Category Archives: Donald Trump

When Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu met for the first time as heads of state, the Israeli prime minister praised the American president for restoring a policy of no daylight between the nations.

Such a policy can mean providing Israel with the security to take risks in peacemaking, as was the case with President Clinton and Prime Minister Ehud Barak during the Oslo talks and with President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with Israels withdrawal from Gaza. But with Trump and Netanyahu, this no daylight claim has been politically divisive in both countries.

In the United States, the two leaders have sealed Israels bond with the Republican Party and evangelical Christians, completing a process Netanyahu started years earlier. In Israel, the right-wing government has enjoyed Washingtons complicity in expanding settlements, annexing the Golan Heights and pushing for similar control over the Jordan Valley and ultimately most of the West Bank.

All these moves have ruptured seven decades of bipartisan agreement on American ties to Israel. They have also left a large share of Democratic voters, including Jews, feeling outraged that their support for Israel and Zionism has been used to endorse a martial state ruling over several million disenfranchised Palestinians and marching headlong toward apartheid.

What long seemed politically impossible ending a blank-check foreign aid policy that refused to question Israels actions is gathering force within the Democratic Party. Far from being a threat to Israel, as the right will surely portray it, this trend offers a vital third way between the extremes of occupation and annexation on the right and the boycott, divestment, sanctions movement on the far left, with its implicit goal of expunging Israel as a nation.

The public emergence of this middle ground on American-Israel relations could be seen at the annual conference last month of J Street, the progressive pro-Israel lobby that is a competitor to the center-right behemoth, AIPAC.

At the three-day gathering, speaker after speaker called for American aid to Israel to be paired with clear limits on its use and other conditions. The aim was to revive some prospect of a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Bernie Sanders, after proudly proclaiming his own Jewish identity, insisted that some portion of the U.S.s annual $3.8 billion in military aid to Israel be spent alleviating the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Two other presidential candidates, Pete Buttigieg in person and Elizabeth Warren by video link, expressed similar positions. All three would require imposing a ban on using U.S. aid for annexation.

Such a position could lead to other conditions, like bans on the use of U.S. aid in constructing settlements and imprisoning Palestinian children.

This is a sizable shift in Democratic positioning, given that the partys 2016 convention delegates rejected platform language condemning occupation and annexation, which had been drafted by Sanders backers.

Recent polling shows that Democrats as a whole and Jews specifically are separating opposition to Netanyahu from their support for Israel. A survey in May by J Street of likely Democratic primary voters found that 82% believed one can be pro-Israel while also criticizing specific Israeli policies. In the same poll, Israel had favorable-vs-unfavorable percentages of 41 and 16. Netanyahu, however, had a positive rating of just 12% and a negative of 39%.

The American Jewish Committee had similar results in its June 2019 poll of American Jews. Some 59% disapproved of President Trumps handling of American-Israeli relations, which he has made the basis of his appeals to Jewish voters. Of those surveyed, 57% said it would be appropriate for American Jews try to influence Israeli policy on issues including peacemaking and security and 64% endorsed a two-state solution.

Predictably, the right wing of both Israeli and American Jewry has cast any criticism of Israeli policies as anti-Israel broadly. And we can expect Trump to continue depicting criticism of Netanyahus regime, even from Jews, as being anti-Semitic.

By the time of the Democratic National Convention next summer, though, there will be no way to quash a full-throated debate and, quite possibly, the passage of a very different platform plank from that of 2016. That kind of daylight could be illuminating in more ways than one.

Samuel G. Freedman is a journalism professor at Columbia University and the author of eight books, including Jew vs. Jew: The Struggle for the Soul of American Jewry.

Read the original:

Trump and Netanyahu push U.S. Jews to the left on Israel - Los Angeles Times

While all eyes turn Wednesday to live television broadcasts of officials testifying in the House impeachment inquiry, scores of podcast hosts will be competing for the publics ears with colorful and sometimes outlandish ways to illustrate the competing claims and efforts at political oneupsmanship. In some cases, they will be arguing for or against impeachment, vying for the attention of deeply partisan listeners.

Since late September, the unfolding story of President Donald Trump and his allies pressuring Ukraine to investigate the Bidens as the U.S. withheld military aid has sparked a podcast frenzy, with news organizations such as CNN, NBC News, Vox, and WNYC quickly rolling out shows to seize on the heightened interest.

The podcasts vary in style, substance, and frequency in catering to each outlets distinct audiences. News junkies might tune into CNNs The Daily DC: Impeachment Watch podcast, which, like the networks impeachment-themed newsletter, covers all the major twists and turns each day. For a broader view, theres Impeachment, Explained, a weekly show hosted by Vox editor-at-large Ezra Klein.

Kleins show, which is released on Saturdays, highlights the weeks biggest developments through conversations with reporters, while also addressing broader issues, such how a historian views the conservative media apparatus of the Trump era versus the Nixon years. The goal, Vox politics editor Laura McGann told POLITICO, is to explain both the fast-moving impeachment story and the slow-moving impeachment story.

