held the other day. They are rather stupid remarks, as you’d expect. Already it seems almost quaint to expect a president to sound intelligent and informed. No no, a president sounds like any other carnival barker.

    So as you know, Melania is a very highly accomplished woman and really an inspiration to so many.  And she is doing some great job.

    Is she? Accomplished? At what? And what job is she doing?

    And I’m so proud that the White House and our administration is filled with so many women of such incredible talent.  This week, as we conclude Women’s History Month, we honor a great woman of American history.  Since the very beginning, women have driven — and I mean each generation of Americans — toward a more free and more prosperous future.

    Among these patriots are women like the legendary Abigail Adams — right? — (applause) — who, during the founding, urged her husband to remember the rights of women.  She was very much a pioneer in that way.

    We’ve been blessed with courageous heroes like Harriet Tubman, who escaped slavery — (applause) — and went on to deliver hundreds of others to freedom, first on the Underground Railroad, and then as a spy for the Union Army.  She was very, very courageous, believe me.  (Applause.)

    And we’ve had leaders like Susan B. Anthony — have you heard of Susan B. Anthony? — (laughter) — I’m shocked that you’ve heard of her — who dreamed of a much more equal and fair future, an America where women themselves, as she said, “helped to make laws and elect the lawmakers.”  And that’s what’s happening more and more.  Tough competition out there, I want to tell you.

    I feel empowered.

  • Trump repeatedly said “get ’em out of here”

    It may yet turn out that Donald Trump is subject to the law just like everyone else.

    The courts keep taking Donald Trump both seriously and literally. And the president’s word choices are proving to be a real headache.

    A federal judge in Kentucky is the latest to take Trump at his word when he says something controversial. Judge David J. Hale ruled against efforts by Trump’s attorneys to throw out a lawsuit accusing him of inciting violence against protesters at a March 2016 campaign rally in Louisville.

    At the rally, Trump repeatedly said “get ’em out of here” before, according to the protesters, they were shoved and punched by his supporters. Trump’s attorneys sought to have the case dismissed on free speech grounds, arguing that he didn’t intend for his supporters to use force. But Hale noted that speech inciting violence is not protected by the First Amendment and ruled that there is plenty of evidence that the protesters’ injuries were a “direct and proximate result” of Trump’s words.

    It’s laughable to pretend he didn’t really mean “get ’em out of here” as a physical act. Of course he did. He’s a bully.

     

    Trump and his team will undoubtedly dismiss this latest example as yet another activist judge who is out to get him. But yet again, they are forced into the position of saying that Trump’s words shouldn’t be taken at face value — that he didn’t mean what he actually, literally said.

    I’ve argued before that this is a completely unworkable standard when it comes to the media’s coverage of Trump. It allows Trump team members to retroactively downgrade whatever they want to, while leaving the good stuff intact — essentially a Get Out of Jail Free card they can redeem anytime they want.

    Instead he’s landed on Boardwalk with a hotel on it.

  • Career diplomats have been instructed not to speak to him directly

    Lordy lordy lordy.

    Secretary of State Rex Tillerson takes a private elevator to his palatial office on the seventh floor of the State Department building, where sightings of him are rare on the floors below.

    On many days, he blocks out several hours on his schedule as “reading time,” when he is cloistered in his office poring over the memos he prefers ahead of in-person meetings.

    Most of his interactions are with an insular circle of political aides who are new to the State Department. Many career diplomats say they still have not met him, and some have been instructed not to speak to him directly — or even make eye contact.

    If he happens to pass them in the halls, are they supposed to turn around and face the wall?

    On his first three foreign trips, Tillerson skipped visits with State Department employees and their families, embassy stops that were standard morale-boosters under other secretaries of state.

    Well, that certainly sounds like a bad fit for the job. He’s shy and introverted and fond of peace and quiet…so he’s not cut out to be Secretary of State, is he.

