Category Archives: Donald Trump

President Trumps insight into what captivates the American people, and what draws the attention of the news media, remains remarkable. Consider, for example, how he castthat seems the right wordthe defense team for his impeachment trial, which begins Tuesday, in the United States Senate. There are not many legal celebrities in the United States, but Trump now has two of them: Kenneth Starr, the erstwhile pursuer of Hillary and Bill Clinton as the independent counsel during the Whitewater (and more) matter, and Alan Dershowitz, defender of O.J. Simpson, other famous clients, and, lately, his own conduct. How can we not wonder how Starr, who inveighed against what he called the dishonesty of the Clintons, will contrive to defend this President? What will Dershowitz, a onetime liberal and a civil libertarian, say about his new client, who is openly hostile to the values enshrined in the Bill of Rights? And how did Trump manage to find not one but two famous lawyers who had previously joined forces to defend Jeffrey Epstein, who was a friend of Trumps?

Five of the Presidents eight lawyers have appeared frequently on Fox News, and theyve been hired to put on an entertaining show for the Senate. (Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel, Jane Raskin, a member of Trumps legal defense team, and Eric Herschmann are the exceptions.) But the showmanship thats likely to be on display should not obscure whats really going on here. The outcome of the trial is not in doubt; there is no way that sixty-seven senators will vote to remove Trump from office. But there is a real question about whether the trial will involve any fact-findingthat is, the presentation of witnesses and new documentary evidence. Trumps real priority, and that of the Republican leadership in the Senate, is to make sure that never happens.

Dershowitz is likely to be the crucial figure on the Senate floor. He is currently trying to portray himself as more of a neutral constitutional expert, rather than as a full-fledged member of Trumps defense team. That semantic dodge is meant to elevate his core argument: that the two articles of impeachment, even if they accurately describe the Presidents conduct, are not impeachable offenses. Its worth addressing that argument, because its likely to be crucial to the Senate trial, not just on the merits but on the issue of whether the seven House managers named by Nancy Pelosi last week will be allowed to call witnesses.

The first article charges Trump with abuse of his constitutional powers, through his dealings with the government of Ukraine. The claim is a familiar one by now. Trump withheld congressionally authorized funds, and also personal Presidential attention, from Ukraine in an effort to force the announcement of an investigation of former Vice-President Joe Biden, Trumps putative 2020 opponent, and Bidens son Hunter. The second article charges Trump with obstructing Congress, by refusing all demands for witnesses and documents in the Ukraine investigation. Dershowitz says, and all of Trumps lawyers will argue, that neither article charges conduct that is a high crime and misdemeanor, the standard for impeachment established in the Constitution.

Dershowitz does not say exactly that a President must commit a crimean actual criminal offenseto commit a high crime and misdemeanor, but thats what his position comes down to in the real world. He is worried, rightly, about Congress trying to evict a President simply because of policy differences. But neither of the articles refers to any good-faith dispute over Trumps performance in office. Rather, both charge core violations of Presidential duties. What Dershowitzs position misses is that impeachment is designed specifically to police Presidential conductto make sure that a President does not abuse the powers which that office alone possesses under our system of governance. This is why Bill Clintons conduct should not have been impeachable. Lying under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky was likely a crimeperjurybut it was not an abuse of Presidential power, and thus not a high crime and misdemeanor.

What makes Dershowitzs argument so important in the context of Trumps case is that it gives Republican senators an excuse to vote against witnesses. If his view is adopted, it means that Republicans can accept the truth of factual assertions from the House managers, for the sake of argument, and still vote to exclude new witnesses. By this reasoning, the witnesses would not offer anything of value because they would only testify to conduct that is not impeachable, anyway. Thats the real point, and the real danger, of Dershowitzs argument; it gives Republicans cover to cut short the Senate trial.

Trump and his followers (and his enablers, such as Dershowitz) surely recognize that the facts in this case will show how much the President abused his power through his dealings with Ukraine. (The Government Accountability Office just added to those facts by finding that the withholding of funds for Ukraine was illegal.) If the House managers are allowed to call witnesses, those witnesses will likely make the case against Trump even stronger. At some level, the Presidents defenders must know that Trumps conduct is impeachable. Thats why Trump has taken every opportunity to block the facts from coming out. On Tuesday, the Presidents lawyers reveal their true agenda: to persuade the Senate to preserve Trumps incriminating secrets.

See the original post:

How Donald Trumps Unlikely Legal Team Will Try to Defend Him - The New Yorker

The big difference was the way most people at Davos, including Americans but especially the non-Americans, were responding to this flamboyant but familiar show. The consensus reaction: Whatever.

This years Davos gathering featured several preoccupationssubjects that seem to come up at every panel, in every sidewalk encounterand it is striking that Trump is a marginal figure in all of them.

Some of the American delegates behave as if the world is America, with its 24-hour, 7X-weekly Trump obsession, while much of the rest of the world has simply moved beyond the Trump drama, David Miliband, a former British foreign minister who now heads the International Rescue Committee, said in an interview.

Christian Rhally, an executive at LinkedIn who emphasized he was speaking in a personal capacity, said Trump lacks the aura or the respect that a president might ordinarily command at Davos. Echoing a common refrain, he said Trumps Tuesday address sounded more like a campaign speech, raising the question of whether he was even trying to engage with the global audience. You cant ignore him but its nothing people really talk about.

Conversation was instead dominated by three seething conflicts that many participants see as existential in their long-term implications for the global order.

There is the conflict over the future of capitalism. Business and government leaders here look at polling in nations around the world, and see the tenor of the debate in the Democratic presidential campaign, and acknowledge that deep mistrust of free markets is likely to be an enduring political reality.

There is the conflict over the future of technology. This is partly about how vigorously to regulate U.S.-based giants like Facebook and Amazon. Even more, however, tech policy is being viewed through the prism of long-term competition between the United States and China over who will be more influential in shaping the global tech landscape on artificial intelligence and 5G mobile capacity.

Above all, there is the conflict over the future of the planet. In this case, the climate change debate came with an edge of generational tension. Seventeen-year-old celebrity activist Greta Thunberg commanded the spotlight here, who scolded reckless capitalists and feckless policymakers in her speech: Your inaction is fueling the flames by the hour, and we are telling you to act as if you loved your children above all else.

President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. | Evan Vucci/AP Photo

It seems likely that Thunbergs perspective goes back far enough to realize that her very presenceand the celebratory attention lavished upon herwas an illustration of one of the historic roles of the Davos gathering.