The Vox audience is aware that this impeachment process is going on and is curious about it, said McGann, who suggested what a hypothetical female reader, who isnt glued to Twitter all day, may be seeking.

Maybe she downloads Ezras podcast to get caught up on the week and listens to somebody smart put it in context for her, McGann said. Shes a smart engaged person, but shes not living on the internet day in and day out.

No one working outside of the media, said Brown, is actually going to take the time to sit and watch 10 hours of testimony, multiple days, and so theyre depending on us to break it down and tell the meaning.

For his part, Brown, whose BuzzFeed News show is produced in partnership with iHeartRadio, told POLITICO that his podcasts tone reflects BuzzFeeds audience, which is mostly young and wants something snappy, a little bit more irreverent and that sounds like the internet.

We wanted to convey both the seriousness of the nature of this time in history, he added, while also not making it so staid and prosaic and lecture-y that people just dont want to tune in and listen.

Added Brown: Theyre watching on YouTube or clips on Twitter and seeing bits and pieces for themselves and they need the context to know how it all fits together. In those ways, thats a service were providing both us as a podcast and media as a whole.

Brian Beutler, host of Crooked Medias new weekly show, Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump, said he aims to cover the latest news while keeping the stakes of the impeachment fight front and center.

The progressive audience turning to Crooked Media, which was launched by former Obama aides and is best known for its signature show, Pod Save America, likely supports impeaching Trump and isnt seeking the journalistic neutrality one might expect from a traditional news outlet.

Beutler said he feels able to convey the facts and the stakes of the impeachment clearly without feeling the need to balance them out or lend his platform to people who peddle disinformation or lie. For instance, Beutler said, he doesnt need to do a show considering whether Trump earnestly wanted to fight corruption in Ukraine in seeking an investigation of Hunter Biden, the former vice presidents son who did business in the country.

We know about Trump. We know that Trump doesnt care about corruption, Beutler said. We know why he did this. We know that theres no legitimate justification for it, and so we can just sort of dispense with all that.

Trump supporters are also making their voices heard, using the podcast format to frame impeachment for the presidents base.

This is a mortal threat to Trumps presidency, former Breitbart chief and ex-Trump adviser Steve Bannon recently told POLITICO ahead of the launch of War Room, a daily radio show and podcast co-hosted by former Trump communications adviser Jason Miller and former Breitbart London editor Raheem Kassam.

Bannon emphasized the need to present a counter-narrative to the Democrats arms for dirt argument on Sundays show, and stressed the urgency as millions are expected to tune in this week to public testimony.

There are going to be two thirds of the nation that has not followed this that does not read POLITICO, that does not go to The Hill, that doesnt even read Breitbart, doesnt know who Drudge is or care, Bannon said. Theyre now going to be brought into this story because its going to overwhelm newscasts. Its going to overwhelm the local news.

Our job is basically to line up in the I-formation. We are the William Refrigerator Perrys in this equation ... and President Trump is our Walter Payton, responded Miller, referring to the 1986 Super Bowl champion Chicago Bears. Our job is to go straight ahead, deliver a clear, easy-to-understand message: Donald Trump did nothing wrong.

"This is about policy differences between the unelected bureaucrats who have been trying to undermine President Trump since the 2016 election, said Miller, who characterized the House proceedings as a "sham."

Another Trump defender, personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, is now considering launching his own impeachment podcast.

I am here for the competition, Brown said on Tuesdays show in extending an invite. Mr. Mayor, if you ever want to have a chat, we here are more than happy to have you.

Go here to see the original:

Donald Trump did nothing wrong: Podcasts furiously vie to control impeachment narrative - POLITICO

Donald Trump has insisted that the US military presence in Syria is only for the oil, contradicting his own officials who have insisted that the remaining forces were there to fight Isis.

Trump made his remarks while hosting Recep Tayyip Erdoan, just over a month after the Turkish president launched an offensive into north-eastern Syria, which has been formally condemned as destabilising by state department officials.

Sitting alongside Erdoan, Trump contradicted his own officials and the Republican leadership on a range of issues, most importantly on the US military mission in Syria. In a later press conference, the Trump declared himself a big fan of Erdoan, and made no criticism of the Turkish incursion.

Erdoan, however, criticised Trump for inviting a Kurdish leader he condemned as a terrorist to the White House. Erdoan also noted he had returned a letter which Trump had sent to him on 9 October, urging his US counterpart to hold back his Syrian invasion plan.

Dont be a tough guy. Dont be a fool! Trump had said in the letter, which Erdoan had said showed a lack of respect.

Asked about the letter on Wednesday, Erdoan through a translator said: We gave back the letter that we have received.

Following Trumps earlier insistence that his administration was solely interested in keeping Syrian oil, the US military deployed mechanised military units to oil fields in the east of the country.

However, seizing or benefiting from oil on a foreign territory, without permission from the sovereign authority, would be a violation of international law. Several US officials had sought to interpret the presidents remarks as meaning the US was denying Isis access to the oil.

Our mission is the enduring defeat of Isis, the defence secretary, Mark Esper, told reporters on Wednesday, adding: Were going to have about 500 to 600-ish troops there, at the end of the day.

