Donald Trump takes his own brand of diplomacy to North Korea summit
He hectored Mexico’s leader over border wall funding. Lobbed statistics at the Canadian leader without checking his facts. Cajoled the British prime minister to crack down on protesters. Had a tête-à-tête with Russia’s head of state on a whim. Bonded with France’s prime minister over military parades. President Donald Trump rarely conducts business-as-usual diplomacy when he interacts with world leaders. Heading into his expected summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, Trump has a record on the international stage that suggests he’ll seek to charm the dictator and look for an agreement that he can pitch as a win — even if it’s more a triumph of appearance than policy. But never bet against the possibility that he’ll just walk away. Trump’s unpredictable negotiating style has been on full display in the run-up to the historic June 12 summit in Singapore. After months spent deriding Kim as “Little Rocket Man” and boasting about the size of his nuclear button, Trump has shifted tone in recent months, suggesting that a friendship was possible and agreeing to an unprecedented meeting. Even when Trump temporarily backed out of the talks, he spoke of a “wonderful dialogue” building between the two leaders. And now that the talks are back on, Trump is shelving the “maximum pressure” phrase he coined to describe his sanctions against the North. As he approaches the Kim talks, Trump’s avowed “America First” attitude has come increasingly to resemble “America alone.” His eagerness for a deal has unsettled Japan and South Korea. Elsewhere, talk of tearing up trade agreements and his imposition of tariffs to protect the American steel and aluminum industries have angered longtime partners. An overriding theme of the president’s first 18 months of foreign policy has been his willingness to go it alone as he seeks to fulfill his nationalistic campaign promises — even if it unsettles allies. “He just doesn’t care as much,” said Ian Bremmer, a foreign affairs columnist and president of the Eurasia Group. “In terms of postwar American history, no one has done more damage to American alliances than Trump has. All you have to do is talk to American allies.” Critics have labeled Trump an inconsistent force, prone to publicly hectoring friendly partners, embracing foes and resistant to much advice or counsel. His loyal supporters see it all as a mark of Trump’s willingness to hold firm to his promised policies even when the conversations get awkward. After nearly two years spent trying to understand the political novice, many world leaders are still struggling with how to engage Trump, though they have learned he is not easily moved from fulfilling the policies he promised to his most loyal voters during the campaign. Foreign diplomats in the U.S. and leaders overseas have gone to great lengths to charm Trump, a rookie president schooled in New York negotiating who promised a major shift in foreign policy. Those efforts have included getting their messages on to Trump-friendly TV shows like “Fox and Friends” and rolling out the red carpet when Trump visits. In France, Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron invited Trump to view a spectacular military parade on Bastille Day, one that inspired Trump to order up his own parade in Washington. In Japan, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe fêted Trump with golf and American-style hamburgers. But those overtures haven’t always yielded policy results. Macron tried unsuccessfully to keep Trump in the Paris climate accord and the Iran nuclear deal. Abe wanted Trump to stay in the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and has encouraged a more skeptical approach to Kim’s overtures. White House officials privately assess that the world leaders most solicitous toward Trump are rarely the most effective. Germany’s Angela Merkel and Britain’s Theresa May, for instance, have both largely refused to play into Trump’s love for pageantry and have been candid about their disagreements with the president. Indeed, even those who were inclined to buddy up to Trump appear to be changing course. During an April summit at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago, Abe and Trump engaged in what U.S. officials described as a heated economic dialogue over Trump’s tariffs. Just last week, Trump imposed new tariffs on the European Union, Canada and Mexico, despite furious lobbying from those countries. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said: “These tariffs are an affront to the long-standing security partnership between Canada and the United States.” Trump, meanwhile, has focused much of his attention on adversaries rather than allies, seeking to sit down with Kim and routinely praising Russian President Vladimir Putin. Fixated on his celebrity and tough-guy image, Trump cares deeply about the pageantry of his interactions with world leaders and also values what he considers respectful treatment. That tone was set on Trump’s first international trip, when Saudi Arabia gave him an opulent welcome. More than a dozen horses flanked the presidential limousine as Trump was slowly driven to the Royal Court in Riyadh. Trumpets played and soldiers stood at attention as the president arrived. Trump declared the spectacle “very impressive.” A key theme in Trump’s calls with foreign leaders has been his need for respect. He badgered Mexico’s president over funding for his border wall, which he views as a face-saving fulfillment of a campaign promise. He nudged the British prime minister to do something about potential protests should he visit the U.K., a potential embarrassment for a diplomatic visit. Trump rarely sweats the small stuff. When it comes to policy meetings and delicate negotiations, Trump is more likely to follow his instincts than stick to a scripted plan. His admission of stretching his information about trade in a call with Trudeau was in keeping with a seat-of-the-pants style that can leave advisers nervous. Advisers say Trump avoids spending extensive time in preparation. He grew frustrated with former national security adviser H.R. McMaster and his briefing style, though he is said to listen more to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Still, Trump is not a fan of detailed briefing books, preferring limited preparation and instinct. Those close to
Donald Trump’s talk of a Syria pullout nothing new
President Donald Trump’s unscripted remark this week about pulling out of Syria “very soon,” while at odds with his own policy, was not a one-off: For weeks, top advisers have been fretting about an overly hasty withdrawal as the president has increasingly told them privately he wants out, U.S. officials said. Only two months ago, Trump’s aides thought they’d persuaded him that the U.S. needed to keep its presence in Syria open-ended — not only because the Islamic State group has yet to be entirely defeated, but also because the resulting power vacuum could be filled by other extremist groups or by Iran. Trump signed off on major speech in January in which Secretary of State Rex Tillerson laid out the new strategy and declared “it is vital for the United States to remain engaged in Syria.” But by mid-February, Trump was telling his top aides in meetings that as soon as victory can be declared against IS, he wanted American troops out of Syria, said the officials. Alarm bells went off at the State Department and the Pentagon, where officials have been planning for a gradual, methodical shift from a military-led operation to a diplomatic mission to start rebuilding basic infrastructure like roads and sewers in the war-wracked country. In one sign that Trump is serious about reversing course and withdrawing from Syria, the White House this week put on hold some $200 million in US funding for stabilization projects in Syria, officials said. The money, to have been spent by the State Department for infrastructure projects like power, water and