Latest StoriesRSS

select from:

E.g., 8/19/2018
E.g., 8/19/2018
Image: BRITAIN-US-DIPLOMACY-TRUMP

Trump creates another international incident, blasts key US ally

07/13/18 08:48AM

Donald Trump sat down with The Sun, a British tabloid newspaper, for an interview earlier this week, knowing that its report would be published soon after the American president arrived in the U.K. for his first official visit since taking office. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders notified British officials about the interview and suggested The Sun's report wouldn't be a problem.

It is, however, an enormous problem.

President Donald Trump continued to attack America's European allies on Thursday -- this time aiming at the United Kingdom's Prime Minister Theresa May a day before they are due to meet in London. [...]

In the interview, Trump insisted that he would have negotiated the [Brexit] deal differently than May, and he said that he had provided the prime minister his "views on what she should do and how she should negotiate."

"I would have done it much differently. I actually told Theresa May how to do it but she didn't agree, she didn't listen to me."

The report in the British tabloid was published late yesterday, and it wasn't long before the piece became the basis for an international incident. In addition to condemning the prime minister's Brexit policy, Trump also suggested May's approach would adversely affect a future trade agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom.

"[I]f they do that, I would say that would probably end a major trade relationship with the United States," Trump said.

Adding insult to injury, as the prime minister's government faces a political crisis, the president took time to praise Boris Johnson, who just resigned as Britain's foreign secretary, which had a destabilizing effect on May's leadership.

Johnson, Trump said, "would be a great prime minister."

read more

Strzok hearing backfires badly on House Republicans

07/13/18 08:00AM

House Republicans made no effort to hide their intentions: they wanted to create a spectacle with a lengthy interrogation of Peter Strzok, who served as the head of the FBI's counter-intelligence division, and who's become a boogeyman in Republican circles.

To a degree, GOP lawmakers got their wish. On the heels of 11 hours of closed-door testimony from Strzok, Americans were treated to 10 hours of open-door testimony yesterday, which offered plenty of sound and fury.

But did it signify anything? Yesterday's drama on Capitol Hill created a circus-like atmosphere, which at times descended into farce, but if we look past the spectacle and focus on the ostensible point of yesterday's hearings, we're left with a question Republicans failed to think through.

If Donald Trump and his allies are correct, Strzok was a biased attack dog who conspired to use his role at the FBI to undermine the president's 2016 candidacy. But if the conspiracy theory were true, why didn't Strzok do what his critics claim? As a Washington Post  analysis explained:

If there was such a conspiracy, of course, it didn't work. Trump is president and, before the election, there was barely a public whiff that any investigation even existed. If Strzok's idea was to "stop" Trump from becoming president, it was a spectacular failure.

In a written statement offered before he testified before the House Oversight Committee on Thursday, Strzok pointedly noted that there was no effort on his part to keep Trump from winning the White House -- and, further, that he was one of only a few people who could have potentially leaked details from the investigation in an effort to block Trump's victory.

"In the summer of 2016," Strzok told lawmakers, "I was one of a handful of people who knew the details of Russian election interference and its possible connections with members of the Trump campaign. This information had the potential to derail, and quite possibly, defeat Mr. Trump. But the thought of exposing that information never crossed my mind."

This point has gone unrefuted. Strzok could've leaked word to the public about the pre-election investigation into Trump's political operation, but he didn't. If the high-ranking agent had been determined to use his position to undermine the president's candidacy, why didn't he use his position to undermine the president's candidacy?

read more

Thursday's Mini-Report, 7.12.18

07/12/18 05:30PM

Today's edition of quick hits:

* Peter Strzok had quite a day on Capitol Hill: "Deepening tension between congressional Republicans and the Justice Department erupted in full public view Thursday, as a senior FBI agent sparred with lawmakers who suggested his bias against President Trump tainted the department's Russia investigation."

* Family separations: "The Trump administration has reunited 57 migrant children under age 5 with their parents as of Thursday morning, one day after the court-ordered deadline, but 12 parents who have been deported remain separated from their young children."

* Before the NATO story starts to fade from public view, Donald Trump was asked this morning whether he has the authority to abandon the alliance without congressional support. "I think I probably can, but that's unnecessary," the president responded.

* At the same press conference, a reporter asked him whether he'll say one thing to the press, and then tweet something else once he's on Air Force One? "No, that's other people that do that," Trump replied. "I don't. I'm very consistent. I'm a very stable genius."

* Unexpected: "The Justice Department will appeal the AT&T-Time Warner merger approval, according to a court document filed Thursday."

* Papa John's founder John Schnatter "resigned as chairman of the company Wednesday amid growing backlash over his use of the n-word during a conference call in May."

* Is Trump trying to gaslight the soybean farmers? It sure looks like it.