    Eight weeks into his tenure as President Trump’s top diplomat, the former ExxonMobil chief executive is isolated, walled off from the State Department’s corps of bureaucrats in Washington and around the world. His distant management style has created growing bewilderment among foreign officials who are struggling to understand where the United States stands on key issues. It has sown mistrust among career employees at State, who swap paranoid stories about Tillerson that often turn out to be untrue. And it threatens to undermine the power and reach of the State Department, which has been targeted for a 30 percent funding cut in Trump’s budget.

    Many have expressed alarm that Tillerson has not fought harder for the agency he now leads.

    Oh well, it’s only the State Department.

    He curbed his enthusiasm about the annual human rights report, too.

    Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who during his confirmation hearings repeatedly vowed to promote human rights as a core American value, alarmed human rights advocates when he did not appear in person to present the State Department’s annual human rights report, released Friday.

    In a break with long-standing tradition only rarely breached, Tillerson’s remarks were limited to a short written introduction to the lengthy report. Nor did any senior State Department official make on-camera comments that are typically watched around the world, including by officials in authoritarian countries where abuses are singled out in the report.

    Instead, a senior administration official talked to reporters by phone and only on the condition of anonymity.

    “The report speaks for itself,” the administration official said. “We’re very, very proud of it. The facts should really be the story here.”

    But Tillerson’s absence underscored how the former ExxonMobil executive remains more comfortable with an aloof, corporate style of governance than the public diplomacy practiced by his predecessors.

    Governance isn’t supposed to be aloof.

    Tillerson drew fire from some members of Congress and advocates who said his decision not to personally unveil the report suggested the Trump administration places a low priority on advancing human rights.

    “While the U.S. commitment to human rights has been imperfect, it has always been one of the key pillars of foreign policy,” said Sarah Margon, the Washington director for Human Rights Watch. “That seems to be under dramatic threat right now. The fact he’s not personally involved makes it much easier for other governments to ignore its findings.”

    It’s not surprising that Trump doesn’t care about human rights, because we already know that Trump doesn’t care about anything that matters. He cares about himself, and money, and winning, and grabbing them by the pussy. Human rights are about other people, so of course he’s not interested.

    In the past, secretaries of state have taken the attitude that their presence in unveiling the report lends weight to its findings. John F. Kerry delayed its release twice because he was traveling and wanted to present it himself. Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright all showed up for the release in their first year in office. Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice missed the first year but made personal appearances in subsequent years.

    Whenever previous secretaries did not make it, the report was always made public on camera by a senior State Department official who answered questions about it.

    But now we have an administration that wants to destroy the Deep State, so apparently that means global human rights too.

    Some human rights advocates said their concerns are heightened by reports of budget cuts impacting humanitarian aid and Trump’s campaign remarks that he supports waterboarding and “much worse” for terrorist suspects.

    Human Rights First said Tillerson’s decision to forgo a public rollout suggests U.S. leadership on the issue is waning.

    “Such a decision sends an unmistakable signal to human rights defenders that the United States may no longer have their back, a message that won’t be lost on abusive governments,” said Rob Berschinski, a senior vice president at Human Rights First and a former State Department official in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.

    Not good.

  • Shouts from the residence

    Trump has been especially loathsome on Twitter this morning. He’s probably cranky because the grownups won’t let him go to Taco del Mar this weekend, on account of how the news media keep pointing out how very much time he is spending on vacation at our expense.

    It makes me want to smash things to see our head of state publicly deploying rude nicknames as if he were five years old. He is degrading us all, and it makes me furious.

    He’s so dense as well as malevolent. A mistake in prediction is not the same thing as fake news.

    The Times is not failing, and in fact Trump has boosted their circulation, but he always calls it that, as if he were five years old.

    He was supposed to be working this weekend. Instead he’s just watching tv. At least we don’t have to pay the bill for the Secret Service to stay at Taco del Mar.

  • National No Grabbing Women by the Pussy Month

    Mother Jones:

    In an announcement late Friday, President Donald Trump proclaimed April as National Sexual Assault and Prevention Month, vowing to commit his administration to raising awareness on the issue and “reduce and eventually end violence” against women, children, and men.