roads, had been announced by outgoing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson at an aid conference last month in Kuwait. The officials said the hold, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, is not necessarily permanent and will be discussed at senior-level inter-agency meetings next week. The officials weren’t authorized to comment publicly and demanded anonymity. The State Department said it continually reviews appropriate assistance levels and how best they might be utilized. And the agency said it continues to work with the international community, members of the Coalition, and our partners on the ground to provide much needed stabilization support to vulnerable areas in Syria. “The United States is working everyday on the ground and with the international community to help stabilize those areas liberated from ISIS and identify ways to move forward with reconstruction once there has been a peaceful political transition away from (Syrian President Bashar) Assad,” according to a statement from the State Department. Trump’s first public suggestion he was itching to pull out came in a news conference with visiting Australian Prime Minister Alastair Campbell on Feb. 23, when Trump said the U.S. was in Syria to “get rid of ISIS and go home.” On Thursday, in a domestic policy speech in Ohio, Trump went further. “We’ll be coming out of Syria, like, very soon. Let the other people take care of it now. Very soon — very soon, we’re coming out,” Trump said. The public declaration caught U.S. national security agencies off-guard and unsure whether Trump was formally announcing a new, unexpected change in policy. Inundated by inquiries from journalists and foreign officials, the Pentagon and State Department reached out to the White House’s National Security Council for clarification. The White House’s ambiguous response, officials said: Trump’s words speak for themselves. “The mission of the Department of Defense to defeat ISIS has not changed,” said Maj. Adrian Rankine-Galloway, a Pentagon spokesman. Still, without a clear directive from the president, planning has not started for a withdrawal from Syria, officials said, and Trump has not advocated a specific timetable. For Trump, who campaigned on an “America First” mantra, Syria is just the latest foreign arena where his impulse has been to limit the U.S. role. Like with NATO and the United Nations, Trump has called for other governments to step up and share more of the burden so that Washington doesn’t foot the bill. His administration has been crisscrossing the globe seeking financial commitments from other countries to fund reconstruction in both Syria and Iraq, but with only limited success. Yet it’s unclear how Trump’s impulse to pull out could be affected by recent staff shake-ups on his national security team. Tillerson and former national security adviser H.R. McMaster, both advocates for keeping a U.S. presence in Syria, were recently fired, creating questions about the longevity of the plan Tillerson announced in his Stanford University speech in January. But Trump also replaced McMaster with John Bolton, a vocal advocate for U.S. intervention and aggressive use of the military overseas. The abrupt change in the president’s thinking has drawn concern both inside and outside the United States. Other nations that make up the U.S.-led coalition fighting IS fear that Trump’s impulse to pull out hastily would allow the notoriously resourceful IS militants to regroup, several European diplomats said. That concern has been heightened by the fact that U.S.-backed ground operations against remaining IS militants in Syria were put on hold earlier this month. The ground operations had to be paused because Kurdish fighters who had been spearheading the campaign against IS shifted to a separate fight with Turkish forces, who began combat operations in the town of Afrin against Kurds who are considered by Ankara to be terrorists that threaten Turkey’s security. “This is a serious and growing concern,” State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said this month. Beyond just defeating IS, there are other strategic U.S. objectives that could be jeopardized by a hasty withdrawal, officials said, chiefly those related to Russia and Iran. Israel, America’s closest Mideast ally, and other regional nations like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are deeply concerned about the influence of Iran and its allies, including the Shiite militant group Hezbollah, inside Syria. The U.S. military presence in Syria has been seen as a buffer against unchecked Iranian activity, and especially against Tehran’s desire to establish a contiguous land route from Iran to the Mediterranean coast in
The doctor is in: White House physician nominated to lead VA
President Donald Trump fired Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin and nominated White House doctor Ronny Jackson to replace him following a bruising ethics scandal and a mounting rebellion within the agency. A Navy rear admiral, Jackson is a surprise choice to succeed Shulkin, a former Obama administration official and the first nonveteran to head the VA. Trump had been considering replacing Shulkin for weeks but had not been known to be considering Jackson for the role. In a statement, Trump praised Jackson as “highly trained and qualified.” It was a decision that signaled Trump chose to go with someone he knows and trusts, rather than choosing a candidate with a longer resume, to run a massive agency facing huge bureaucratic challenges. Shulkin said he was undone by advocates of privatization within the administration. He wrote in a New York Times opinion piece that they “saw me as an obstacle to privatization who had to be removed.” He added: “That is because I am convinced that privatization is a political issue aimed at rewarding select people and companies with profits, even if it undermines care for veterans.” Jackson has served since 2013 as the physician to the president, one of the people in closest proximity to Trump day in and day out. His profile rose after he conducted a sweeping press conference about the president’s medical exam in January in which he impressed Trump with his camera-ready demeanor and deft navigation of reporters’ questions as he delivered a rosy depiction of the president’s health, according to a person familiar with the president’s thinking but not authorized to discuss private conversations. Jackson eagerly embraced the idea of moving to the VA, according to a White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters. Ironically, it was Shulkin who had recommended Jackson for an undersecretary position at the agency in fall. Jackson was vetted during that time on his policy positions and other issues, the official said. The promotion of Jackson marks the latest Trump hire to be driven at least as much by personal familiarity with the president as by his vision for the role at government’s second-largest department, responsible for 9 million military veterans in more than 1,700 government-run health facilities. Brig. Gen. Dr. Richard Tubb, who trained Jackson, said in a letter read at Jackson’s briefing that the doctor had been attached like “Velcro” to Trump since Inauguration Day. “On any given day,” he wrote, “the ‘physician’s office,’ as it is known, is generally the first and last to see the President.” A White House official said Shulkin was informed of his dismissal by chief of staff John Kelly before the president announced the move on Twitter on Wednesday. A major veterans’ organization expressed concern over Shulkin’s dismissal and Trump’s intention to nominate Jackson, whom they worried lacked experience to run the huge department. “We are disappointed and already quite concerned about this nominee,” said Joe Chenelly, the national executive director of AMVETS. “The administration needs to be ready to prove that he’s qualified to run such a massive agency, a $200 billion bureaucracy.” Rep. Phil Roe, chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, said