A way that we ensure the enduring defeat of Isis is deny them access to the oilfields because if they have access to the oil fields, they can generate revenue. If they can generate revenue, then they can pay fighters, they can buy arms, they can conduct operations, Esper said.

On the same day however, Trump repeated his intention that the US should take possession of the oil in the region.

Were keeping the oil. We have the oil. The oil is secure. We left troops behind only for the oil, Trump said.

At a joint press conference with Erdogan, the US president said the ceasefire in north-east Syria while complicated, is moving forward and moving forward at a very rapid clip.

Erdoan praised Trump, describing him as a dear friend, but went on to denounce the US partnership with Syrian Kurdish forces.

Both parties in Congress have condemned the Turkish incursion and threatened sanctions unless it is reversed. US officials have describe it as unwelcome and destabilising. In the run-up to Erdoans controversial visit to Washington, senior officials expressed concern about reported war crimes committed by Turkish-backed Arab militias spearheading the offensive. One senior official told reporters that the US held Ankara responsible.

However, sitting alongside Erdoan, Trump said: I want to thank the president for the job theyve done.

The president and I have been very good friends, weve been friends for a long time almost from day one, Trump said. I understand the problems that theyve had, including many people from Turkey being killed, in the area that were talking about.

It is unclear what the president meant. Turks have not been killed in significant numbers in north-eastern Syria, nor is there evidence of attacks on Turkey being launched from the area.

There are strong links between the Kurdish Peoples Protection units (YPG), the main force in the SDF, and the insurgent Kurdistan Workers party (PKK), which has carried out attacks inside Turkey.

In blunt remarks in the White House on Wednesday, Erdoan criticised Trump for inviting the SDF leader Mazloum Kobani, (to whom he referred by his birth name, Ferhat Abdi ahin) to the White House. Noting his PKK links, Erdoan blamed Mazloum for hundreds of civilian deaths and said: A person like this should not be welcomed by a country such as the United States.

It is not the administrations official position that PKK attacks justify the incursion into Syria. Officials including Jeffrey have criticised Turkey for abandoning a joint security mechanism agreed with the US, and invading the safe zone along the border that mechanism was intended to safeguard.

Challenged by a Turkish reporter about US links with the YPG despite its ties to the PKK, Trump said that the US had a great relationship with the Kurds, adding: A lot of that is definition whats your definition of the various groups within the Kurds. You have various groups and some like them and some dont.

But he shrugged off the broader concerns voiced by administration officials and Republican leaders about the Turkish invasion.

Its time for us not to be worried about other peoples borders. I want to worry about our borders, the president said.

See original here:

Trump contradicts aides and says troops in Syria 'only for oil' - The Guardian

It is now likely that President Trump will be impeached by the House of Representatives on the grounds that he has abused his power. But history teaches that there are three kinds of corruption in national politics: money, power, and sex. Amazingly, in less than one term, Trump has racked up ample material for impeachment on all three.

Money is at the root of the standard political scandal. Using high office to line his own pockets is what brought down Vice President Spiro Agnew, who took kickbacks as governor of Maryland on government contracts.

And the two great presidential scandals before Watergate involved money. The Crdit Mobilier matter rocked the Ulysses Grant administration in the 1870s, when government officials accepted bribes in return for providing land grants to railroad barons. And Warren Hardings Teapot Dome scandal in the 1920s involved Cabinet members who made a fortune using their authority to enrich oil magnates and others. Unlike Agnew, neither Presidents Grant nor Harding profited in these sordid affairs, but their ineptitude allowed the wrongdoing.

So fixated were Americans on corruption of money as the source of presidential disgrace that many could not understand how Nixons impeachment could result from the misconduct in which he and his top aides engaged. What scandal? I never made a cent from Watergate, exclaimed former Attorney General John Mitchell.

But Watergate introduced the second kind of scandal: corruption of power. Nixon may not have ordered the break-in at the DNC headquarters, but he was brought low because he actively managed the cover-up and subsequent efforts to obstruct the impeachment inquiry.

This was followed by the Iran-Contra affair in the late 1980s. This one did not lead to an impeachment, but corruption was obvious in the effort to secretlyand illegallysupply arms to Iran-backed Shiite militias in return for the release of hostages and money to fund Contra insurgents in Nicaragua.

Which brings us to the sex scandal. President Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath in 1998, when he denied having a sexual affair with an intern. He was not the first president to have a consensual (albeit highly improper) affair in the White House. But he was the first person in national politics to be entangled in a scandal involving behavior entirely unrelated to his official duties.

Amazingly, Trump is a candidate for impeachment on all three. His effort to keep porn star Stormy Daniels from publicizing their relationship made him an unindicted co-conspirator in a crime that sent his former lawyer to jail. And if any of the almost 20 women who have accused him of sexual harassment ever had their day in court, there might be other reasonsincluding criminal misconductto impeach the man who bragged on tape about grabbing womens genitals with impunity.

Unlike Grant and Harding, Trump is the one being paid in this corrupt use of his office.