With its mix of public-policy activists side by side with some of the planets wealthiest and most influential peopleall participating in a virtually round-the-clock blur of panels and partiesDavos has long served as a kind of buffering agent between go-go capitalists and do-good social activists.

For the capitalists, the theme of censorious self-criticism was especially pronounced this year. Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, wrote in a special Davos issue of Time magazine that Capitalism may be at a tipping point, endangered in part because policymakers and business leaders have done of a poor job of helping those who have been left behind.

An annual survey known as the Trust barometer sponsored by the Edelman public affairs firmcollecting views from 34,000 people in 28 countriescaptured the downbeat assumptions that pervaded many conversations at Davos. Some 56 percent of respondents say they believe that capitalism does more harm than good. Fewer than one in three people in developed markets believe they and their families will be better off in five years time. Nearly 80 percent agree that elites are getting richer while regular people struggle to pay their bills.

Virtually every event or corporate branding project here was designed to associate the sponsor with the message of acknowledging gaps in equalitybetween sexes, between geographical regions, between capitalisms winners and losersand pledging to do something about it. Lets make business the greatest platform for change, read the banner at the Salesforce hub here.

The blas reaction to Trump showed how quickly the Davos crowd has gone through its stages of reaction to a figure who was elected in part with a pledge to halt the kind of economic and social integration that historically has been celebrated by the World Economic Forum.

Three years ago, just as Trump was about to be inaugurated, the general thrust of conversations with business and government leaders about him was one of alarm: What the hell has happened to America and what does this mean?!

Around the time of his first appearance at Davos two years ago, fresh off passing a tax-reform measure that many business leaders liked as pro-growth, people here criticized his divisive style but often added something like, You know, his actual record is not as bad as we feared and we can learn to live with him.

Now, Trumps style and substance seems to have been factored into peoples expectations alreadycreating a new normalthat Trump has become something people dont often associate with him: No longer especially interesting.

It is not that the Davos participants see themselves as simply waiting out Trump. There was lots of chatter here predicting that he would win re-election, though the reasons offered were not any more insightful than something you would hear on a random cable-TV panel (Trumps base is so loyal; Democrats may nominate someone too divisive, etc.).

Still, the general mood here made the self-oriented, rah-rah promotion of Trump seem off-key, irrelevant to the moment.

At his Wednesday news conference before leaving, Trump said he wished he saw Thunbergs speech but that she should turn her attention elsewhere from the United States because our water numbers, our numbers on air, are tremendous.

He is a moron, a European energy executive said of Trump. Do we have time for it? No. We have to change our whole company to get carbon-neutral.

Greta is great, said an executive for a Japanese manufacturer. Even if she cant deliver, she is needed to balance Trump in conversation and that seems to be happening.

Read this article:

Trump Roars, and Davos Shrugs - POLITICO

Starting this week, an endless number of commentators, including yours truly, will descend on the cable news networks to breathlessly analyze the Senate trial of President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump says his advice to impeachment defense team is 'just be honest' Trump expands tariffs on steel and aluminum imports CNN's Axelrod says impeachment didn't come up until 80 minutes into focus group MORE. We will talk about the law and strategy as we eagerly consume every hour of what will be a clownish but captivating spectacle. We will watch senators from both parties pretend their minds are not made up, when we know exactly how they will each vote. We will pontificate about the sanctity of impeachment, about the Constitution, and how this entire ordeal will eventually be judged in the history books.

But let me clue you in on something. None of this really matters, and not just because we all know how it ends. It does not matter because this trial simply has nothing to do with the law or the Constitution or dealings with Ukraine. This is not oversight by Congress or some principled exercise by serious leaders to protect the system from a corrupt president. It is and has always been about rejecting a president who not only refuses to play by the rules but to acknowledge they even exist. It is and has always been a desperate attempt to stop him from winning reelection this November.

Anyone paying attention in 2016 knew exactly what we were getting with Trump, and nothing he has done as president is a surprise. He is impolite and petulant. He will throw anyone under the bus. He is not judicious in his choice of friends, his actions, or his speech, and he regularly toes the line of legality. He has no use for Washington power structures or respect for freedom of the press. In a town that rewards conformity, Trump is the complete opposite, and his election threw the entire system out of whack.

But you know what? That is all just fine. Ultimately, the system within our democracy was not meant to limit presidential candidates to the vetted members of an aristocratic class. The beauty of our nation is that anyone can be elected to office, whether they are cut out for the job or not, and Americans are entitled to the president of their choice every four years.

For the past few decades most of our presidential candidates fit into one of two molds. One was the career politician who went to an Ivy League, groomed for politics with no experience in the private sector. The other was the product of a dynasty, someone whose success was largely owed to the power and wealth that came from existing bases. When you look at 2016, Trump was an outlier on both sides of the aisle. His election was the resounding rejection of a system that millions of Americans decided was not working for them. They chose to give Trump a chance to do better.

When the Ukraine story broke, despite the efforts by Democrats to sell it as the worst offense, the public did not buy it because this is exactly the kind of behavior they expect from Trump. They were unimpressed with an impeachment case with no real crime and no actual harm to Ukraine, with many convinced this was no worse than how other presidents behave. It revealed the Hunter Biden arrangement with Burisma, exactly the type of deal that Americans so detest yet have come to expect from Washington insiders and their families shamelessly cashing in on all their influence.

Perhaps if Democrats had not spent the last three years calling Trump a Russian stooge and traitor then they would have some credibility today. However, the special counsel investigation and the unceasing march to impeach Trump for whatever they find now makes them impossible to take seriously. Despite their best efforts there was no public outcry for impeachment and no break in the ranks by Republicans. Yet Democrats marched on to hand us a partisan impeachment simply doomed to fail.

The true threat to our democracy is not Trump. It is leaders who are using the system to accomplish what they cannot at the ballot box. For better or worse, Trump is our president. We had the right to elect him the first time, and we have the right to decide if he keeps his job for another term. This impeachment is about taking away that right. Let us have the trial, ensure it is fair, hear from witnesses, and allow the chips to fall where they may. But let us not pretend it is principled. It is a divisive and harmful scorched earth campaign designed to prevent Americans from repeating what the ruling class believes never should have been allowed in the first place.