he believed Shulkin did a “fantastic job” and didn’t think he should have been dismissed, but “at the end of the day, Cabinet secretaries serve at the pleasure of the president.” “I respect President Trump’s decision, support the president’s agenda and remain willing to work with anyone committed to doing the right thing on behalf of our nation’s veterans,” said Roe, a Republican from Tennessee. Shulkin is the second Cabinet secretary to depart over controversies involving expensive travel, following Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price’s resignation last September. Trump said in a statement he is “grateful” for Shulkin’s service. Shulkin had agreed to reimburse the government more than $4,000 after the VA’s internal watchdog concluded last month that he had improperly accepted Wimbledon tennis tickets and that his then-chief of staff had doctored emails to justify his wife traveling to Europe with him at taxpayer expense. Shulkin also blamed internal drama at the agency on a half-dozen or so rebellious political appointees, insisting he had White House backing to fire them. But the continuing VA infighting and a fresh raft of watchdog reports documenting leadership failures and spending waste — as well as fresh allegations that Shulkin had used a member of his security detail to run personal errands — proved too much of a distraction. It was the latest in a series of departures of top administration officials, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security adviser H.R. McMaster. The VA change comes as Trump is trying to expand the Veterans Choice program, fulfilling a campaign promise that major veterans’ groups worry could be an unwanted step toward privatizing VA health care. His plan remains in limbo in Congress. Having pushed through legislation in Trump’s first year making it easier to fire bad VA employees and speed disability appeals, Shulkin leaves behind a department in disarray. Several projects remain unfinished, including a multibillion-dollar overhaul of electronic medical records aimed at speeding up wait times for veterans seeking medical care as well as expanded mental health treatment for veterans at higher risk of suicide. Trump selected Robert Wilkie, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, to serve as the acting head of the VA. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
At odds with John Bolton on North Korea, Jim Mattis appears isolated
Of the issues that divide Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and President Donald Trump’s incoming national security adviser, John Bolton, one stands out: North Korea. Bolton, who will replace Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster on April 9, has publicly advocated for overthrowing the North Korean government. Mattis, a retired Marine general who knows intimately the costs of war, favors diplomacy to rid the North of its nuclear weapons and has said war on the Korean peninsula would be “catastrophic.” On Iran, too, Mattis would seem at odds with Bolton, who has argued for abandoning the Obama-era nuclear deal. These and other matters of war and peace will test Mattis’ influence with Trump as his national security team is overhauled. Mattis was sometimes at odds with McMaster, but the arrival of the hawkish Bolton, combined with the firing of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and the uncertain status of John Kelly as White House chief of staff, appears to leave Mattis more isolated than at any time since he took over the Pentagon 15 months ago. Often described as a steadying or moderating influence on the impulsive Trump, Mattis has little previous relationship with Bolton. The North Korea issue is front-and-center: Trump has agreed to meet with North Korean President Kim Jong Un by May to discuss the North’s nuclear disarmament. The unprecedented summit could be a turning point in a decades-old U.S.-North Korean standoff that Trump himself has said could end in “fire and fury” – an American nuclear attack __ to stop the North from gaining the ability to strike the U.S. with a nuclear missile. “This is buckle-up time,” retired Navy Adm. James Stavridis, dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, said last week on MSNBC. “For the military I have three words: Sharpen your swords. He (Bolton) is someone who is going to reach for the military instrument.” The changes in the White House and at the State Department, while significant for Mattis, are hardly heart-stopping. People close to him sense no change in his commitment to the job; some suggest that Trump’s decision to move former Republican congressman and current CIA director Mike Pompeo to State, replacing Tillerson, could benefit Mattis in the sense that he’ll have a partner at State who is better aligned with Trump. Publicly, Mattis has said little about the shakeup. He was in Afghanistan when Tillerson got the ax. When reporters asked his reaction a couple of days later, Mattis said he preferred not to comment on the details, although he went on to suggest that its importance was being exaggerated. He said that in all of his discussions abroad with foreign government officials and American troops, the matter was not brought up once. “I understand why you’re asking, but I’m just pointing out that in most parts of the world this is a Washington, D.C. story,” he said. Another Washington story is Mattis and his ability to forge a workable relationship with Trump despite differences on some issues like the Iran nuclear deal, which Mattis says is flawed but worth honoring as long as the Iranians do. Mattis also has differed with the president over Trump’s wish to bar all transgender people from serving in the military, and he helped sway Trump from his inclination last year to end U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan. The Mattis formula seems to be simple. Out of the spotlight, out of trouble. The less he says publicly, the less he risks losing influence with Trump. “Part of his success … is absolutely the fact that you don’t see him in the limelight terribly much,” says Loren Dejonge Schulman, a defense analyst at the Center for a New American Security who served in key national security positions in the White House and Pentagon under President Barack Obama. “That may be keeping him out of trouble with the White House but I think it’s setting an incredibly bad precedent in terms of Pentagon transparency.” If Mattis, who spent more than 40 years in uniform and is the first career military officer to lead the Pentagon since George C. Marshall in the early 1950s, isn’t the most experienced politician to run the military’s vast bureaucracy, he has shown a knack for staying out of trouble with his thin-skinned boss. Mattis has even broken Trump of his habit of calling the retired general “Mad Dog,” which Mattis insists was a media invention to begin with. Trump frequently has lunch and dinners with the defense secretary and speaks glowingly of him to outside advisers. White House officials have said that Trump sometimes repeats military historical anecdotes he heard from Mattis. Even Mattis’ few known stumbles have not dogged him. In August, for example, Mattis told sailors at a submarine base in his home state of Washington that the Navy would give them the worst and the best days of their lives, and then added, “That means you’re not some (expletive) sitting on the sidelines,” he said. “You know what I mean, kind of sitting there saying, ‘Well, I should have done something with my life.’” His language was quickly forgotten. The episode pointed to a man who has shaped the job and not let it shape him. So much so that perhaps the most poignant criticism of his tenure has been the secrecy with which the military has handled everything from troop deployment numbers to the details of its military strategies — things that often were made public under previous secretaries. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Cabinet chaos: Trump’s team battles scandal, irrelevance