Trump could also be impeached for corruption of money. His brazen efforts to profit from the presidency are a daily spectacle, culminating in his breathtaking (and since withdrawn) decision to host a summit of world leaders at his Miami golf club. This is a clear violation of the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution, which, bizarrely, Trump recently called phony. Unlike Grant and Harding, Trump is the one being paid in this corrupt use of his office.

And of course, it is corruption of power that is leading to Trumps impeachment. In the Ukraine affair, there is evidence of an impeachable offense: attempting to coerce a vulnerable foreign government into providing dirt on a political opponent. This is a more serious abuse of power than even the Watergate robbery and its cover-up. And it is only one of this presidents many abuses of power, including contempt of Congress and the obstruction of justice revealed by Robert Muellers inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

To be clear, it is not an impeachable offense to be a terrible president. He cannot be impeached for being a pathological liar, a vicious bully, a narcissist, or an ignoramus. He cannot be removed for stimulating fear and hatred, attacking a free press, or characterizing political opponents as traitors. It is not impeachable to admire autocrats and demean democratic allies. He cannot even be impeached for imprisoning children on the border or betraying the Kurds and allowing ISIS to spring back to life.

But Trump can be impeached for a stunning number of other things. Unlike Nixon, who stuck to abuse of power, Clinton, who simply lied about sex, and Harding, who allowed cronies to make off with bags of money, Trump has not confined himself to a single avenue of impeachable scandal. He has hit the trifecta.

David H. Bennett, an Emeritus Professor of American History at Syracuse University, is the author of From Teapot Dome to Watergate, a monograph on presidential scandal.

Read more from the original source:

Donald Trump Has Hit the Corruption Trifecta - The Daily Beast

The far-right activists who jeered Donald Trump Jr off a stage in California on Sunday are part of a bloc of white nationalists who embraced Trumps father on his ascent to the White House but are now causing multiple headaches for the presidents friends, allies and family as his campaign for re-election gathers pace.

The extremists have launched an insurgent campaign to thrust their views in the faces of key Trump supporters some of whom have reputations of their own for political views flirting with the fringes of the permissible. Seeking to command attention and force a response, they are using many of the same gadfly tactics Trump has deployed against Democrats and the left.

Their fury at being denied an opportunity to ask questions at an event promoting Trump Jrs book Triggered, and their willingness to shout the house down, are just the latest sign of acrimony ripping at the right flank of the fabled Trump base.

In the last two weeks alone, followers of Nick Fuentes a 21-year-old YouTube provocateur who offers supporters a diet of derogatory remarks about black, gay and Jewish people and has questioned the Holocaust have repeatedly heckled the head of a key pro-Trump student organization, Turning Point USA; accused the Trump administration, however improbably, of being soft on immigration; and picked a fight with the erstwhile White House adviser and Trump loyalist Sebastian Gorka.

When Gorka who has himself been accused of antisemitism, among other sins said he found Fuentess views on the Holocaust chilling, Fuentes responded in a tweet that Gorka was a fat mutton-headed buffoon and a prostitute for Israel.

Gorka is one of a number of Trump surrogates and supporters who have found such provocations impossible to ignore. They have been particularly concerned to put as much daylight as possible between their own positions and those of the extremists who variously call themselves alt-right, paleoconservative or foot soldiers in a groyper war, a reference to a rightwing meme.

Donald Trump has nothing to do with these so-called, self-proclaimed America First asshats, the former editor of Breitbart News, Ben Shapiro, told a conservative forum at Stanford University last week in a speech originally intended to target Trumps more familiar adversaries on the political left.

Shapiro quoted Fuentes without naming him and described his supporters as a bunch of masturbating losers living in your mothers basement who only pretended to support Trump and were out for as much attention as they could muster.

Trump is many things, Shapiro insisted. He is not a white supremacist, and he is not an antisemite.

Shapiros problem in making this argument is that the racist far right was in fact openly enthusiastic about Trump when he ran for president in 2016, and Trump initially punted when invited to disavow their support.

Later, when the notorious Unite the Right protest in Charlottesville in 2017 resulted in the death of counter-protester Heather Heyer, Trumps reaction was to say there were very fine people on both sides a widely condemned expression of moral equivalence Trump himself has recently sought to play down.

Shapiro faced his own band of Fuentes-admiring hecklers at Stanford, but kept talking as they were escorted out by security guards.

Im literally condemning Nazis, he said, incredulously, and youre telling me to leave? Do you hear yourselves?

Trump Jr and his girlfriend, Kimberly Guilfoyle, had notably less success in maintaining control in the university lecture hall where they appeared on Sunday. Guilfoyle told the protesters they were being rude and disruptive and discourteous and added: I bet you engage in online dating because youre impressing no one here to get a date in person.

She and Trump Jr abandoned the event moments later.

A triumphant Fuentes denied that he was only a pretend Trump supporter and said the person his followers were targeting was not Trump Jr but the Turning Point USA founder, Charlie Kirk, who appeared on stage as a featured speaker but did not say a word.