    “This includes supporting victims, preventing future abuse, and prosecuting offenders to the full extent of the law,” a statement from the White House read. “I have already directed the Attorney General to create a task force on crime reduction and public safety.  This task force will develop strategies to reduce crime and propose new legislation to fill gaps in existing laws.”

    “In the face of sexual violence, we must commit to providing meaningful support and services for victims and survivors in the United States and around the world.”

    The Huffington Post:

    President Donald Trump, who has been publicly accused of sexual assault by more than 15 women and was caught on tape boasting he could grab women “by the pussy” without their consent, has officially proclaimed April 2017 to be National Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month.

    In 2009, Barack Obama became the first president to officially proclaim April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month, although activists had recognized the month as a time to boost awareness of sexual violence for several decades. Since 2009, a proclamation has been released each year by the White House. But 2017 brings us the first year that a president who has been accused of committing sexual assault has issued such a proclamation.

    Something to be proud of, isn’t it.

    H/t Screechy Monkey

  • His biggest lie yet

    This tweet is particularly infuriating:

    How can we possibly enlist the full potential of women in our society when women in our society are subject to so much contempt and predatory behavior from men like Trump? How can he mouth pious bullshittery about the full potential of women when he talks about women the way he does? Where does he get the nerve?

  • Dashing off in all directions

    Ok my excuse is that yesterday was rushed because I had to do things out in the world, so I didn’t grasp what the news about the identity of the people who gave Nunes the sekrit info meant. Julie Hirschfeld Davis at the Times caused the penny to drop in a piece on Trump’s dopy tweet about Flynn and immunity and “Dems” this morning.

    The credibility of the inquiry was thrown into question on Thursday after it emerged that a pair of White House officials helped provide Representative Devin Nunes of California, a Republican and chairman of the Intelligence Committee, with intelligence reports that showed Mr. Trump and his associates were incidentally swept up in foreign surveillance by American spy agencies.

    Armed with the information, Mr. Nunes held a news conference and made a public show of going to the White House to hand-deliver information to Mr. Trump, an apparent effort to help the White House explain why the president had taken to Twitter early this month to accuse President Barack Obama of wiretapping his telephone. The chiefs of the F.B.I. and the National Security Agency have both testified that such surveillance never took place.

    Ohh – right. The fact that they are White House people means that Nunes’s exciting dash to the White House to brief Donnie was a big fucking charade. White House people gave him the info, therefore Trump already knew about it, therefore Nunes’s “briefing” was a piece of theater.

    It was not clear from Mr. Trump’s post on Friday whether he fully appreciated the potential impact on his administration if Mr. Flynn received immunity to participate fully in the investigation. But he has said previously that seeking protection from prosecution is a telltale sign of wrongdoing.

    “If you’re not guilty of a crime, what do you need immunity for, right?” he said at a campaign rally in Orlando, Fla., in September. Mr. Trump was referring to Hillary Clinton aides who received immunity during an F.B.I. inquiry into her private email server.

    And Flynn led the crowd in chanting “Lock her up!”

    The point about Nunes’s charade is in yesterday’s Times article but I was reading too fast (or skimming) and missed it.

    The revelation on Thursday that White House officials disclosed the reports, which Mr. Nunes then discussed with Mr. Trump, is likely to fuel criticism that the intelligence chairman has been too eager to do the bidding of the Trump administration while his committee is supposed to be conducting an independent investigation of Russia’s meddling in the presidential election.

    It is the latest twist of a bizarre Washington drama that began after dark on March 21, when Mr. Nunes got a call from a person he has described only as a source. The call came as he was riding across town in an Uber car, and he quickly diverted to the White House. The next day, Mr. Nunes gave a hastily arranged news conference before going to brief Mr. Trump on what he had learned the night before from — as it turns out — White House officials.

    It has a cartoonish feel, doesn’t it. Ooh, a late night call while riding in an Uber car – oooh a quick diversion to the White House – ooh an emergency press conference followed by an emergency briefing to tell Trump what he already knew.