* On this, Gov. Kay Ivey (R) made the right call: "Alabama's governor has begun to cut off a gravy train for the state's sheriffs: the unspent money for prisoners' meals that the sheriffs have long been allowed to keep for themselves."

read more

Image: Speaker of the House Paul Ryan speaks at a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington

Facing test on legislative arithmetic, Paul Ryan flunks

07/12/18 04:40PM

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) is generally very careful about publicly disagreeing with Donald Trump, and this morning was no exception. While not specifically condemning the president trade tariffs by name, the outgoing Republican Speaker was willing to say, "New tariffs are not the solution."

So why not pass a bill rejecting the White House's policy? Ryan also said today there's simply no point.

"You would have to pass a law saying 'don't raise those tariffs' and the president would have to sign that law. That's not going to happen."

This comes the day after most Senate Republicans supported a measure expressing vague opposition to Trump's tariffs -- in a non-binding resolution that had no force of law.

Circling back to our coverage from several weeks ago, let's put aside the oddity of hearing Ryan insist Congress should only tackle legislation the White House is inclined to support. He had a very different approach in the Obama era – how many dozens of votes did Ryan's House Republican conference hold on repealing the Affordable Care Act? -- but for now, let's not dwell on recent history.

Instead, let's remind Congress' most powerful Republican that the legislative branch has a remedy for dealing with a president who vetoes popular and worthwhile bills: lawmakers have the constitutional authority to override a veto.

read more

President Barack Obama laughs with former Presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush on the campus of Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, April 25, 2013.

Americans point to the best president of their lifetimes in new poll

07/12/18 02:40PM

Earlier this year, members of the American Political Science Association's Presidents and Executive Politics section -- 170 scholars, in total -- ranked each of the American presidents from best to worst. Barack Obama did quite well, ranking 8th overall, and 1st among presidents over the last half-century.

As it turns out, public attitudes are largely in line with scholars' attitudes. The Pew Research Center published an interesting report on this yesterday:

When asked which president has done the best job in their lifetimes, more Americans name Barack Obama than any other president. More than four-in-ten (44%) say Obama is the best or second best president of their lifetimes, compared with about a third who mention Bill Clinton (33%) or Ronald Reagan (32%).

When it comes to first-place votes -- presidents who were picked as the very best president of respondents' lifetimes -- Obama was the clear winner with 31%, followed by Reagan with 21%, and Clinton with 13%.

There was, however, a significant age gap: Obama dominated among younger Americans, while Reagan fared better among older Americans.

read more

Image:

Trump boasts about NATO commitments that don't appear to exist

07/12/18 12:48PM

Before leaving the NATO summit in Brussels, Donald Trump held an unusually subdued press conference, where he seemed to make some news: according to the American president, he demanded that other NATO members increase their defense spending, and they agreed to do as he requested.

"We really accomplished a lot with respect to NATO. For years presidents have been coming to these meetings and talked about the expense, the tremendous expense, for the United States, and tremendous progress has been made.

"Everyone's agreed to substantially up their commitment. They're going to up it at levels that they've never thought of before.

"Prior to last year where I attended my first meeting, it was going down, the amount of money being spent by countries was going down -- and down very substantially -- and now it's going up very substantially."

Under the blueprint adopted in 2014, after Russia invaded Crimea and Barack Obama made it clear that it was time for NATO members to invest more in national security, each member nation committed to spend at least 2% of its GDP on defense by 2024.

This morning, however, the American president declared, "Ultimately, that'll be going up quite a bit higher than that." Trump added, more than once, that NATO allies "substantially upped their commitment."

There are a couple of things to keep in mind. For example, when Trump said defense spending among NATO members was "going down ... very substantially" at the time of last year's summit, that's ridiculously untrue. Obama pressed member nations to increase defense spending four years ago, and that's precisely what they did, long before Trump took office.

As the Washington Post's Greg Sargent explained in a very good piece yesterday, everyone involved was willing to let Trump take credit for the increases in recent years, though the Republican president has been reluctant to take yes for an answer.

This morning, his posture seemed to shift a bit, with Trump suggesting that NATO members bent to his will, agreeing to defense spending "at levels that they've never thought of before."

Which leads to the other problem: the commitments the American president bragged about appear to exist only in his imagination.

read more

Thursday's Campaign Round-Up, 7.12.18

07/12/18 12:00PM

Today's installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* If there were questions about Rep. Beto O'Rourke's (D) ability to compete with Sen. Ted Cruz (R) in Texas this year, he's answering them: the Dallas Morning News  reports that the challenger raised "an eye-popping $10.4 million" in the second quarter of 2018. Making it all the more impressive, O'Rourke has "sworn off political action committee support."

* The Washington Examiner  reports that the Congressional Leadership Fund, a leading super PAC backed by House Speaker Paul Ryan, raised $51 million over the last three months, all of which will go toward helping Republicans keep their House majority. Most of the haul came from casino mogul Sheldon Adelson.