Joseph Moreno is a former federal prosecutor at the Justice Department and a United States Army combat veteran. He currently practices law in Washington. You can follow him on Twitter @JosephMoreno. The views expressed in this column are his own and are not those of his employer.

More:

This trial is not about Donald Trump | TheHill - The Hill

Five other states Illinois, Maine, New York, Oregon and Washington have similar laws on the books. But HHS is, for now, only singling out California.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom indicated the state won't change the policy.

"The Trump administration would rather rile up its base to score cheap political points and risk access to care for millions than do whats right," he said. "California will continue to protect a womans right to choose, and we won't back down from defending reproductive freedom for everybody full stop.

California's Attorney General Xavier Becerra tweeted "California won't be deterred. We will fight this by any means necessary."

The move is in line with other Trump administration actions targeting the progressive state over issues including environmental standards, immigration policies and homelessness. It was also timed to coincide with the March for Life on the National Mall, where President Donald Trump will become the first president to address the anti-abortion demonstration in person as he works to shore up support from social conservatives.

Groups opposed to abortion immediately praised the threat to cut funding.

The Family Research Council said the decision shows "just how seriously this administration views its role in protecting conscience rights for all Americans" while the leader of Susan B. Anthony List a group that plans to spend tens of millions of dollars this year to help Trump get re-elected praised him as "the most pro-life president in U.S. history."

While public insurance programs like Medicaid have long been barred from covering abortion services, Fridays announcement also marks an escalation of the administrations efforts to extend the prohibition to private coverage. In December, HHS unveiled a rule requiring private insurers on Obamacare markets to send patients separate monthly bills to separate the portion of the premium that goes toward abortion coverage. The added administrative burden could prompt some insurers to drop abortion care altogether.

"We're sending a message that if any state does what California has done, they should likewise expect to be found in violation," Severino said. "Whatever one thinks of the legality of abortion, the American people have spoken with one voice that they should not be forced to pay for, participate in, or cover someone's abortion."

HHS said a Catholic order that previously and unsuccessfully sued California over the policy the Missionary Guadalupanas of the Holy Spirit filed a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights that led to the investigation and notice of violation. Severino on Friday compared the issue to the legal challenge filed by another group of nuns challenging the Obamacare's birth control mandate a case the Supreme Court last week agreed to review.

"The parallels with the Little Sisters of the Poor case are clear," he said. "Once again, the government is trying to force nuns to cover abortion for fellow nuns. Why can't they be left alone?"

Read the rest here:

Trump threatens to cut California funding over abortion coverage - POLITICO

Trump attracts plenty of ridicule for his promise-mongering about the wall with Mexico, but the unbuilt wall can do the same job in 2020 as the hypothetical wall did in 2016 e.g., Reelect me, I have to finish what Nancy Pelosi prevented me from doing, blah blah blah.

Trumps, harsh, cruelty-first immigration policies havent won him many friends in the commentariat, or in states where immigration and asylum issues arent integrally connected to the local economy, i.e., Massachusetts. But he will run on his record.

A Trump ad aired last fall claims he has cut illegal immigration in half an exaggeration, to put it mildly. Yet The Washington Post recently reported that the number of migrants taken into custody along the US-Mexico border has started to plateau after several straight months of decline.

He grasped the nettle, as he promised to do.

Nobel Prize winners are never going to praise Trumponomics (Paul Krugman on Election Day, 2016: Markets are plunging), but in a presidential campaign, three pocketbook issues matter: (1) Is inflation under control? (2) Is gasoline more expensive? and (3) Do I have a job?

The election is several months away, but for now the answers for most Americans are Yes, No, and Yes. Advantage Trump.

Concerning foreign entanglements, Trumps foreign policy can be politely described as incoherent. American troop deployments overseas have either declined or remained steady, depending on whom you choose to believe. When Trump was elected, my greatest fear was that he would provoke a war on the Korean peninsula. That hasnt happened, which either exposes my poor judgment or means that Trump has acted with more restraint than I thought he would.

Trumpism spawned a spate of wheezy Death of Democracy articles in thought leader publications, e.g., The Atlantics How America Ends or The New York Timess How Democracy Dies. What a charade. Trump loves democracy! American democracy has provided him with a tricked-out Boeing 747 that he can fly down to Florida to play golf, any day he wants. Not just on weekends.

Democracy is grand!

Further proof that Trump loves democracy: He has injected himself into several closely contested state elections since he became president. (Louisiana, Kentucky, and Alabama come to mind.) With mixed results, to be sure. But there is no reason to think he wont contest this next election, and vigorously. Itll be worth it just to keep flying his Golf Shuttle, formerly known as Air Force One.

Ah, I hear you say, but people despise Donald Trump. That is true. In one poll, 69 percent of the respondents said they dislike Trumps admittedly loathsome personality. But the Trump campaign has that angle covered: Hes no Mr. Nice Guy, an ad that ran during the 2019 World Series declared, but sometimes it takes a Donald Trump to change Washington.

Its easy to write off Trump as a psychiatric basket case, or an Adolf Hitler wannabe. The truth is much starker: He is a formidable candidate for reelection to the presidency of the United States.

Alex Beams column appears regularly in the Globe. Follow him on Twitter @imalexbeamyrnot.

Read this article:

Lets analyze Donald Trumps reelection chances - The Boston Globe

Everyone wants to know how Amazon owner Jeff Bezos got hacked. Not only because its surprising to learn that the tech big-wigs phone wasnt adequately protected against cybercrime, but because it matters in todays political landscape.

A forensic analysis of Jeff Bezos cell phone pointed to a WhatsApp video as the source of the hacking attack. The video was sent to Bezos by Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Following reports of the hacking source, the Saudi Arabian embassy issued a statement on Twitter calling the accusations absurd. After all, why would Saudi officials want Jeff Bezos personal information?

There are a few potential answers to that the first and most prominent being to hold it over his head in the wake of Washington Post Journalist Jamal Khashoggis death. Khashoggis murder was called into question by WaPo, and the ordeal soured Bezos relationship with Salman, but was it the reason for Bezos phone hack?

Perhaps, but the timing is questionable. The video in question was sent to Jeff Bezos on May 1 while the two men were having a friendly conversation. Khashoggi was murdered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul five months later.

Some say the fact that the Saudi price was monitoring Bezos device shows how far-reaching the nations cyber surveillance efforts have become. Others claim Salman sent the infected video in hopes of getting some dirt on Bezos if the Washington Posts coverage of Saudi Arabia was unpopular.