One Cabinet member was grilled by Congress about alleged misuse of taxpayer funds for private flights. Another faced an extraordinary revolt within his own department amid a swirling ethics scandal. A third has come under scrutiny for her failure to answer basic questions about her job in a nationally televised interview. And none of them was the one Trump fired. President Donald Trump’s Cabinet in recent weeks has been enveloped in a cloud of controversy, undermining the administration’s ability to advance its agenda and drawing the ire of a president increasingly willing to cast aside allies and go it alone. Trump’s ouster of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Tuesday may have just been the first salvo in a shakeup of a Cabinet that, with few exceptions, has been a team of rivals for bad headlines and largely sidelined by the White House. “Donald Trump is a lone-wolf president who doesn’t want to co-govern with anybody and doesn’t want anyone else getting the credit,” said presidential historian Douglas Brinkley of Rice University. “For his Cabinet, he brought in a bizarre strand of outsiders and right-wing ideologues. Many are famed conservative or wealthy business people, but that doesn’t mean you understand good governance.” The string of embarrassing headlines for Trump’s advisers, as well as the president’s growing distance from them, stands in sharp contrast to how he portrayed the group last year. “There are those that are saying it’s one of the finest group of people ever assembled as a Cabinet,” Trump said then. On Tuesday, the president hinted after firing Tillerson that more changes may be forthcoming, saying an ideal Cabinet is in the making. “I’ve gotten to know a lot of people very well over the last year,” Trump told reporters at the White House, “and I’m really at a point where we’re getting very close to having the Cabinet and other things that I want.” Even as Trump routinely convened Cabinet meetings in front of the cameras for “Dear Leader”-type tributes over the past year, his relationship with many of its members began to splinter. Last summer he began publicly bashing Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a former close adviser who was the first senator to back his campaign. Furious that the attorney general recused himself from the Russia probe that has loomed over the White House, Trump has privately mused about firing Sessions and taken to delivering unprecedented Twitter broadsides against him. Trump has used the words “beleaguered” and “disgraceful” to describe Sessions, who only recently stood up to the president and defended his recusal decision. Tillerson also frequently clashed with Trump, who never forgave the outgoing secretary of state for reportedly calling him “a moron” last summer after grumbling that the president had no grasp of foreign affairs. The pair never developed a particularly warm relationship. Last November, during a full day of meetings in Beijing, Trump and his senior staff were served plates of wilted Caesar salad as they gathered in a private room in the Great Hall of the People. None of the Americans moved to eat the unappetizing dish, but Trump prodded Tillerson to give it a try, according to a senior administration official. “Rex,” the president said, “eat the salad.” Tillerson declined, despite Trump’s urging. After repeatedly undermining and contradicting Tillerson, Trump at last fired his secretary of state in a tweet. Trump in recent days has told confidants that he feels emboldened. He’s proud of his unilateral decisions to impose sweeping tariffs on metal imports and to meet with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, and far less willing to put up with disloyalty around him, according to a person who has spoken to the president in recent days but was not authorized to discuss private conversations publicly. Trump’s esteem for the Cabinet has faded in recent months, according to two White House officials and two outside advisers. He also told confidants that he was in the midst of making changes to improve personnel and, according to one person who spoke with him, “get rid of the dead weight” — which could put a number of embattled Cabinet secretaries on notice. The officials all spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke underwent questioning Tuesday by Senate Democrats, who accused him of spending tens of thousands of dollars on office renovations and private flights while proposing deep cuts to conservation programs. Zinke pushed back, saying he “never took a private jet anywhere” — because all three flights he had taken on private planes as secretary were on aircraft with propellers, not jet engines. Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin’s days on the job may be limited after a bruising internal report found ethics violations in connection with his trip to Europe with his wife last summer, according to senior administration officials. He also has faced a potential mutiny from his own staff: A political adviser installed by Trump at the Department of Veterans Affairs has openly mused to other VA staff about ousting the former Obama administration official. Trump has floated the notion of moving Energy Secretary Rick Perry to the VA to right the ship, believing Shulkin has become a distraction, according to two people familiar with White House discussions. They were not authorized to discuss internal deliberations and spoke on condition of anonymity. Others under the microscope: —White House aides deemed Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ recent appearance on “60 Minutes” a disaster as she struggled to defend the administration’s school safety plan and could not answer basic questions about the nation’s education system. —Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson came under fire last month after reports his agency was spending $31,000 for a new dining set, a purchase HUD officials said was made without Carson’s knowledge. —Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt has faced questions about $25,000 spent on a soundproof “privacy booth” inside his office to prevent eavesdropping on his phone calls and another $9,000 on biometric locks. —The first Cabinet member to
Donald Trump drawing criticism for not explicitly rebuking white supremacists
President Donald Trump is drawing criticism from Republicans and Democrats for not explicitly denouncing white supremacists in the aftermath of violent clashes in Virginia, with lawmakers saying he needs to take a public stand against groups that espouse racism and hate. Trump, while on a working vacation at his New Jersey golf club, addressed the nation Saturday soon after a car plowed into a group of anti-racist counter-protesters in Charlottesville, a college town where neo-Nazis and white nationalists had assembled for march. The president did not single out any group, instead blaming “many sides” for the violence. “Hate and the division must stop, and must stop right now,” he said. “We have to come together as Americans with love for our nation and … true affection for each other.” Trump condemned “in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides.” He added: “It’s been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump. Not Barack Obama. It’s been going on for a long, long time.” He did not answer questions from reporters about whether he rejected the support of white nationalists or whether he believed the car crash was an example of domestic terrorism. Aides who appeared on the Sunday news shows said the White House did believe those things, but many fellow Republicans demanded that Trump personally denounce the white supremacists. Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., tweeted: “Mr. President – we must call evil by its name. These were white supremacists and this was domestic terrorism.” Added Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.: “Nothing patriotic about #Nazis,the #KKK or #WhiteSupremacists It’s the direct opposite of what #America seeks to be.” GOP Chris Christie of New Jersey, a staunch Trump supporter, wrote: “We reject the racism and violence of white nationalists like the ones acting out in Charlottesville. Everyone in leadership must speak out.” On the Democrat side, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer of New York said “of course we condemn ALL that hate stands for. Until @POTUS specifically condemns alt-right action in Charlottesville, he hasn’t done his job.” The president’s only public statement early Sunday was a retweet saluting two Virginia state police officers killed in helicopter crash after being dispatched to monitor the Charlottesville clashes. The previous day, Trump tweeted condolences to those officers soon after the helicopter crashed. His tweet sending condolences to the woman killed in the protests came more than five hours after the incident. Trump’s national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, said Sunday that he considered the attack in Charlottesville to be terrorism: “I certainly think anytime that you commit an attack against people to incite fear, it is terrorism,” McMaster told ABC’s “This Week.” “It meets the definition of terrorism. But what this is, what you see here, is you see someone who is a criminal, who is committing a criminal act against fellow Americans.” The president’s homeland security adviser, Tom Bossert, defended the president’s statement by suggesting that some of the counter-protesters were violent too. When pressed, he specifically condemned the racist groups. The president’s daughter and White House aide, Ivanka Trump, tweeted Sunday morning: “There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis.” White nationalists had assembled in Charlottesville to vent their frustration against the city’s plans to take down a statue of Confederal Gen. Robert E. Lee. Counter-protesters massed in opposition. A few hours after violent encounters between the two groups, a car drove into a crowd of people peacefully protesting the rally. The driver was later taken into custody. Alt-right leader Richard Spencer and former Ku Klux Klan member David Duke attended the demonstrations. Duke told reporters that the white nationalists were working to “fulfill the promises of Donald Trump.” Trump’s speech also drew praise from the neo-Nazi website Daily Stormer, which wrote: “Trump comments were good. He didn’t attack us. He just said the nation should come together. Nothing specific against us. … No condemnation at all.” The website had been promoting the Charlottesville demonstration as part of its “Summer of Hate” edition. Mayor Michael Signer, a Democrat, said he was disgusted that the white nationalists had come to his town and blamed Trump for inflaming racial prejudices with his campaign last year. “I’m not going to make any bones about it. I place the blame for a lot of what you’re seeing in American today right at the doorstep of the White House and the people around the president,” he said. Trump, as a candidate, frequently came under scrutiny for being slow to offer his condemnation of white supremacists. His strongest denunciation of the movement has not come voluntarily, only when asked, and he occasionally trafficked in retweets of racist social media posts during his campaign. His chief strategist, Steve Bannon, once declared that his former news site, Breitbart, was “the platform for the alt-right.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Donald Trump advisers at odds over president’s foreign policy
The direction of President Donald Trump‘s foreign policy is at the center of a battle between two of his top aides. Conservative groups are targeting national security adviser H.R. McMaster. They argue that he’s insufficiently supportive of Israel and not tough enough on Iran. Those critics along with a website tied to Trump adviser Steve Bannon are pushing for McMaster to be ousted. McMaster is one of several powerful generals in Trump’s orbit who hail from the Republican foreign policy establishment. But Trump is equally sympathetic to the views of firebrands like Bannon, who are trying to push the party in a new, isolationist direction embodied by his “America First” doctrine. Administration officials and outside advisers tell The Associated Pres that McMaster and Bannon have clashed over Afghanistan war strategy. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Donald Trump defends sharing ‘terrorism’ facts with Russians
President Donald Trump defended revealing information to Russian officials, saying in a pair of tweets Tuesday that he shared “facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety” and had “the absolute right” to do so. Trump was responding to reports Monday that he revealed highly classified information to senior Russian officials during an Oval Office meeting last week, putting a source of intelligence on the Islamic State at risk. But Trump tweeted that he shared the information for “humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism.” Trump says he wanted to share with Russia “facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety.” He noted that as president, he has an “absolute right” to do this. The reports by The Washington Post and others drew strong condemnation from Democrats and a rare rebuke of Trump from some Republican lawmakers. White House officials denounced the report, saying the president did not disclose intelligence sources or methods to the Russians, though officials did not deny that classified information was disclosed in the May 10 meeting. The president and the foreign minister reviewed a range of common threats to our two countries including threats to civil aviation,” said H.R. McMaster, Trump’s national security adviser. “At no time, at no time were intelligence sources or methods discussed and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known.” Secretary of State Rex Tillerson also disputed the Post report. He said Trump discussed a range of subjects with the Russians, including “common efforts and threats regarding counter-terrorism.” The nature of specific threats was discussed, he said, but not sources, methods or military operations. The Post, citing current and former U.S. officials, said Trump shared details about an Islamic State terror threat related to the use of laptop computers on aircraft with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak. The ambassador has been a central player in the snowballing controversy surrounding possible coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russia’s election meddling. The anonymous officials told the Post that the information Trump relayed during the Oval Office meeting had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement. They said it was considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government. The New York Times and BuzzFeed News published similar reports later Monday. Russia’s foreign ministry spokesman denied the report. Maria Zakharova, a spokeswoman for the Russian foreign ministry, on Facebook on Tuesday described the reports as “yet another fake.” The revelations could further damage Trump’s already fraught relationship with U.S. intelligence agencies. He’s openly questioned the competency of intelligence officials and challenged their high-confidence assessment that Russia meddled in last year’s presidential election to help him win. His criticism has been followed by a steady stream of leaks to the media that have been damaging to Trump and exposed an FBI investigation into his associates’ possible ties to Russia. The disclosure also risks harming his credibility with U.S. partners around the world ahead of his first overseas trip. The White House was already reeling from its botched handling of Trump’s decision last week to fire James Comey, the FBI director who was overseeing the Russia investigation. A European security official said sharing sensitive information could dampen the trust between the United States and its intelligence sharing partners. “It wouldn’t likely