Our problem is not with Donald Trump Jr who is a patriot we are supporters of his father! Fuentes wrote on Twitter. Our problem is with Charlie Kirks TPUSA organization that SHUTS DOWN and SMEARS socially conservative Christians and supporters of President Trumps agenda.

Trumps allies worry that this public feuding can only dampen his bases enthusiasm and embolden his Democratic party challengers for the presidency. It seems likely, too, that the more extreme elements who backed Trump last time might think twice before doing so again. Two Fuentes supporters at Sundays book event said they were likely to sit out 2020 and not bother to vote at all.

Read this article:

Donald Trump Jr caught in the middle of far-right insurgency - The Guardian

Getty Images

In The Arena

It would take just three Republican senators to turn the impeachment vote into a secret ballot. Its not hard to imagine what would happen then.

By JULEANNA GLOVER

November 12, 2019

Juleanna Glover has worked as an adviser for several Republican politicians, including George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft and Rudy Giuliani, and advised the presidential campaigns of John McCain and Jeb Bush.

By most everyones judgment, the Senate will not vote to remove President Donald Trump from office if the House impeaches him. But what if senators could vote on impeachment by secret ballot? If they didnt have to face backlash from constituents or the media or the president himself, who knows how many Republican senators would vote to remove?

A secret impeachment ballot might sound crazy, but its actually quite possible. In fact, it would take only three senators to allow for that possibility.

Story Continued Below

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he will immediately move to hold a trial to adjudicate the articles of impeachment if and when the Senate receives them from the House of Representatives. Article I, Section 3, of the Constitution does not set many parameters for the trial, except to say that the Chief Justice shall preside, and no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present. That means the Senate has sole authority to draft its own rules for the impeachment trial, without judicial or executive branch oversight.

During the last impeachment of a president, Bill Clinton, the rules were hammered out by Democrats and Republicans in a collaborative process, as then Senate leaders Trent Lott and Tom Daschle recently pointed out in a Washington Post op-ed. The rules passed unanimously. Thats unlikely this time, given the polarization that now defines our politics. McConnell and his fellow Republicans are much more likely to dictate the rules with little input from Democrats.

But, according to current Senate procedure, McConnell will still need a simple majority51 of the 53 Senate Republicansto support any resolution outlining rules governing the trial. That means that if only three Republican senators were to break from the caucus, they could block any rule they didnt like. (Vice President Mike Pence cant break ties in impeachment matters.) Those three senators, in turn, could demand a secret ballot and condition their approval of the rest of the rules on getting one.

Some might say transparency in congressional deliberations and votes is inviolable, and its true that none of the previous Senate impeachments have been conducted via secret ballot. But the Senates role in an impeachment is analogous to a U.S. jury, where secret ballots are often used. When Electoral College gridlock has resulted in the House picking the presidentthe House elected Thomas Jefferson in 1800 and John Quincy Adams in 1824that vote has been secret. And, of course, when citizens vote for president, they do so in private.

Trump and those around him seem confident that he wont lose the 20 Republican senators needed to block a guilty verdict. But its not hard to imagine three senators supporting a secret ballot. Five sitting Republican senators have already announced their retirements; four of those are in their mid-70s or older and will never run for office again. They might well be willing to demand secrecy in order to give cover to their colleagues who would like to convict Trump but are afraid to do so because of politics in their home districts. There are also 10 Republican senators who arent up for reelection until 2024 and who might figure Trumpism will be irrelevant by then. Senators Mitt Romney and Lisa Murkowski have been the most vocal Republicans in expressing concerns about Trumps behavior toward Ukraine. Other GOP senators have recently softened in their defense of him, as wellall before the House has held any public hearings.

Theres already been some public speculation that, should the Senate choose to proceed with a secret ballot, Trump would be found guilty. GOP strategist Mike Murphy said recently that a sitting Republican senator had told him 30 of his colleagues would vote to convict Trump if the ballot were secret. Former Senator Jeff Flake topped that, saying he thought 35 Republican senators would vote that way.

While its unlikely Trump would support a secret ballot, its possible he might actually benefit from one in the long run. If a secret ballot is agreed on and Trump knows the prospect of impeachment is near, he could then focus his energies on his post-presidency. Once he leaves office, Trump faces multiple possible criminal investigations, at the federal, state and local level. He almost certainly knows that a President Pence could pardon him only for federal crimes. To avoid the prospect of serving time, Trump could negotiate a collective settlementjust as the Sackler family has done in the OxyContin matterwith all the jurisdictions now running independent investigations into his activities. Trumps impeachment, followed by a quick resignation, might appease Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vances and New York Attorney General Letitia Jamess thirst for justice, making them more likely to agree to a deal.

Even McConnell might privately welcome the prospect of a secret ballot. He has always been intently focused on maintaining his Republican majority in the Senate. Trumps approval numbers continue to languish, and support for impeachment has been rising. McConnell himself, facing reelection next year, has an approval rating of just 18 percent in Kentucky, not to mention that the Republican governor there just suffered a stunning upset in last weeks election. All of which suggests McConnell might warm to the possibility that he and his caucus could avoid a public up-or-down vote in defense of behavior by the president thats looking increasingly indefensible.