Proponents of this theory point to the private text messages published by the National Enquirer nine months later as proof. But while the Saudis are almost certainly responsible for infecting Bezos phone, the why has become increasingly important.

If the Saudi prince was hoping to blackmail Bezos or change the way the Washington Post was reporting, does it make sense to publish damaging personal information posing as someone else? The National Enquirer claims the personal exchanges between Jeff Bezos and girlfriend Lauren Sanchez came from her disgruntled brother.

But her brother tells another story. While he admitted to working with the National Enquirer, Michael Sanchez says he didnt provide the publication with the texts and photographs in question.

Admittedly, there is no concrete evidence linking President Trump to the Jeff Bezos hacking but he is a common thread linking each of the participants. Trump close to the National Enquirers then-owner, David Pecker. The two have been accused of working together to skew media coverage in Trumps favor in the past.

Plus, theres Donald Trumps chummy relationship with Said officials a fact that has been vehemently criticized in the wake of Khashoggis murder. New concerns that the Saudi prince may have been spying on the White House via Jared Kushners phone reveal the president forced [Salmans] security clearance through.

Finally, theres his ongoing conflict with the Washington Post and its owner. Trumps beef with Bezos was rumored to have disrupted a potential deal between Amazon and the Department of Defense. If you subscribe to that theory, is it such a stretch to imagine Trump asking the Saudi Prince to dig up dirt on Bezos?

With Trump currently on trial for abusing his power for his own personal gain, the fact that he has been feuding with Jeff Bezos and the Washington Post for years cant be overlooked. Saudi Arabias bold Twitter post calling for an investigation into claims that Prince Salman is behind the hacking attack are telling. Whether the White House is willing to delve into the matter further is likely dependent on the presidents involvement.

Moving forward, keep an eye on Trumps response and Washingtons willingness to investigate the Saudis cyber-surveillance. While there isnt any evidence linking Donald Trump to the ordeal right now, Id say theres a good chance there will be if the investigation goes further.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of CCN.com.

This article was edited by Sam Bourgi.

Last modified: January 22, 2020 4:49 PM UTC

Excerpt from:

Donald Trump May Have Been Behind Jeff Bezos Phone Hack - CCN.com

The enemies of Israel have unleashed a massive air attack on the Promised Land. Hundreds of fighter jets streak across the sky. But before Israel can be destroyed, fire rains from the heavens and the enemy jets explode in mid-air with no explanation. Hailstones the size of golf balls follow the fire. The ground shakes. Birds pick clean the bodies of the fallen attackers. The enemy is vanquished without a single Israeli casualty, and the country is saved.

These are some of the opening scenes of the bestselling 1995 book Left Behind: A Novel of the Earths Last Days, by Jerry B. Jenkins and the late evangelical minister Tim LaHaye. But dont mistake this scenario for a mere action sequence: Its based on the war of Gog and Magog, a biblical conflict prophesied in the Book of Ezekiel. In the Bible, Gog is the leader of Magog, a place in the far north that many evangelicals believe is Russia. According to Ezekiels prophecy, Gog will join with Persianow Iranand other Arab nations to attack a peaceful Israel like a cloud that covers the land. LaHaye, like many evangelicals, believed this battle would bring on the Rapture, the End Times event when God spirits away the good Christians to heaven before unleashing plagues, sickness, and other horrors on the unbelievers remaining on Earth. Meanwhile, the Antichrist reigns supreme.

The story of Gog and Magog is central to the bloody eschatology long embraced by millions of American evangelicals. In recent years, End Times has gained special political currency as believers have seen any number of Middle East conflagrations as fulfilling Ezekiels prophecy, notably the US invasion of Iraq and the war in Syria. Gog and Magog took on fresh relevance earlier this month, when the Trump administration assassinated Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, the commander of Irans elite Quds Force.

On many levels, President Donald Trumps self-created crisis in Iran seems to have no relationship to any sort of coherent foreign policy or geopolitical plan for the future. The assassination has yielded few if any tangible rewards for the US. But there is an eager constituency for Trumps improvised policy toward the Middle East and Iran in particular: the evangelical Christians who see it as a means of ushering in the return of Christ. Lured by the promise of conservative Supreme Court justices, anti-abortion measures, and a commitment to Christian supremacy under the guise of religious freedom, white evangelicals voted for Trump in higher numbers than any other groupmore than 80 percent.

He desperately needs them if hes going to be reelected. And while some have expressed concern about the administrations inching toward war with Iran, many of those with what were once fringe beliefs have cheered the killing of Soleimani. Iran has this big part to play in biblical history, says religious historian Diana Butler Bass, who grew up in the evangelical church, attended an evangelical college and seminary, and wrote her Ph.D. thesis at Duke University on American fundamentalism. There are these particular prophecies from Ezekiel, where there is talk of a war that will happen at a very important moment in Israels history. And that war is going to kick off the End Times. People in this prophetic community believe Iran is going to be one of these aggressors.

Bass thinks this worldview may be central to understanding Trumps foreign policy. When Iran gets into the news, especially with anything to do with war, its sort of a prophetic dog whistle to evangelicals. They will support anything that seems to edge the world towards this conflagration, she says. They dont necessarily want violence, but theyre eager for Christ to return and they think that this war with Iran and Israel has to happen for their larger hope to pass.

Not all or even most evangelicals believe inthe literal truth of these sorts of prophecies, though nearly 60 percent of white evangelicals, according to one 2010 poll, believe Jesus is definitely or probably going to return by the year 2050. But those who do subscribe to this apocalyptic world view seem to be overrepresented among Trumps religious supporters and advisers. In October, a host of influential evangelical pastors came to the White House to pray with Trump to protect him from impeachment. Among those who laid hands on the president as he stood, head bowed, in the Oval Office, was repeat visitor Greg Laurie, pastor of a California megachurch. A few days after the killing of Soleimani, Laurie made a YouTube video with Don Stewart, author of 25 Signs We Are Near the End, to discuss Iran and the End Times. The scenario that the Bible predicted, seemingly so impossible, Stewart promised, is now falling into place.