stop partners from sharing life-saving intelligence with the Americans, but it could impact the trust that has been built, particularly if sharing such information exposes specific intelligence gathering methods,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak about such intelligence sharing. The revelation also prompted cries of hypocrisy. Trump spent the campaign arguing that his opponent, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, should be locked up for careless handling of classified information. The Post said the intelligence partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russian officials. By doing so, Trump would have jeopardized cooperation from an ally familiar with the inner workings of the Islamic State group, and make other allies – or even U.S. intelligence officials – wary about sharing future top secret details with the president. Afterward, White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency, the newspaper said. The CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment Monday evening. Congressional Republicans and Democrats expressed concern about the report. GOP Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters the Trump White House “has got to do something soon to bring itself under control and order.” He described the White House as “on a downward spiral.” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York also called the story “disturbing,” adding, “Revealing classified information at this level is extremely dangerous and puts at risk the lives of Americans and those who gather intelligence for our country.” The controversy engulfed the White House. Reporters spent much of the evening camped out adjacent to Press Secretary Sean Spicer‘s office, hoping for answers. At one point, an eagle-eyed reporter spotted a handful of staffers, including Spicer and Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, walking toward the Cabinet Room. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Donald Trump’s 100-days promises: Fewer than half carried out
Sure enough, the big trans-Pacific trade deal is toast, climate change action is on the ropes and various regulations from the Obama era have been scrapped. It’s also a safe bet President Donald Trump hasn’t raced a bicycle since Jan. 20, keeping that vow. Add a Supreme Court justice — no small feat — and call these promises kept. But where’s that wall? Or the promised trade punishment against China — will the Chinese get off scot-free from “the greatest theft in the history of the world”? What about that “easy” replacement for Obamacare? How about the trillion-dollar infrastructure plan and huge tax cut that were supposed to be in motion by now? Trump’s road to the White House, paved in big, sometimes impossible pledges, has detoured onto a byway of promises deferred or left behind, an AP analysis found. Of 38 specific promises Trump made in his 100-day “contract” with voters — “This is my pledge to you” — he’s accomplished 10, mostly through executive orders that don’t require legislation, such as withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. He’s abandoned several and failed to deliver quickly on others, stymied at times by a divided Republican Party and resistant federal judges. Of 10 promises that require Congress to act, none has been achieved and most have not been introduced. “I’ve done more than any other president in the first 100 days,” the president bragged in a recent interview with AP, even as he criticized the marker as an “artificial barrier.” In truth, his 100-day plan remains mostly a to-do list that will spill over well beyond Saturday, his 100th day. Some of Trump’s promises were obviously hyperbole to begin with. Don’t hold your breath waiting for alleged Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl to be dropped out of an airplane without a parachute, as Trump vowed he’d do at many of his campaign rallies. China’s leader got a fancy dinner, complete with “beautiful” chocolate cake at Mar-a-Lago this month, not the promised “McDonald’s hamburger” and humble pie. But many promises were meant to be taken seriously. Trump clearly owes his supporters a Mexico border wall, even if it doesn’t end up being a foot taller than the Great Wall of China. One page of his 100-day manifesto is devoted to legislation he would fight to pass in 100 days. None of it has been achieved. The other page lists 18 executive actions and intentions he promised to pursue — many on Day One. He has followed through on fewer than a dozen, largely through the use of executive orders, and the White House is boasting that he will set a post-World War II record when he signs more this week. That’s a change in tune. “We need people in Washington that don’t go around signing executive orders because they can’t get people into a room and get some kind of a deal that’s negotiated,” he declared in New Hampshire in March 2015. “We need people that know how to lead, and we don’t have that. We have amateurs.” Efforts to provide affordable child care and paid maternity leave, to make college more affordable and to invest in urban areas have been all but forgotten. That’s despite the advantage of a Republican-controlled Congress, which the White House failed to pull together behind Trump’s first attempt to repeal and replace “Obamacare.” An AP reporter who followed Trump throughout the presidential campaign collected scores of promises he made along the way, from the consequential to the fanciful. Here are some of them, and his progress so far: ___ ENERGY and the ENVIRONMENT: — Lift President Barack Obama‘s roadblocks on the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines. Done. Keystone XL is revived and construction of the Dakota Access is completed. — Lift restrictions on mining coal and drilling for oil and natural gas. Done. Trump has unraveled a number of Obama-era restrictions and initiated a review of the Clean Power Plan, which aimed to restrict greenhouse gas emissions at coal-fired power plants. — Cancel payments to U.N. climate change programs and pull out of the Paris climate accord Nope. Trump has yet to make a decision on Paris. His aides are torn. ___ ECONOMY and TRADE: — Pass a tax overhaul. “Just think about what can be accomplished in the first 100 days of a Trump administration,” he told his supporters again and again in the final weeks of the campaign. “We are going to have the biggest tax cut since Ronald Reagan.” He promised a plan that would reduce rates dramatically both for corporations and the middle class. Nowhere close. Trump has scrapped the tax plan he campaigned on, and his administration’s new package is in its early stages, not only missing the first 100 days but likely to miss a new August deadline set by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. Some details may emerge this week. —Designate China a currency manipulator, setting the stage for possible trade penalties because “we’re like the piggy bank that’s being robbed. We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country, and that’s what they’re doing.” Abandoned. Trump says he doesn’t want to punish China when it is cooperating in a response to North Korean provocations. He also says China has stopped manipulating its currency for unfair trade advantage. But China was moving away from that behavior well before he took office. Also set aside: repeated vows to slap high tariffs on Chinese imports. —Announce his intention to renegotiate or withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement. Backtracked, in essence. A draft of his administration’s plan for NAFTA proposes only a mild rewrite. But in his AP interview, he threatened anew to terminate the deal if his goals are not met in a renegotiation. — Direct his commerce secretary and trade representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly hurt American workers. Done. Trump has initiated plenty of studies over the past 100 days. — Slap a 35 percent tariff on goods from
Who’s Dina Powell? A rising Donald Trump national security figure