    Image result for road runner

  • Or we could just let Putin run the board

    The government ethics duo Richard Painter and Norman Eisen on Flynn and immunity:

    Instead of categorically rejecting Mr. Flynn’s offer, as the Senate Intelligence Committee appears to have done today, both houses of Congress and federal prosecutors should carefully review Flynn’s proffered testimony and the details of the immunity deal and then make a decision.

    This is the latest development in a scandal more frightening than Watergate because it involves a foreign adversary attacking the American political system. We need to get to the bottom of it as soon as possible.

    In this case need to know might outweigh need to punish.

    This time, the stakes are too high to wait. Immunity should be granted as soon as Congress and prosecutors are persuaded that Mr. Flynn has information that will lead to a criminal case against one or more people at least as important to the alleged wrongdoing as Mr. Flynn may be. The overriding objective must be learning who if anyone in the United States collaborated with the Russians as well as who knew about it, what they knew and when they knew it.

    This case is different from ordinary criminal investigations. Finding the truth is even more important than punishing the guilty, because it is critical to our national security and the future of our democracy.

    It is also vitally important that decisions about whether to grant Mr. Flynn immunity, and all other decisions about the Trump-Russia investigation, be made only by people who are completely independent of anyone who could possibly be a subject or target of that investigation.

    Like Trump, for instance. Like Trump especially.

    Congress — particularly the House of Representatives — has also compromised its independence by treating the Trump-Russia investigation as a partisan issue. The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, has turned it into a farce by running over to the White House to give and receive information in the dark of night, and even to possibly publicly divulge classified information. He must also recuse himself for purposes of the immunity grant and the investigation as a whole.

    Because this scandal involves the hostile acts of a foreign adversary, it is a national security issue. We now have a witness who may help us get to the bottom of it. A prompt and proper grant of immunity can maximize our chances of finding out what happened — and making sure that those who may have betrayed the United States are never in a position to do so again.

    Trump continues to act like a child.

  • No, look over there

    There’s yet more confirmation that Devin Nunes is the White House’s fluffy fluffy poodle.

    A pair of White House officials helped provide Representative Devin Nunes of California, a Republican and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, with the intelligence reports that showed that President Trump and his associates were incidentally swept up in foreign surveillance by American spy agencies.

    The revelation on Thursday that White House officials disclosed the reports, which Mr. Nunes then discussed with Mr. Trump, is likely to fuel criticism that the intelligence chairman has been too eager to do the bidding of the Trump administration while his committee is supposed to be conducting an independent investigation of Russia’s meddling in the presidential election.

    Why, just because he did the White House’s bidding when it was the White House his committee was investigating? And because he did it all in secret?

    Several current American officials identified the White House officials as Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence at the National Security Council, and Michael Ellis, a lawyer who works on national security issues at the White House Counsel’s Office and was previously counsel to Mr. Nunes’s committee. Though neither has been accused of breaking any laws, they do appear to have sought to use intelligence to advance the political goals of the Trump administration.

    Emails! Abortion! Bad hombres! A squirrel!

    [E]ven before Thursday, the view among Democrats and even some Republicans was that Mr. Nunes was given access to the intelligence reports to divert attention from the investigations into Russian meddling, and to bolster Mr. Trump’s debunked claims of having been wiretapped.

    On both counts, Mr. Nunes appears to have succeeded: The House inquiry into Russian meddling that he is leading has descended into a sideshow since he disclosed the information, and the administration has portrayed his information as vindicating the president’s wiretapping claims.

    The failing New York Times! Fake news! Enemy of the people! Big truck!

  • Who is going to be advising him?

    Meanwhile, Trump is leaving executive branch science jobs unfilled, which means he has no science advisers on staff.

    Mr. Trump’s first budget proposes slashing $5.8 billion, or 18 percent, from the National Institutes of Health and $900 million, or about 20 percent, from the Energy Department’s Office of Science, which runs basic research at the national laboratories. The Environmental Protection Agency would be cut by 31 percent.