* And as long as we're on the topic of fundraising, Donald Trump's re-election campaign sent out a new fundraising pitch, asking donors to contribute in response to progressive calls to eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

* The National Democratic Redistricting Committee released a new three-minute video yesterday, featuring former President Barack Obama touting the importance of the NDRC's work.

* In Pennsylvania's gubernatorial race, Republican Scott Wagner is trying to distance himself from the Rev. Hyung Jin Sean Moon after appearing with the controversial pastor this past weekend. Moon's church is best known for incorporating AR-15 rifles into its services.

read more

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, talks with reporters after a meeting of the House Republican Conference in the Capitol on June 26, 2018.

Dismissing scandal, GOP leaders circle the wagons, defend Jim Jordan

07/12/18 11:29AM

As of earlier this week, seven former Ohio State University student athletes alleged Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), during his tenure as a coach at the school, knew about a team physician's sexual misconduct, but he turned a blind eye. On Tuesday, CNN ran another report, quoting an unnamed former OSU wrestler, who said, "Jim Jordan knew. He didn't do anything about it."

Given the number of witnesses, one might assume the far-right congressman would face real political peril right now. However, as this NBC News report makes clear, Jordan's support among his Republican colleagues appears to be resilient.

Speaker Paul Ryan on Wednesday joined a unified GOP front supporting Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio in the face of allegations from some former wrestlers at Ohio State University that Jordan turned a blind eye to sexual abuse by the team's doctor.

"Jim Jordan is a friend of mine," Ryan, R-Wis., told reporters. "We haven't always agreed with each other over the years. ... I've also known Jim Jordan to be a man of honesty and a man of integrity."

The House Speaker added that the House Ethics Committee will not review the case, and as of yesterday, every member of the House GOP leadership has expressed his or her support for Jordan against the allegations, as has Donald Trump.

The Washington Post  reports that Jordan is also being backed by a conservative crisis communications firm, "known for representing conservative figures," which has circulated testimonials from students defending the congressman. The article added, "It is unclear who is paying for the effort."

read more

North Koreans didn't show up for latest round of diplomatic talks

07/12/18 11:00AM

Donald Trump has already made a series of extraordinary concessions to North Korea, confident that his gifts to the rogue dictatorship will lead to its denuclearization. That fantasy appears to be unraveling, leaving the American president with nothing to show for his efforts.

The White House, naturally, doesn't quite see it that way. Indeed, as far as Trump is concerned, he's already delivered a major breakthrough: the president has said "thousands" of American parents who lost loved ones during the Korean War have asked him to bring home the remains of fallen troops, and Trump insists he's doing exactly that.

"They have already done 200 people, which is so great," the president boasted at a recent rally in Nevada.

That wasn't entirely true. The State Department conceded soon after that we "have not yet physically received" the remains, though there was a meeting today to discuss the issue. How'd that go?

North Korean officials did not show up on Thursday for a meeting with Americans at the inter-Korean border to discuss the return of remains of United States soldiers killed in the Korean War, officials said. [...]

Though American military officials went to Panmunjom for the meeting on Thursday, their North Korean counterparts did not, according to a United States defense official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. A South Korean government official, who also asked for anonymity, confirmed that the North Koreans had not shown up at Panmunjom.

So let's recap what we've seen since Trump's summit with Kim Jong-un. First, U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that North Korea has recently increased its production of fuel for nuclear weapons at multiple secret sites. Second, formal talks between the countries went nowhere, culminating in North Korea's foreign ministry accusing the Trump administration of making "unilateral and gangster-like" demands.

And third, North Koreans were a no-show at a meeting to discuss the return of American soldiers' remains.

read more

The 'worst-run White House of modern times' loses another prominent official

07/12/18 10:08AM

The White House's legislative affairs director is usually a low-profile position. Traditionally, directors prefer to work behind the scenes, quietly twisting arms on Capitol Hill, hoping lawmakers consider a president's wishes.

Marc Short, however, Donald Trump's legislative affairs director, has put the job in the spotlight. For example, Short has made 15 Sunday-show appearances since this president took office, which is unheard of for someone in his position.

Nevertheless, next week, he's leaving his post. Politico  reported this morning:

President Donald Trump's legislative affairs director is heading for the exits just as the White House gears up for a major Supreme Court nomination battle and approaches a daunting midterm election landscape. [...]

Short, who declined to comment on the record, is taking a position at Guidepost Strategies consulting firm and will teach at the University of Virginia's business school, where he received his MBA, and will also serve as a senior fellow at the university's Miller Center.

A Washington Post  report added, "His departure ... was confirmed by a White House official who requested anonymity to discuss a personnel move that has not been formally announced."

Short's departure comes on the heels of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's resignation, among other major departures from Trump World.

And while I'm not inclined to update the absurdly long master list, I am reminded of a New Yorker piece from last week, in which Susan Glasser described this as possibly "the worst-run White House of modern times," in which "no one is really in charge."

read more

Pages