A secret ballot might get Trump out of office sooner than everyone expects: The sooner any three Republican senators make clear that they will support nothing short of a secret ballot, the sooner Trump realizes his best course could be to cut a deal, trading his office for a get-out-of-jail-free carda clean slate from prosecutorsjust as Vice President Spiro Agnew did. And if Trump were to leave office before the end of the year, there might even be enough time for Republicans to have a vibrant primary fight, resulting in a principled Republican as the nominee.

UPDATE: Some constitutional scholars have pointed out that Article 1, Section 5, of the Constitution designates that 20 senators can oppose a secret ballot on any questions, but questions are defined as Any matter on which the Senate is to vote, such as passage of a bill, adoption of an amendment, agreement to a motion, or an appeal. No mention of impeachment proceedings is made. And, as others have pointed out, preceding this one-fifth requirement is crucial language: Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy. Precedents are so thin here, but it is clear the Senate has the power to make its own rules over the trial proceedings. Those rules have historically required a simple majority of support.

More:

Theres a Surprisingly Plausible Path to Removing Trump From Office - POLITICO

The presidents large adult son thought a book would be an easy rollout to a political career, but it turns out that even for a Trump, the road to literary greatness is fraught.

One of the great contradictions in American life is the politician-authored book, for it is neither written by nor (often) read by that politician. It largely serves as a book tour delivery mechanisma way for said politician to do the media circuit, the morning shows, the late-night shows, and everything in between. But Donald Trump Jr. isnt a politician. In fact, hes never held any elected office. But not having anything substantive to say has never prevented anyone from writing a book ever (I know this from firsthand experience).

Junior obviously wants to be the heir to his fathers virulent fan base. A book was the next logical step down that lamentable road. He needed something to sell besides his father, his last name, and his bedbug-infested hotels, and so a book was born. After all, everyone else in Trumpworld has done a book, from dancing king Sean Spicer to presidential footnote Anthony Scaramucci to reality television villain Omarosa Manigault Newman.

Those were money hustles. But Juniors book was written with real political intent: It was to be his springboard to greatness, his moment to start to lay claim to the MAGA movement his father has been priming for the last four years. Junior is arguably his fathers heir apparent, a gun-toting, cheetah-killing, wife-leaving, lib-hating firebrand who is always offended by some wrong done to him by either the left or the mainstream media. Junior is senior without the charm and grooming.

And since Junior had logged hours and hours on Fox News, there was the assumption that hed be fine on a book tour. After all hed handled many questions from Fox News pundits over the years. The problem for Junior was that this book tour meant that he would have to engage with the non-Fox News media, and this immediately presented a problem, despite the fact that he did many of his appearances with a skilled media handlerhis girlfriend, former Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle.

His appearance on The View was unsurprisingly a disaster. A tearful Meghan McCain stared down Junior and said, Mr. Trump, a lot of Americans in politics miss character, and a lot of people miss the soul of this country. You and your family have hurt a lot of people and put a lot of people through a lot of pain, including the Khan family, who is a Gold Star family that I think should be respected for the loss of their son. Does all of this make you feel good?

Junior tried his best to stick to his talking points but the optics of it were impossible to ignore: a weeping, mourning daughter of Mr. Hanoi Hilton confronting a brattish son of Mr. Bone Spurs. It went downhill from there, with Junior accusing one of the hosts of wearing blackface and another of being a Roman Polanski rape apologist. Yes, Junior brought oppo research to his daytime talk show appearance.

He even got in trouble when he tried to answer the easy question about whether hed marry Kimberly or not. Junior answered: But no, Kimberlys, Kimberlys been amazing, she understands this world in a, unfortunately, you know, my world has drastically changed from what I was used to before politics and everything. Not exactly the answer the daytime talk show audience was longing for.

But what really made Juniors appearance on The View so terrible was that he couldnt get over it. Four days later, he was still tweeting about it and complaining about it to anyone who would listen. He told John Catsimatidis on his AM radio show five days later: You could see very quickly they went aggressive fast. They tried to smear me, to try to besmirch my father and my family.

But perhaps the most damaging thing to happen to Junior so far on his not-so-magical mystery book tour was his appearance at UCLA on Sunday. By appearing on a liberal campus, perhaps Junior was hoping to trigger the libs and thus by his own weird Trumpian calculus own them. But what happened was completely unexpected. A splinter group of America First called Groyper Army, who believe the Trump administration has been taken captive by a cabal of internationalists, free-traders, and apologists for mass immigration booed the presidents large adult son. Yes, it turns out that theres a rift in Charlie Kirks Turning Point USA, and its being accused of being too pro-Israel.

In response to the booing and the chanting, a visibly irritated Guilfoyle said, Let me tell you something, I bet you engage and go on online dating because youre impressing no one here to get a date in person. Perhaps not the wittiest comeback.

Junior came to UCLA to own the libs but ended up being owned by the enraged crowds he originally helped gin up. It was as if the MAGA-world Junior helped create had grown more powerful than Junior and now he was unable to control it.