    On Tuesday, Mr. Trump issued executive orders that roll back Mr. Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which would have closed hundreds of coal-fired power plants in an effort to curb planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions.

    Those actions have been taken without advice or guidance from scientists and engineers inside the White House. The few remaining policy advisers have ceased distributing daily memos on policy issues like climate change, machine-learning regulation, or the ethics of big data collection.

    “They are flying blind when it comes to science and tech issues,” said Kumar Garg, who left the Office of Science and Technology Policy as a senior adviser after the election.

    And they’re hardly a scientifically literate crowd.

    Obama expanded the office from 50 people to 130.

    Mr. Obama turned to the science office during crises like the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Africa; the 2011 nuclear spill in Fukushima, Japan; and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.

    The staff of the science office developed the White House’s recommendations for regulation of commercial drones and driverless cars at the Transportation Department. Last year, the staff produced an attention-grabbing report that raised concerns about the threat that robots posed to employment and that advocated retraining Americans for higher-skilled jobs. The staff also put on the annual White House science fair.

    Trump doesn’t understand enough about science to understand how it can be useful to him. He doesn’t even understand enough about it to understand that he doesn’t understand.

    Under Mr. Obama, the science and technology office included 19 policy advisers in the environment and energy division, 14 in the national security and international affairs division, nine in the science division and 20 in the technology and innovation division.

    “We are all sitting on the edge of our seats hoping nothing catastrophic happens in the world,” said Phil Larson, a former senior science and technology adviser to Mr. Obama. “But if it does, who is going to be advising him?”

    Oh I’m sure Steve Bannon will step up.

  • A tough tone with the rebels

    Today in Trump.

    Fight them, and the Dems, and the 65% of the population who think Trump is a trainwreck. That should go well.

    The Times attempts to pick its way through the debris field, starting with that tweet.

    The post from Mr. Trump did not seem to have been impulsive: Mr. Bannon, who has counseled a tough tone with the rebels, has instructed his staff to more closely monitor the president’s Twitter messages to use them as leverage in negotiations.

    Dan Scavino, an aide who controls Mr. Trump’s official White House Twitter account, recently moved into Mr. Bannon’s West Wing office, where he closely monitors social media activity by and about the president, according to two officials.

    Minutes after Mr. Trump’s post, his Republican critics took to Twitter to respond, in Trump-ese: “It’s a swamp not a hot tub. We both came here to drain it. #SwampCare polls 17%. Sad!” wrote Representative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who often sides with the caucus on votes.

    “It didn’t take long for the swamp to drain @realDonaldTrump,” said Representative Justin Amash of Michigan, a member of the Freedom Caucus who has emerged as one of Mr. Trump’s most caustic Republican critics. “No shame, Mr. President. Almost everyone succumbs to the D.C. Establishment.”

    Michael Flynn Jr., a conservative activist — and son of Michael T. Flynn, Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser — went even further. “Why is @realDonaldTrump siding w/ estab Repubs (which we know r closet Dems) and looney Dems like Pelosi and Schumer? NOT WHAT WE VOTED FOR,” he said on Twitter.

    I wonder if Steve Bannon is now worrying that he’s not reactionary enough.

    Trump, at any rate, quickly returned to more comfortable territory.

    About an hour after he stepped up his criticism of his own party, Mr. Trump trained his fury on a more familiar target, The New York Times, posting on Twitter a link to a New York Post editorial critical of the paper.

    “The failing @nytimes has disgraced the media world. Gotten me wrong for two solid years. Change libel laws?” Mr. Trump wrote.

    Sure, Donnie. Let’s change the libel laws so that they carve out an exception for a thin-skinned asshole from Queens who can dish it out all day long but can’t take it for one second.

  • Donnie is watching

    Spicey is shocked, shocked, that people think there was anything wrong with the way he talked to April Ryan yesterday. Or, more likely, he’s pretending to be shocked. They want to normalize asshole behavior so that Trump won’t look so glaringly abnormal and psychopathic.