The photo from inside Donald Trump‘s makeshift situation room at Mar-a-Lago affirmed what White House insiders have recognized for some time — that Dina Powell has quietly established herself as a White House power. Though sandwiched between other administration officials, the deputy national security adviser for strategy stands out as the only woman among 13 staffers in the room on the night the president ordered the missile attack in Syria. And in a White House that is split between outsider ideologues and more traditional operators, Powell is viewed as a steady force in the growing influence of the latter. Her West Wing experience, conservative background and policy chops have won over Trump’s daughter and son-in-law. Now, Powell is at the table as the president turns more of his attention to international affairs, attempting to craft a foreign policy out of a self-described “flexible” approach to the world. “No one should ever underestimate Dina Powell.” says Brian Gunderson, a former State Department chief of staff. He hired her to work in former House Majority Leader Dick Armey‘s office early in her career and later worked with her in George W. Bush‘s White House. Powell, 43, declined comment for this story. She is a rare Bush veteran in a White House that has largely shunned its Republican predecessor’s legacy. She came via Goldman Sachs — decidedly not a rarity for the new president — originally to work on economic development at the behest of Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner. An Egyptian-American with international experience and fluency in Arabic, she was soon moved to the National Security Council, though she retains her economic title. Powell’s ties to Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, who recruited her, and to economic adviser Gary Cohn, a fellow Goldman alumnus, mean she has been labeled by some as part of a more moderate group at the White House. But GOP leaders describe her as a longtime conservative thinker. She has quickly earned the respect of the president, who said in a statement to The Associated Press: “Dina is an extremely intelligent and competent member of my team. She is highly respected and a great person.” National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster said he recruited Powell “because of her exceptional expertise and leadership skills, to lead an effort to restore the strategic focus of the national security council. She has already accomplished this shift in a few weeks, establishing great relationships across our government and with key international allies.” Powell’s foreign policy experience was forged under Condoleezza Rice, who brought her into the State Department when the Bush administration was trying to improve diplomacy in the Middle East. Calling her a “member of my Middle East brain trust,” the former secretary of state said that Powell knows the region well and “not just confined to Egypt.” She added that Powell was “somebody who understood the limits of secularism in the Middle East but the dangers of fundamentalism. She brought sensitivities to those issues.” Still, Powell is plunging into a national security role at a fraught moment, as the United States ponders next steps with Syria, navigates complex relationships with North Korea, China and Russia and seeks to combat the rise of ISIS. All under a president, who campaigned on a platform of “America First” but whose foreign policy has proved unpredictable. Tommy Vietor, who served as NSC spokesman under Barack Obama, said the administration is still struggling to present a coherent foreign policy. “Does ‘America First’ mean we don’t care anymore?” he asked. “They need to do a better job making clear people understand where they stand on many issues.” Powell was brought onto the national security team after a period of tumult. Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn was asked to resign in February amid revelations that he misled senior administration officials about his Russian contacts. One of his deputies, K.T. McFarland — notably absent from the Florida photo — is expected to exit soon. She is in line to be U.S. ambassador to Singapore. As deputy national security adviser for strategy, Powell is working to coordinate the various U.S. security-related agencies and advisers. According to a recent national security memo, she attends meetings of the National Security Council’s Principals Committee and Deputies Committee. Those advisers briefed Trump with options last week after a chemical attack that the U.S. determined was ordered by Syrian President Bashar Assad. Born in Cairo, Powell moved to the United States with her family at the age of four and had to learn to speak English. She is a Coptic Christian, the faith that was targeted with bombings of two churches in Cairo on Palm Sunday. Entering Republican politics at a young age, Powell put herself through the University of Texas by working in the state Legislature. After stints with several GOP congressional members and at the Republican National Committee, she joined George W. Bush’s administration. There she became the youngest person to ever run a president’s personnel office. Later she served Rice as assistant secretary of state for educational and cultural affairs and as deputy undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs. From the White House, Powell went to Goldman Sachs, where she worked for a decade, becoming a partner, looking after global investment and serving as president of the company foundation, overseeing an effort to invest in female entrepreneurs around the world. Speculation is already underway about whether her current role could grow. “She’s already ascending in a big way,” said Sen. Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, who has known Powell for years. “My sense is she will continue to be someone to look for.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Donald Trump pick as security adviser is independent-minded
President Donald Trump‘s choice of an outspoken but non-political Army general as national security adviser is a nod to pragmatism, but Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster will serve a commander in chief with unorthodox ideas about foreign policy and an inner circle of advisers determined to implement them. McMaster, 54, is an independent-minded soldier widely admired for his leadership skills, but he is short on experience in Washington’s trenches. His appointment reinforces the more mainstream approach to security that Trump is getting from Pentagon chief Jim Mattis, who seems to have steered the administration toward stronger support for NATO and allies in Asia, and away from the reauthorization of torture in interrogations. Still, it’s an open question how McMaster, a decorated combat veteran, will fare in a White House that has set up what some call a parallel power structure led by Stephen Bannon and his strategic initiatives group, whose role and reach hasn’t been publicly explained. As Trump’s chief strategist, Bannon, the conservative media executive with outspoken views about Islam, has a seat on the National Security Council’s principals committee in a restructuring that puts him on equal footing with Cabinet members like Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said Tuesday that Trump promised McMaster “100 percent control” over the structure of the NSC. Peter R. Mansoor, a retired Army colonel who served with McMaster in Iraq during the 2007 surge of U.S. troops, said Bannon’s inclusion on the principals committee shows his group “has an outsized measure of importance within the White House.” What that means for McMaster and fellow pragmatists Mattis and Tillerson, he said, is unclear. Mansoor said he expects McMaster to be a “voice of reason” and a natural ally to Mattis. McMaster convened a meeting with senior NSC staff on Tuesday, his first day in the White House. He did not make any immediate changes to the NSC’s senior team and most top officials were expecting