Monthly Archives: June 2017

During the 2016 election, many voters were dismayed by both major-party candidates. Hillary Clinton was the personification of the Washington establishment foreign-policy hawk, with her dismal track record of urging ill-conceived military interventions. And Donald Trump, who railed against squandering American blood and treasure abroad, possessed neither the knowledge nor the experience nor the discipline nor the character to steer Americas approach to geopolitics in a better direction.

As if those choices weren't dispiriting enough, I fretted that for all Donald Trumps denunciations of the Iraq War and promises to spend money at home rather than abroad, a careful assessment of his words showed that his own instincts were interventionistthat he was no less likely than his opponent to blunder into a major war.

In Syria today, President Trump is risking just such a conflict.

American forces and American allies are not only taking territory from ISIS, theyre holding that territory against regime forces, David French writes at National Review. Theres a word for what happens when a foreign power takes and holds territory without the consent of the sovereign state invasion. In many ways, current American policy is a lighter-footprint, less ambitious version of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Were using local allies, but our own boots are on the ground, and were directly defending our forces and our allies from threats from Syrias own government. In his estimation, the key warring parties increasingly face a stark choiceagree to a de facto partition of the country or inch toward a great-power conflict.

To wit, an American fighter shot down a Syrian warplane on Sunday, the first time the American military has downed a Syrian aircraft since the start of the civil war in 2011. Observers immediately called the incident a marked escalation in the conflict.

And their view was quickly vindicated: Russia on Monday condemned the American militarys downing of a Syrian warplane, suspending the use of a military hotline that Washington and Moscow have used to avoid collisions in Syrian airspace and threatening to target aircraft flown by the United States and its allies over Syria.

Those skeptical of U.S. intervention in the Syrian civil war have long warned that it could escalate into a civilization-warping conflict between nuclear powers. But neither Vietnam nor Afghanistan nor Iraq nor Libya has persuaded todays hawks to sufficiently weight the unintended consequences that plague all complex military interventions. And there are so many varieties of hawks that are urging action.

The complexity of the civil war in Syria is underscored by the fact that the ascendant pro-war faction inside the Trump administration is composed of Iran hawks. According to reporters Kate Brannen, Dan De Luce and Paul McLeary at Just Security, antagonism toward Iran is causing two officials in the Trump White House to push for broadening the conflict, against the advice of officials at the Pentagon:

Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence on the National Security Council, and Derek Harvey, the NSCs top Middle East advisor, want the United States to start going on the offensive in southern Syria Their plans are making even traditional Iran hawks nervous, including Defense Secretary James Mattis, who has personally shot down their proposals more than once, the two sources said Despite the more aggressive stance pushed by some White House officials, Mattis, military commanders and top U.S. diplomats all oppose opening up a broader front against Iran and its proxies in southeastern Syria, viewing it as a risky move that could draw the United States into a dangerous confrontation with Iran, defense officials said. Such a clash could trigger retaliation against U.S. troops deployed in Iraq and Syria, where Tehran has armed thousands of Shiite militia fighters and deployed hundreds of Revolutionary Guard officers.

Put another way, Iran hawks in the Trump White House want to broaden the conflict there in a manner that pits the U.S. against another country that also seeks the defeat of ISIS, the ostensible reason the U.S. is involved in Syria in the first place.

Meanwhile, hawks in Iran are escalating that countrys role in Syria: Iran announced Sunday the Iran Revolutionary Guards had launched ballistic missile strikes on Saturday against ISIS targets in Syria, dramatically escalating the countrys role in the Syrian conflict. The mid-range ground-to-ground missiles targeted militants in eastern Syria in retaliation for the deadly terrorist attacks in Tehran earlier this month.

The American public does not want a major intervention in Syria.

There has never been a congressional vote authorizing U.S. military operations in Syria against anyone, and there has been scant debate over any of the goals that the U.S. claims to be pursuing there, Daniel Larison notes. The U.S. launches attacks inside Syria with no legal authority from the U.N. or Congress, and it strains credulity that any of these operations have anything to do with individual or collective self-defense.