This weekend an internet prankster changed the cover of Juniors book to read Daddy please love me. It was meant to be funny, but the larger tragedy of Junior looms large. Behind all his rage one senses an emptiness. Junior thinks that if he can just be like his dad, hell win his dads love. But Im continually struck by this quote from McKay Coppins: Everybody who works for Trump learns sooner or later that imitating him will only draw his contempt. The tragedy of Don Jr. is that he seems never to have learned this lesson.

The presidents large adult son thought a foray into publishing could change that truth; it only confirmed it.

Read the original post:

Donald Trump Jr.'s Series of Unfortunate Book Tour Events - The Daily Beast

President Donald Trump used his pulpit before the Economic Club of New York on Tuesday to bash the Federal Reserve, a marked diversion from what many on Wall Street had hoped would be a positive speech on the progress of trade relations between the U.S. and China.

Instead of highlighting warmer relations with Beijing, Trump criticized the Fed for what he sees as its hesitation to lower interest rates and blamed the central bank for capping gains in the U.S. economy and stock market.

The president noted that since his election, the S&P 500 is up more than 45%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up over 50% and the Nasdaq Composite is up 60%. But those numbers could be way higher, Trump said, if it weren't for the reluctance of the Fed.

"And if we had a Federal Reserve that worked with us, you could have added another 25% to each of those numbers, I guarantee you that," Trump said.

"But we all make mistakes, don't we?" the president added. "Not too often. We do make them on occasion."

It wasn't immediately clear which "mistake" Trump was referencing: His choice to nominate Fed Chair Jerome Powell to lead the central bank or Powell's preferred course of monetary policy.

Trump also contended that the Fed should continue to cut interest rates to make the U.S. more competitive in the global market.

"We are actively competing with nations who openly cut interest rates so that now many are actually getting paid when they pay off their loan, known as negative interest," he said. "Whoever heard of such a thing?"

"Give me some of that," he said. "Give me some of that money. I want some of that money."

The president lambasted Powell throughout 2018 (and into 2019) as the Fed continued to tighten monetary policy and raise interest rates, which it typically does when it tries to curb inflation and ease the pace of expansion to prevent the economy from overheating.

Criticism of the Fed is unusual from a sitting president, with prior presidents taking a softer tone or refraining from weighing in on the direction of the central bank's policies. In breaking with that tradition, Trump has blamed the Fed and its leader for swings in the stock market and undermining trade deliberations with Beijing.

"I think the Fed is making a mistake. They are so tight," the president said in October 2018. "I think the Fed has gone crazy."

The Fed instituted nine quarter-point hikes between Dec. 16, 2015, and Dec. 19, 2018, the last time it raised rates. It has cut rates three times in 2019 in what it characterized as a "midcycle adjustment."

To be sure, the U.S. stock market has soared since Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016, with the S&P 500 up more than 40%. The broad market index touched a new all-time high on Tuesday as investor concern over the U.S.-China trade war eased.

Though investors aren't certain whether the two nations are close to a permanent deal, stocks have rallied to records in recent weeks in expectation of a sort-of trade truce.

More here:

Trump rails on Fed, notes other countries have negative rates: 'Give me some of that money' - CNBC

Donald Trump Jr. (C) hugs his father Donald Trump as Donald Jrs wife Vanessa (L) walks past after Trump accepted the Republican presidential nomination at the 2016 Republican National Convention in July 21, 2016.(Mike Segar/Reuters)The younger Trump is an obvious candidate to fuse his fathers populism with the movement conservatism that dominated the party before.

Theres a lot of speculation these days about the post-Trump era. Donald Trump will face election in one year, and even if he wins, hell soon be a lame duck. At least thats whats said. My boss Rich Lowry has been asked about the post-Trump era over and over. He believes the Republican party cant just snap back to what it was before Donald Trump barged onto the scene, and that Republican politicians must develop a synthesis of the nationalist themes that Trump has highlighted and the conservative causes that still have the adherence of so many party members and activists.

Some are clearly trying for such a synthesis. Senator Marco Rubio is experimenting with a more worker-focused brand of politics. Tom Cotton has tried to advance nationalist concerns about trade and immigration from his perch. And Josh Hawley has added an anti-big-business politics to his cultural populism. But Ive started to wonder if were not headed for a post-Trump era at all; perhaps were still in the pre-Trump era.

In the past week, Donald Trump Jr. has been on a whirlwind publicity tour to promote his new book, Triggered: How the Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us, which he dedicates to The Deplorables. The tour has shown him to be his fathers most effective media surrogate. Asked a question by The Views Meghan McCain about Trump Sr.s character assassination of Khizr Khan, he swiftly launched into a monologue about record-low unemployment numbers for African Americans and rising wages at the bottom. Asked about the Ukraine whistleblower, he slapped back at the network he was on for trying to out the person who leaked video of a reporter complaining that her stories on Jeffrey Epstein were killed. Asked about his fathers indecencies, he accused co-host Joy Behar of wearing blackface and co-host Whoopi Goldberg of minimizing Roman Polanskis rape of a child. He defended his father by saying He fights back. That is uncustomary for Republicans.