From the outset, Trump has surrounded himself with people who hail from the fringes of the evangelical community that is steeped in the language of biblical prophecy, and his administration regularly reflects that language back to them in its messaging. In March 2017, for instance, Trump issued an official White House statement recognizing the Persian New Year in which he misattributed a quote to Cyrus the Great, the libertine pagan leader of the ancient Persian empire who was anointed by God to free Jews in Babylon. Ordinary Americans probably wouldnt have even noticed the announcement, but evangelicals knew that Trump was speaking their language. Many of them believe Trump is like Cyrus, a flawed nonbeliever who nonetheless is chosen by God to work his miracles on Earth.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was reportedly instrumental in pushing for the killing of Soleimani, is also a master of such messaging. In March, during an interview in Jerusalem with the Christian Broadcasting Network (founded by another apocalyptic preacher, Pat Robertson), Pompeo showed his familiarity with another Iran-centric Bible story popular with End Times evangelicals. In the story, a Persian king is urged to slaughter the Jews in his kingdom at the urging of the evil adviser Haman. But his Jewish Queen Esther convinces him not to and saves her people. Asked whether he thought Trump could be a modern-day Esther, saving the Jews from Iran, Pompeo replied, As a Christian, I certainly believe thats possible. The secretary of states End Times beliefs made headlines again after the Soleimani killing, as meme-makers circulated a quote from a speech he made in a Kansas church in 2015. A few days after the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage, Pompeo said: We will continue to fight these battles. It is a never-ending struggle. until the Rapture.

The State Department did not respond to questions about how Pompeos religious views may affect his foreign policy decisions. But its not hard to see how apocalyptic evangelicalism might be influencing the Trump administration as it seeks to mobilize the millions of evangelicals reached by televangelists and megachurch pastors preaching the End Times. The most blatant appeal to this constituency came when Trump made the controversial decision to move the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a long-desired goal of evangelicals who see it as fulfilling a biblical prophecy necessary in securing the Second Coming. What may be less obvious is how Trumps disdain for international governing bodies like NATO also dovetails almost perfectly with End Times theology, whether he realizes it or not.

Matthew Avery Sutton, a Washington State University history professor and author of American Apocalypse: A History of Modern Evangelicalism, says evangelicals who believe the end is near have always been hostile to any sort of international organizations. Thats because they believe biblical prophecies that say that in the last days, a world leader who preaches peace will emerge and move toward a one-world government. In fact, the prophecy goes, that leader will be the Antichrist who will force the world to accept a false religion and persecute people who dont accept him as a Messiah. (In Left Behind, the Antichrist is a Romanian UN secretary-general.) Evangelicals love Trumps talk of pulling out of NATO, his attacks on the UN, and his trashing of the Paris climate change accord. They hate the UN, Sutton says. Trumps unilateralism is also music to their ears.

Trump is not the first president to surround himself with evangelical Christians with an apocalyptic bent. Ronald Reagan was advised by Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell, and personally believed in the End Times and the coming apocalypse, writing about it in his journals. He appointed people like Interior Secretary James Watt, a Pentecostal fundamentalist whose disdain for environmental conservation seemed to be informed by his belief that the end of the world was nigh. In an appearance before Congress, he told stunned lawmakers, I do not know how many future generations we can count on before the Lord returns.

Apparently George W. Bush was also part of this apocalypse-now group. When Bush was trying to convince French president Jacques Chirac to support an invasion of Iran in 2003, he reportedly told Chirac:Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East. Biblical prophecies are being fulfilled. Chirac had no idea what Bush was talking about and had to consult a biblical scholar.

Trump, who seems unable to distinguish between the New and Old Testaments, doesnt seem particularly fluent in the prophecies of Ezekiel. But he has brought into the White House a host of people who are. Quite a few also hail from what Bass delicately describes as the not respectable charlatan wing of evangelical Christianity. Theyre the prosperity preachers and prophets of the sort depicted by Sinclair Lewis in Elmer Gantry. I have no doubt at all that those people are sitting right next to [Trump], giving him these Bible verses, telling him about these prophecies, Bass says, which means that they are kind of egging him on, [telling him] that hes part of Gods prophetic fulfillment for these last days.

Many of those who have become White House regulars are associated with something known as the New Apostolic Reformation, what Christianity Today describes as a loosely connected group of Pentecostals and Charismatics. Theyre the ones who speak in tongues, scour the news for clues to biblical prophecies, engage in faith healing, and preach prosperity gospelthe notion that faith in God (or, usually, the preacher) will make people wealthy (or at least enrich the preacher). These apostles tend to embrace dominionist theology that implores Christians to take over of all levels of government, media, and education as a way of preparing for the End Times and return of Christ. Influential politicians like former Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who has made several visits to the Trump White House, former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, and former Trump Energy Secretary Rick Perry fall into this camp.

Peter Montgomery, a senior fellow at the liberal nonprofit People for the American Way who has tracked the religious right for many years, says that the network of preachers who come from NAR and Pentecostal media operations are telling people over and over again that Trump was chosen, that God intervened in the election. Some of them say very explicitly that Trump is playing a role in Gods End Time plans to bring about the return of Christ.

One of the most prominent representatives of the Left Behind wing of the evangelical movement is San Antonio televangelist John Hagee, who has been calling for a war with Iran for more than a 15 years. In 2005, Hagee wrote a best-selling book, Jerusalem Countdown, that claimed the Bible predicted a war with Iran. (In 2011, it was turned into a movie of the same title, starring Bionic Man Lee Majors and Randy Travis.) Shortly after the book was published, Hagee created Christians United for Israel, a Christian Zionist organization that now claims to have 8 million members. It lobbies for support for Israeli settlements, military aid to Israel, and for the US to join with Israel to launch a preemptive strike on Iran.

Hagee, now 79, had once been popular with powerful Republicans during the George W. Bush administration, despite some of his more controversial statements. Among other things, he has said that gays caused Hurricane Katrina, referred to the Catholic Church as the great whore, called Hitler a half-breed Jew, and said that Hitler was part of Gods plan to get the Jews back to Israel. His star began to fall in 2008 after he endorsed Sen. John McCain for the GOP presidential nomination. McCain rejected his support, calling Hagees views crazy and unacceptable.

The election of Barack Obama consigned Hagee to his megachurch in San Antonio. But Trump has restored him to the corridors of power in Washington. Hagee endorsed Trump early in 2016. Once Trump was elected, Hagee met with the new president for two hours in 2017 to discuss moving the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Foreign policy experts feared the embassy relocation would destabilize the region and hamper peace talks, but Trump moved it anyway in May 2018. Israeli troops killed more than 50 people in the protests that followed.