And the push for escalation is a particular betrayal for Trump voters who supported the candidate based on rhetoric about quickly defeating ISIS and otherwise eschewing war. Here is what Trump had to say back when President Obama was contemplating a greater U.S. role in Syria: What I am saying is stay out of Syria AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!

Today, escalation in Syria risks those very bad things, along with American lives and treasure, but Trumps current rhetoric suggests he is more focused on his ongoing feud with the news media, Hillary Clinton, and whether he is under investigation. His approach carries all the risks of Washington establishment hawkery with none of the steadiness, experience or discipline that helps to mitigate them.

Were inching toward an outright invasion and extended occupation of northern Syria, French writes at National Review. All without congressional approval. All without meaningful public debate. Will Trumps base stand for this betrayal? So long as he is commander in chief, the U.S. will suffer from the worst qualities of the establishment and its antagonists. It is hard to imagine a president less fit to avoid catastrophe.

More:

Donald Trump No Longer Wants to 'Stay Out' of Syria - The Atlantic

Jonathan Rauch in Lawfare writes on Republicans' continued devotion to President Donald Trump:

"Perhaps there are limits to Republicans' tolerance, but if Trump hasn't already triggered them, it is hard to imagine where they are. The firing of a special prosecutor? An indictment? Possibly, but one wonders if it might be literally true that Trump could, as he once boasted, shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and retain Republican support.

"The numbers support no predictions, but they offer a hint. Even under a worst-case scenario of presidential malfeasance, removing Trump would be no easy or quick task. It would require a sea-change in Republican partisans' attitude, a change of which there is no sign today. And it would require Republican leaders to take political risks that few have shown any appetite for."

GOP defeats in 2018 might give the Democrats the majority in the House, expediting impeachment, but removing Trump would require a vote of two-thirds of the Senate. Without substantial GOP defections, Trump will be there for the remainder of his four-year term.

Could Trump be forced to resign if, for example, the choice was between resignation and being held in contempt of court for refusal to turn over financial records? Perhaps, but it's far from clear that such a standoff would occur. If it did, Trump and his fleet of lawyers could certainly delay and appeal, in essence running out the clock on his presidency.

Whether in 2020 or before, the only surefire means to protect the country from Trump is to defeat his followers, and eventually him. A third-party candidate, as my colleague Michael Gerson recognizes, could throw the race to the Democrat. My reaction to that possibility is: So? We've made the case here and been proved correct that Trump's flaws as a human being and president surpass matters of policy and put the republic at risk.

While it is true that a primary has never defeated a sitting president in more than 100 years (Lyndon Johnson chose not to run in 1968, Jimmy Carter beat back Ted Kennedy and Gerald Ford held off Ronald Reagan), Trump is helping to rewrite the political playbook. An anti-Trump Republican unsullied by sycophancy and presenting a credible program for uniting the country and addressing policy problems that have befuddled Trump would have a historic opportunity.

In the short term, the most effective way of removing Trump is to defeat again and again lawmakers who refuse to remove him, thereby advancing the prospects for impeachment and putting optimum pressure on Republican senators. (Republicans pledging to vote for impeachment or removal in the Senate based on the facts available at the time might spare themselves.)

With Georgia's special election Tuesday in the 6th Congressional District, we'll get our first inkling of just how vulnerable Republicans might be in 2018. Between now and 2018, Democrats, independents and the small cadre of #NeverTrump Republicans need to pursue two tracks simultaneously keeping the special counselor in place (and assisting in the fact-finding process with open hearings, when possible) and generating momentum to defeat the greatest possible number of Trump protectors. That might entail fielding third-party candidates and primary challenges. Democrats certainly will need to keep their base energized, field an all-star list of candidates and make the case against the extreme Trump agenda while presenting reasonable alternatives of their own.