to stay on, according to an administration official who was not authorized to discuss the internal meeting publicly and insisted on anonymity. As successor to Michael Flynn, ousted for his explanation of his communications with Russia’s ambassador before Trump took office, McMaster continues Trump’s reliance on career military officers. Mattis and John Kelly, the homeland security secretary, are retired Marine generals. Flynn was an Army lieutenant general. McMaster becomes the first active-duty officer to serve as national security adviser since Colin Powell, then a three-star general, assumed the job in President Ronald Reagan‘s final two years in office. Powell went on to grab the military’s top job as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Robert Harward, a retired three-star admiral, was Trump’s first choice to replace Flynn but turned down the offer. The national security adviser has a special role within the government, working directly with the president but not subject to confirmation by the Senate. McMaster will advise Trump and serve as his coordinator of foreign and defense policy. He will approach matters differently than Flynn, who was a contentious figure before Trump appointed him. After being fired as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014, Flynn publicly lambasted the Obama administration as soft on Islamic extremism. During the 2016 president campaign, he delivered a harsh, partisan denouncement of Democrat Hillary Clinton at the Republican National Convention. Trump says he fired Flynn for misleading Vice President Mike Pence on the nature of his pre-Inauguration Day phone conversations with the Russian ambassador in Washington. Flynn unsettled others by asserting that Islamic extremism posed an existential threat to the West and that the Muslim faith was the source of the problem. McMaster comes into the job without Flynn’s baggage or such controversial views. It’s unclear if he will need Senate confirmation because he is a three-star general taking on a new assignment. “He absolutely does not view Islam as the enemy,” Mansoor said, adding that McMaster believes that in the war against extremism, “we need to have Muslim nations on our side, on the side of moderation. “So I think he will present a degree of pushback against the theories being propounded in the White House that this is a clash of civilizations and needs to be treated as such,” he said. McMaster will immediately encounter Trump’s proposed ban on travelers from seven majority-Muslim nations, which has been stymied in court. Both the Pentagon and the State Department are pushing to have Iraq removed from that list of seven, officials say, noting that Iraq is an ally in the fight against the Islamic State group and that Iraqis have long served in support of U.S. forces there. It’s an example of the more pragmatic foreign policy push led by Mattis and Tillerson. McMaster has a reputation for speaking truth to power. In his 1997 book, “Dereliction of Duty,” McMaster leveled stinging criticisms at the U.S. military establishment for failures during the Vietnam War. His outspokenness almost derailed his career. As a colonel with an exceptional combat record he was passed over for promotion to brigadier general twice before Gen. David Petraeus intervened on his behalf. “He is very forceful in stating what he believes and had managed to ruffle quite a few feathers in the process,” said Stephen Biddle, a George Washington University professor. “Of all incoming presidential administrations, this one does not strike me as one of the most open to opinions that might contradict the president,” Biddle said. “Will a guy who is willing to speak truth to power, and do so in a forceful way, be able to be effective in this setting?” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
New national security adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster a soldier-scholar
President Donald Trump has chosen as his national security adviser a soldier-scholar who fought in both Iraq wars and wrote an influential book that called out the U.S. government for “lies” that led to the Vietnam War. Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster would remain on active military duty while leading the National Security Council, White House officials said Monday. He joined two retired generals — Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly — already in Trump’s inner circle, adding to the impression that the president prefers military men in top roles. Trump called McMaster “a man of tremendous talent and tremendous experience” when he introduced his new national security adviser at his private Florida club. McMaster, who returned to Washington with the president, said he looked forward to “doing everything that I can to advance and protect the interests of the American people.” McMaster replaced retired Gen. Michael Flynn, who was fired last week after Trump determined that Flynn had misled Vice President Mike Pence about the nature of his discussion with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. during the presidential transition. The White House said McMaster was one of four candidates Trump interviewed for the job over the weekend. McMaster has been heavily involved in the Army’s efforts to shape its future force and its way of preparing for war. He is the director of the Army Capabilities Integration Center, a sort of military think tank, at Fort Eustis, Virginia. McMaster commanded troops in both American wars in Iraq — in 1991, when he fought in a storied tank battle known as the Battle of 73 Easting, and again in 2005-2006 in one of the most violent periods of the insurgency that developed after the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. He is credited with using innovative approaches to countering the insurgency in the northern Iraqi city of Tal Afar when he commanded the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. He later served as a special adviser to the top U.S. commander in Iraq. McMaster, born in 1962, earned a doctoral degree in history from the University of North Carolina. Outside the Army, he may be best known for his 1997 book, “Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies that Led to Vietnam,” a searing indictment of the U.S. government’s mishandling of the Vietnam War. The book earned him a reputation for being willing to speak truth to power. How closely McMaster’s and Trump’s views align were not clear. On Russia, McMaster appears to hold a much dimmer view than Trump of Moscow’s military and political objectives in Europe. In remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in May 2016, McMaster said Russia managed to annex Crimea and intervene militarily in eastern Ukraine “at zero cost” from the international community. McMaster said Moscow’s broader goal is to “collapse the post-Cold War security, economic and political order in Europe and replace that order with something that is more sympathetic to Russian interests.” In his current role, McMaster has studied the way Russia developed and executed its campaigns in Crimea and Ukraine, where it used what some call “hybrid warfare” — part political, part disinformation, part military. The National Security Council has not adjusted smoothly to Trump’s leadership. The president has suggested he does not trust holdovers from the Obama administration and complained about leaks to reporters. His decision to put his top political adviser on the council’s senior committee drew sharp criticism. On Friday, the head of the council’s Western Hemisphere division was fired after he criticized Trump’s policies and his inner circle of advisers. Trump said retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, who had been his acting adviser, would serve as the National Security Council chief of staff. He also said he would be asking John Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to work with them in a “somewhat different capacity.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