Hagee attended the opening ceremony alongside notables such as Ivanka Trump and husband Jared Kushner, and he gave the closing benediction. Let every Islamic terrorist hear this message: Israel lives, he announced. Let it echo down the marble halls of the presidential palace in Iran: Israel lives. He later told the Texas Observer that he was looking forward to Trump confronting Iran, explaining, The sum of Irans evil is greater than the whole of its parts.

When Christians United for Israel held its annual DC confab and lobbying day last summer, Trump sent no fewer than five top administration officials to address attendees, including Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence (both evangelicals themselves), thennational security adviser John Bolton, a special envoy to the Middle East, and the US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman. Pompeo opened the speech by telling the crowd of more than 5,000 people, This is what it must have looked like to be part of the crowd for the fishes and the loaves. What a miracle that was. Once more the story of Queen Esther came in handy, this time as Pompeo compared it to modern-day Iran.

Hagee is one of the most prominent of Trumps evangelical supporters who see a war with Iran as a necessary step towards the End Times, but hes far from the only one. The White House has hosted a steady stream of dominionists and NAR apostles since Trump took office, including Lance Wallnau, author of Gods Chaos President. An evangelical leader with a consulting business in Dallas, Wallnau has become famous as one of the few evangelicals who accurately prophesied Trumps election after receiving divine inspiration to read chapter 45 of the Book of Isaiah. Thats the story of King Cyrus, whom Wallnau and many other evangelicals think Trump resembles. (For $45, Wallnau and ex-con televangelist Jim Bakker now sell a Trump/Cyrus coin that people can use to pray for Trumps reelection.) Dr. Lance, as hes known, has made several visits to the White House, including for a private briefing on Jared Kushners Middle East peace plan.

Facilitating many of these visits is Paula White-Cain, the controversial televangelist associated with the Trinity Broadcasting Network who became Trumps spiritual adviser after he saw her preach on TV in the early aughts. White led a 20,000-strong megachurch in Tampa that was investigated by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) in 2007 for lavish spending on private jets and big houses and possible violations of its tax-exempt status. His report did not find any wrongdoingchurch leaders refused to cooperate with the investigationbut in 2012, Whites church declared bankruptcy. She went on to lead a mostly African American church in Florida where she remained until last spring, when her son took over the ministry.

Now on her third marriage, White has long been at odds with more elite, mainstream evangelicals because of her particular self-help brand of prosperity gospel. Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore called White a charlatan and heretic. Nonetheless, in late October, Trump installed her in an official post at the White House office of public liaison to do outreach to evangelicals, formalizing access for some of the more extreme members of that group. She has referred to Trump as a modern-day Esther and called his enemies demonic.

Bass says that evangelical elites of the sort who associated with President George W. Bush have long looked down their noses at populist preachers like White and her crowd, but Trump has elevated them to positions of power. Its a win-win situation. The evangelicals are at last in the influential positions those who disparaged them once held. And Trumps narcissism is receiving special nourishment by their insistence that he was chosen by God. I think that Trump likes it when people think hes close to Godhe called himself the chosen oneand to think that all of this has some sort of divine backing, Bass says. I dont think theres ever been a president who was quite influenced by this stream of evangelicalism as Trump has been.

Naturally, there are political benefits to all of this. The administration has struggled to provide evidence of any imminent threats from Soleimani, but the timing for the assassination was certainly fortuitous for someone looking to mobilize evangelicals. Not only was Trump embroiled in impeachment hearings, he was still chaffing from a recent editorial in the evangelical publication Christianity Today, founded by Billy Graham, calling for him to be removed from office on moral grounds. Trump announced the killing of Soleimani just hours before appearing at the launch of his campaigns Evangelicals for Trump coalition in Miami.

That event took place at a Pentacostal Latino church headed by Guillermo Maldonado, who speaks in tongues and hosts a TV show called The Supernatural Now. Hes the founder of the King Jesus International Ministry, a Miami megachurch with upwards of 20,000 members and a large TV and radio presence. Maldonado is also another regular White House visitor who has preached that Trump has a role in Gods plans for the End Times. At the 2019 Global Prophetic Summit, he claimed that God told him, America, I have prepared this time, I have raised somebody in office to open the doors for my gospels.

Andr Gagn, a theology professor at Concordia University in Montreal, says the apocalyptic worldview is concerning at such high levels of power, because believers may be rather sanguine about the possibility that assassinating an Iranian general might spur an even bigger war or nuclear confrontation in the Middle East. If it brings the end of the world, it brings the end of the world, Gagn says. Theyre ready. They cant wait for the Rapture to happen. For them its the ultimate reunion with God.

Top image credits: Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP; Kenneth Thomas/AP; Sebastian Scheiner/AP; Steve Parsons/WPA Pool/Getty; Getty Images (2)

Continued here:

Evangelicals Love Donald Trump for Many Reasons, But One of Them Is Especially Terrifying - Mother Jones

In the midst of Donald Trump's impeachment trial, asDemocrats continue to lay out a flawless case demonstrating the president's guilt, Trump is turningto the anti-sex lady-haterbrigade to bolster him. That's right: On Friday, Trump will become the first president to show up in personat the annual March for Life. Other Republican presidents have just phoned in their remarks from a distance, since while they need the votes of anti-abortion fanatics, they have clearly found such people as pleasant to be around as the rest of us do.

But Trump is desperate to shore himself up with his almighty base, and that means maximum pandering to the people who have a fetish for forced childbirth. So he's got to showup and talkdirectly to the fundamentalists and thesquads of high school virgins they bus in, using them to fill out the ranks of marchersbefore those teensstart having sex and drifting away from the anti-choice movement.

That Trump is turning to these people as a comfort blanket and a shield against the political damage of impeachment might seem strange at first: What does punishing women for having sex have to do with blackmailing Ukraine? But in truth, the whole situation makes a lot of sense if we unpack it a little.

That's because thetactics that Trump and his defenders are using to ward off consequences for his crimes are thosethe anti-choice movement has honed for decades: Phony piety, bad-faith arguments, a practiced rejection of facts, nutty conspiracy theoriesand a stalwart belief that neither democracy nor justice should stand in the way of white male domination.

For decades, the anti-choice movement as been the vanguard for the worst kinds of right-wing tactics. Everything that we associate with Trumpism, from the nonstop lying to the rise in violent tactics to intimidate the opposition, was field-tested by anti-choicers before it was spread out into the conservative movementas a whole. And now these tactics are being deployed to protect Trump himself.