The only real guarantee, you see, of reversing the debacle of 2016 is to defeat Trump and his minions at the polls. The solution to democracy gone astray is always more democracy.

Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Republicans, beware. The tables will turn.

My application to replace Sean Spicer

Trump's voters were more motivated by nationalism than economic hardship

If Republicans lose the House, Trump will be impeached

More:

To stop Donald Trump, defeat the Republicans who enable him - Chicago Tribune

Donald Trump thanks students whose yearbooks were altered

President Trump is weighing in on a high school that had yearbooks altered to remove three students' references to him

Updated: 1:21 AM EDT Jun 21, 2017

President Donald Trump is weighing in on a New Jersey high school that had yearbooks altered to remove three students' references to him.

The Asbury Park Press reports Trump posted a letter to his Facebook page Monday, thanking Wall High School students Montana and Wyatt Dobrovich-Fago, who previously reported their entries were altered to remove references to Trump.

The letter itself was written by Michael Glassner, the executive director of Trump's campaign. He sent it to the siblings along with a care package of campaign memorabilia.

Superintendent Cheryl Dyer ruled the alteration of Wyatt's photo was unintentional, and said it wasn't clear if Montana's quotation of Trump was intentionally left out.

Dyer says another student, junior Grant Berardo, had his Trump T-shirt digitally painted a nondescript black in an "intentional" alteration.

Go here to see the original:

Donald Trump thanks students whose yearbooks were altered - WYFF Greenville

Another day, another low point for Donald Trump. The president's approval rating, which has proved historically bad since he took office, has sunk again.

The latest survey from CBS Newsout Tuesday found his approval rating had hit a new low of 36 percent, while 57 percent disapproved of the job he is doing. Trump's approval rating has declined over the last few monthsin the CBS News poll. Forty-three percent approved of him in early April, a number that dropped to 41 percent by late April and now has hit the new low of 36 percent in late June. The previous low for Trump was 39 percent in February.

Trump's support among Republicans might have been a factor in the drop. Seventy-two percent of GOP respondents approved of the president's job performancewhich sounds like a lotbut actually represents an 11-percentage-point fall compared with April.

Daily Emails and Alerts- Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

The poll found that the investigation into Trump's potential ties with Russia, the country that interfered in the 2016 election as it aimed to helpget the GOP candidate into office, hasdragged down his popularity. His firing of FBI Director James Comey and comments suggesting the move was connected to the bureau's Russia probe, as well as his near-constant focus on the investigation, might not be helping him with the American people.Just 28 percent of respondents approved of the way he's handled the probe, according to CBS, while 63 percent disapprove. About one-third said Trump's approach on the process has left them thinking less of the president. Fifty-sevenpercent of GOP respondents approved of Trump's handling of the Russia investigation.

Thirty-nine percent of all respondents thought the Russia investigation was a critical national security issue, while 32 percent thought it was a distraction. Twenty-seven percent thought it was a serious issue but not as serious as other issues.

The CBS News survey, conducted bySSRS,sampled1,117 adults across the country though telephone interviews from June 15 through June 18. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points for the full sample.

Other recent surveys haven't brought good news for Trumpeither. The tracking poll from the generallyright-leaning Rasmussen Reports, a survey often cited by the president on Twitter, found Trump's approval rating had fallen 2 percentage points over the weekend, to 48 percent. Gallup's tracking poll, meanwhile, pegged Trump's approval at just 38 percent Monday, closing in on the president's lowest point in the survey35 percentwhich he hit in late March.

The weighted average from data-focused website FiveThirtyEighthad Trump's approval rating at 38.7 percent Tuesday morning, while his disapproval stood at 55.3 percent. FiveThirtyEightaggregates public polls to come up with the average figure and accounts for each survey's quality, timeliness, sample size and any partisan leanings.

See original here:

Donald Trump's Approval Rating Plummets to New Low as Republicans Grow Wary Amid Russia Investigation - Newsweek