    White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer responded to accusations of sexism and racism after he repeatedly told senior journalist April Ryan to stop shaking her head during Tuesday’s press briefing.

    Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized Spicer’s actions Tuesday, labeling the incident an example of the kind of sexism that women encounter every day. But Spicer said that Ryan was a tough reporter and he was “astonished” at the accusation. He insisted that he treats the White House correspondent no different than male colleagues in the briefing room.

    But of course the way he talks to reporters is, again, not normal. He does it because Trump tells him to, and Trump watches the press briefings. That itself is not normal. Andrew Marantz in the March 20 New Yorker:

    In past Administrations, the President has usually been too busy with matters of state to hang on his press secretary’s every word. This is one of the main reasons that press briefings exist. In the nineteenth century, most Presidents briefed reporters themselves, on an infrequent, ad-hoc basis. By the nineteen-twenties, doling out information had become a full-time job, and Herbert Hoover became the first President to hire a secretary whose responsibilities were solely press-related.

    President Trump, by most accounts, is rarely too busy to watch TV, especially when he is the topic. “Look at his daily schedule, and you’ll notice how few events are held between 1 and 2 p.m.,” the radio correspondent told me. This is the hour during which Spicer almost always conducts his briefings. The correspondent continued, “I sometimes feel like I’m too busy to go to the briefings, and going to them is my job. The thought that the President of the United States might take the time to sit through an entire briefing, much less all of them, is, frankly, mind-boggling.” Another correspondent pointed out how often press aides deliver notes to Spicer while he’s at the lectern, and how obediently Spicer seems to respond to the notes’ directives, cutting a response short or abruptly ending a briefing. The reigning theory is that the notes are transcribed messages from the President, watching live from elsewhere in the building.

    None of this is normal.

  • Client confidences

    The Trump gang tried to stop Sally Yates testifying.

    According to letters The Post reviewed, the Justice Department notified Yates earlier this month that the administration considers a great deal of her possible testimony to be barred from discussion in a congressional hearing because the topics are covered by the presidential communication privilege.

    Yates and other former intelligence officials had been asked to testify before the House Intelligence Committee this week, a hearing that was abruptly canceled by the panel’s chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.).

    Who worked on Trump’s transition team. That Devin Nunes.

    Yates and another witness at the planned hearing, former CIA director John Brennan, had made clear to government officials by Thursday that their testimony to the committee probably would contradict some statements that White House officials had made, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The following day, when Yates’s lawyer sent a letter to the White House indicating that she still wanted to testify, the hearing was canceled.

    Sleazy enough yet?

    In a March 23 letter to Acting Assistant Attorney General Samuel Ramer, Yates’s attorney David O’Neil described the government’s position. O’Neil, who declined to comment, noted in the letter that Yates is willing to testify, and that she will avoid discussing classified information and details that could compromise investigations. The correspondence was later shared with the Intelligence Committee.

    “The Department of Justice has advised that it believes there are further constraints on the testimony Ms. Yates may provide at the [Intelligence Committee] hearing. Generally, we understand that the department takes the position that all information Ms. Yates received or actions she took in her capacity as Deputy Attorney General and acting Attorney General are client confidences that she may not disclose absent written consent of the department,’’ the lawyer wrote.

    Client confidences. So they’re arguing that the Deputy Attorney General was Trump’s personal lawyer and Trump and his administration were her clients? Is that normal? Is that an accepted principle, that US AGs are presidents’ lawyers and presidents are the clients of AGs? It sounds bizarre as hell to me.

    “We believe that the department’s position in this regard is overbroad, incorrect, and inconsistent with the department’s historical approach to the congressional testimony of current and former officials,’’ the letter continues. “In particular, we believe that Ms. Yates should not be obligated to refuse to provide non-classified facts about the department’s notification to the White House of concerns about the conduct of a senior official. Requiring Ms. Yates to refuse to provide such information is particularly untenable given that multiple senior administration officials have publicly described the same events.’’

    So is the Secretary of Defense Trump’s personal bodyguard?