The most frustrating aspect for those who are following the impeachment process, but aren't part of the Trumpist cult, has been the factthat Republicans seem to live onan entirely different plane of existence fromthe rest of us. While those of us living in the reality-based plane see quite clearly that Trump is a liar and a criminal facing down a mountain of evidence of his guilt, Republicans claimto seeTrump as an innocent lamb who is being unfairly persecuted. Many Republicans, suchas the infamous Rep. Devin Nunes of California, ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, have gone a step further, spinning wild conspiracy theories alleging some fictional plot against Trump being concocted by Ukrainians and Democrats.

For those who have been working in the reproductive rights space for awhile, these tactics are quite familiar. The anti-choice movement, for decades, has organized by encouraging its followers to ignore medical and scientific facts in favor of often-bananas conspiracy theories and urban legends.

For instance, in the real world, abortion is safer than other common outpatient procedures like wisdom tooth extraction and colonoscopies, and 99% of women who get abortions report feeling relief and not regret, even years after the fact. But in the delusional world of anti-choicers, abortion is a super-dangerous procedure and "abortion regret syndrome" is widespread. In the real world, contraception prevents abortion. Anti-choicers, however, believe contraception causes abortion by tricking more people into having lots of sex.

Indeed, what's remarkable about the anti-choice movement is how they lie about everything. They lie about their motives, claiming to oppose "killing babies,"when in fact their opposition to LGBT rights and accessible contraception as well as their opposition to universal health care makes clear that their real motives are controlling people's sexuality and enforcing strict gender norms. They claim to be about "protecting women,"but in fact abortion bans are meant to make women's lives more miserable. They even tryto pass laws forcingdoctors to lie to women by telling them they can "reverse" abortions.

Because of all this, anti-choicers havehelped to normalize and mainstream the practice of relentless lying in Republican politics. For decades, Republicans have been able to get away with jaw-dropping lies such as claiming that doctors deliver babies alive and then murder them, that Planned Parenthood rana secret black market in "baby parts,"that black women are committing self-genocidethrough abortion orthat vaccinating teens against HPV will make them promiscuous largely because the subjects of sex and gender roles make mainstream journalists too squeamish to engage in robust debunking.

The only people who were aggressively fighting back against these lies werefeminists, who tend to be marginalized in mainstream political discourse, too often stuck in the "women's issues" ghetto and not taken as seriously as political figures who discuss more male-centric topics. Even today, with more women in political media, it's difficult to get journalists to prioritize questions about reproductive rights when interviewing politicians or moderating debates.

Republicans have used the world of anti-choice politics as a space to practice lying, sharpen their skills at concocting conspiracy theoriesand test out strategies for getting disinformation into the public discourse, all away fromthe spotlight of "serious" political media. This also helped train Republican politicians in the art of stifling their consciences and lying shamelessly for political gain.

As one compelling example, look at Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee. She's becomealightning rod for a lot of outrage, because she has been particularly aggressive in lying to defend Trump, going so far as to repeatedly defame Lt.Col. Alexander Vindman, who testified during the impeachment hearings about Trump's attempts to extort Ukraine's president. Blackburn has been pushing ugly lies about Vindman that seem to originatein the QAnon conspiracy-theory world.

It may be shocking to many people that a U.S. senator is willing to go so far but not to reproductive rights activists, who have long known that Blackburn's political rise came thanksto her radicalanti-choice views, complete with all the lies and conspiracy theories that come with them. She has largelygotten away with it because of mainstream media indifference to anti-choice nuttery. Blackburn, for instance, took the lead in Congress in selling the lie that Planned Parenthood sells "baby parts,"as well as falsely accusing doctors of murdering born infants. She's now applying her well-honed skills at shameless lying and defamation to defending her party's president.

A lot of liberals are confused about the mutual admiration club between Trump and anti-choice activists, believing that it's hypocritical for the anti-sex brigade to be so enthused about a thrice-married chronic adulterer. But it actually makes perfectsense, starting with the fact that anti-sex ideology has always madeexceptions for straight male horndoggery, and that Trump shares themisogynist worldview ofanti-choicers.

But perhaps most importantis the shared commitment of bothTrump and the anti-choice movementto lieall the time about everything. Which, in turn, is rooted in their shared contempt for democracy. After all, just as Republicans plan to acquit a guilty presidentagainst the will of the majority of Americans, anti-choicers have been working to ban abortion against the will of 7 out of 10 Americans. For both Trump and the anti-choice zealots, the end justifies the means andthere's nothing wrong with shameless lying to get their way.

Visit link:

How the anti-choice movement's lies laid the foundation for Donald Trump's big cover-up - Salon

The US president had no plan, no scheme, no constructive ideas whatever, according to one of the worlds most influential economists.

He was in many respects, perhaps inevitably, ill-informed. He was slow-minded and bewildered, and failed to remedy these defects by seeking advice. He gathered around him businessmen, inexperienced in public affairs and only called in irregularly.

This assessment was written a century ago, in 1919, by the up-and-coming economist John Maynard Keynes.

The president was Woodrow Wilson, whom Keynes criticised for his inability to influence Europes post-first world war settlement in a way more likely to lead to peace and prosperity.

A century later the United States has another president out of his depth in global affairs. Wilson, at least, was a generously intentioned man. What would Keynes make of Donald Trump, whose policies are driven by a sense of entitlement and fear of being played for a sucker?

This week, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump flagged new fronts in his dangerous campaign of economic nationalism. He reaffirmed his intention to reshape the World Trade Organization, which he said been very unfair to the United States for many, many years.

Read more: Myth busted: Chinas status as a developing country gives it few benefits in the World Trade Organisation

He fretted about the tremendous advantages given to China and India. He threatened tariffs on European cars if the European Union didnt agree to a fair free-trade deal.

The barrier-besotted president is pretty much everything Keynes warned against as ruinous to the prospects of a lasting peace.

Keynes had observed Wilson at the talks in Paris to conclude the Treaty of Versailles, which set out the detail of terms and conditions following Germanys surrender (on November 11 1918) to end the war.

Wilson had proposed 14 points for a just and stable peace but proved completely ineffectual at the talks. The result was a treaty with terms so punitive for Germany they arguably created the conditions for Adolf Hitler to come to power, and thus led to the second world war.

Keyness disquiet with the treaty led him to write the book The Economic Consequences of the Peace.