Technically, Trump Jr. was the third of a trio of children of prominent Republicans on The View, along with McCain (daughter of John) and Abby Huntsman (daughter of Jon). But he was the one who made the shows debate virally contentious.

In fact, maybe Don Jr. has always been the most effective public face of his fathers political movement. His speech to the 2016 Republican convention was perhaps the best received of the entire affair. He did strong work connecting the playboy real-estate mogul to working-class concerns through his own life story, saying that his father forced him to work under Guys like Vinnie Stellio, who taught us how to drive heavy equipment, operate tractors and chainsaws, who worked his way through the ranks to become a trusted adviser of my father. (For emphasis, he added: Its why were the only children of billionaires as comfortable in a D10 Caterpillar as we are in our own cars.)

In short, Don Jr. is the most natural candidate to synthesize his fathers populism with more-traditional conservative politics. Of the Trump children, he was the most conservative in his politics before his father ran for the presidency. Hes an authentic winger who has an instinctive aversion to liberals. Hes a hunter and gun enthusiast, things his father is not. Hes also a dedicated Republican-party man in a way that his father is not. He flies around the country constantly to campaign and fundraise for Republican candidates and causes, at a pace that reminds history buffs of the way Richard Nixon put work into the 1966 midterms.

Of course, he wouldnt be a Trump if he didnt make your eyes water at his pure chutzpah. In his new book, he writes about visiting Arlington National Cemetery in this cringe-inducing passage:

I rarely get emotional, if ever. I guess youd call me hyper-rational, stoic. Yet as we drove past the rows of white grave markers, in the gravity of the moment, I had a deep sense of the importance of the presidency and a love of our country. . . . In that moment, I also thought of all the attacks wed already suffered as a family, and about all the sacrifices wed have to make to help my father succeed voluntarily giving up a huge chunk of our business and all international deals to avoid the appearance that we were profiting off of the office.

And of course, hell always be associated with the legacy of his fathers administration. He was a legendary part of the Russia probe. For a solid chunk of time, a large part of the Resistance Media fantasized about a day when he would be imprisoned. And he has incorporated this experience into a political narrative about the reputational, financial, and social sacrifices hes made for his father, and by extension, the country.

I dont point any of this out as a booster of the younger Trump. Like many conservative writers, I prefer notional candidates to the actual options on offer. But if Republicans want to split the difference between Donald Trumps GOP and the GOP of movement conservatism that came before, Donald Trump Jr. is one of the more obvious choices.

View post:

The Easiest Post-Trump GOP to Imagine Might Be One Led by Donald Trump Jr. - National Review

President Donald Trump looks on as his nominee for the chairman of the Federal Reserve Jerome Powell takes to the podium during a press event in the Rose Garden at the White House, November 2, 2017 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images

Former Indian central bank chief Raghuram Rajan warned that the biggest threat to the U.S. economy will come from President Donald Trump's trade policies.

In an opinion piece titled "Is Economic Winter coming?" published on the Project Syndicate website Tuesday, Rajan said the old rules governing macroeconomic cycles no longer seem to apply and it remains to be seen what might cause the next recession in the U.S.

"But if recent history is our guide, the biggest threat stems not from the U.S. Federal Reserve or any one sector of the economy, but rather from the White House," Rajan, who is currently a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, said.

He further highlighted that Trump's administration "doubled down" on its trade war with China just after the Fed embarked on its rate rising path last year.

"After markets started tumbling in late 2018, the Fed backed off. With a comprehensive deal to resolve the trade war nowhere in sight, and with a formal impeachment inquiry into Trump now underway, the Fed is unlikely to tighten monetary policy anytime soon," Rajan said.

Rajan Raghuram at Jackson Hole, Wyoming August 24, 2018.

David A. Grogan | CNBC

Meanwhile, a second factor Rajan points to is geopolitical risks such as the attack on Saudi Arabia's oil facilities in September. "A spike in the price of oil could tip the global economy into recession."

Rajan who served as the governor of the Reserve Bank of India for three years, from Sept. 2013 to Sept. 2016, said while recessions are unpredictable by nature, the greatest threat is not rising rates but unforeseen actions in areas such as trade and geopolitics.

"If the world had fewer wannabe strongmen, the global economy would be much stronger than it is," Rajan said. "Unfortunately, most of today's authoritarian leaders are there because voters put them there."

When asked for comment, a White House spokesperson provided this statement:

"Free, fair, and reciprocal trade is essential to American and global prosperity, but many countries have pursued a strategy of unfair competition for decades that has created barriers for our great farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and entrepreneurs. President Trump inherited a problem that previous U.S. presidents foolishly chose to ignore. President Trump has instead used every available tool to level the playing field for American workers and reduce barriers to the export of our goods and services. With a booming economy, low unemployment, and rising wages despite severe headwinds from severe monetary tightening and a global recession it's clear the President's policy of fair and reciprocal trade along with lower taxes and deregulation are working."

Continued here:

Trump not the Fed is the biggest threat to the US economy, ex-India central bank chief says - CNBC