Wilsons great failure was his inability to prevent punitive action. Trumps is his love of punitive action. If his default stance in international diplomacy was to be summed up in a three-word slogan, it would be Make Them Pay.

In the longer term his administrations intransigence on climate change may well prove Trumps worst policy legacy to the world. But right now he is doing most damage through bringing back tariffs, particularly in the trade war started with China.

Trump has claimed (more than a hundred times in 2019, by one count) that he has made China pay by imposing tariffs on Chinese exports to the US. The truth, of course, is that US import tariffs were almost completely passed through into US domestic prices. China pays through its goods being less competitive.

Trump has bragged just as loudly about winning the peace. A week ago he declared a phase one trade deal as the biggest deal anybody has ever seen.

But really all this agreement does is reverse some of the harmful actions the US has taken. It has been aptly called a partial and defective truce.

This week the International Monetary Fund (IMF) updated modelling first published in October 2019 estimating the damage the US-China trade war will do in 2020.

Its initial modelling estimated the tit-for-tat tariffs would reduce the level of global GDP in 2020 by 0.8 percentage points. Trumps biggest deal anybody has ever seen will reduce that harm, but by just 0.3 percentage points, meaning world growth will be 3.3%, rather than 3.8% in 2020. And thats only, says IMF chief economist Gita Gopinath, if the deal proves durable.

The IMFs October 2019 modelling included a breakdown of how much various economies would suffer in 2020 from the trade war. It estimated Chinas real GDP would be 2 percentage points lower than otherwise, with the US down 0.6 percentage points. Europe and Japan would lose about 0.5 percentage points.

Chinas economy is growing at three times the rate of the US an estimated 6% compared with 2% so the hit is almost equal. In terms of lost GDP per capita a proxy measure for how much the tariffs cost individuals on average the cost is about US$400 a year for both US and Chinese citizens.

Given Chinas median income is well below that of the US, that forgone extra income hurts more in China something fitting the Trumpian narrative that the trade war is making China pay more.

But the lesson of history is that punitive actions come back to bite. As Keynes so eloquently wrote a century ago, the prosperity and happiness of one country promotes that of others.

Read more: What's worse than the US-China trade war? A grand peace bargain

Crucial to peace and prosperity, Keynes said, was free trade, which he hoped could mitigate the adverse new political frontiers now created between greedy, jealous, immature, and economically incomplete nationalist States.

Wilson aspired but failed to replace a world order based on conflict between great powers with one based on rules and reason. Trump, by contrast, seems to prefer conflict over rules and reason.

A punitive approach to international economic relations failed a century ago. We have good reason to fear it now.

See the rest here:

'Slow-minded and bewildered': Donald Trump builds barriers to peace and prosperity - The Conversation AU

President Donald Trump is threatening to launch a damaging new trade war with the United Kingdom as the country prepares to leave the European Union.

In recent weeks, the president and his allies have issued a series of threats to the UK on everything from telecoms to vehicle tariffs to security cooperation.

Meanwhile, the UK Parliament on Wednesday voted to ratify Prime Minister Boris Johnson's Brexit agreement with the EU, paving the way for Britain's exit on January 31.

As Johnson prepares to seek new trade deals outside the EU, the Trump administration is poised to take advantage of the UK's vulnerable new position on the world stage.

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Trump. Getty

Johnson's administration has pledged to implement a 2% tax on the revenue that tech companies such as Facebook and Google make from users in the UK starting this April.

The levy is designed to target international companies that the UK government believes use their position to avoid taxes in the UK.

Johnson's spokesman said at a press briefing this week that these companies, most of which are based in the US, were "undermining public trust and confidence in our economic system."

However, US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin responded to what the UK has described as a "proportionate" tax by threatening a new trade war with the UK over the issue.

"If people want to arbitrarily put taxes on our digital companies, we will consider arbitrarily putting taxes on car companies," Mnuchin said this week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The automotive industry is a key part of the UK economy, and almost a fifth of overseas sales of UK vehicles go to the US.

Johnson's spokesman said that such a trade war would "harm businesses and consumers on both sides of the Atlantic."

The UK's international trade secretary, Liz Truss, was also bullish on the issue, saying on Thursday that the UK's policy was "not a matter for the US," "not a matter for the EU," and "not a matter for anybody else."

Johnson and Trump. Stefan Rousseau/Reuters

Threats of a new trade war could escalate if the UK government pushes ahead with its plan to defy Trump and strike a deal with Huawei, the Chinese telecoms company building a 5G network.

Trump has warned the UK that the intelligence-sharing arrangement between the two allies would be at risk if the deal goes ahead, with US officials saying last week that Trump "is watching closely."

However, Johnson has suggested he would allow the Huawei deal to go ahead despite Trump's threats, telling the BBC last week that "the British public deserves access to the best possible technology."

He added: "If people oppose one brand or another, they have to tell us, what's the alternative?"

Phil Hogan, the EU trade commissioner, said at an event in London last week that the president's threat was simply not credible.

"I don't think that will happen at the end of the day," he said.

"You can call their bluff on that one."

Johnson and Trump. Getty

The United Kingdom remains committed to the Iran nuclear deal despite Trump's pulling the US out of the agreement in 2018.

Johnson last week joined with other European leaders in signing a letter endorsing the deal, which they see as the best chance of bringing Iran back into the fold and preventing a devastating conflict with the US.

However, Trump's threats to impose 25% tariffs on European vehicles appear to have played a part in forcing those European countries to invoke the deal's dispute mechanism, which could ultimately cause it to fall apart.

Johnson's administration has repeatedly criticized Trump's stance toward Iran, with the prime minister earlier this month warning that the president's threat of targeting Iranian cultural sites could be a war crime.

Now, as Britain prepares to enter new trade negotiations with the US, the threat of more punitive trade retaliation by Trump looms over the UK.

Trump. Carolyn Kaster/AP

Johnson's administration hit back against Trump's threats earlier this month with a threat of its own.

Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told The Sunday Times that Trump's isolationist foreign policy meant the UK was considering drawing back from its long-standing defense alliance with the US.

"Over the last year we've had the US pullout from Syria, the statement by Donald Trump on Iraq where he said NATO should take over and do more in the Middle East," Wallace said.

"The assumptions of 2010 that we were always going to be part of a US coalition is really just not where we are going to be."

See the original post here:

Trump is threatening a damaging new trade war with the United Kingdom after Brexit - Business Insider - Business Insider