Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[omerome]

Oh be quiet, Collins.

And that other Collins, too!

[Paranoid Android]

Always a quote from Trump.

Here's video of Trump in 2014 saying what being impeached would do to Obama: "He would be a mess. He would be thinking about nothing but. It would be a horror show for him. It would be an absolute embarrassment. It would go down on his record permanently." https://t.co/WctYjnjsP1

https://twitter.com/KFILE/status/120...952802816?s=19

[Skroe]

Always a quote from Trump.



https://twitter.com/KFILE/status/120...952802816?s=19

There is ALWAYS a Tweet.

ALWAYS.

He's like a soothsayer for his own ruination.

[TigTone]

There is ALWAYS a Tweet.

ALWAYS.

He's like a soothsayer for his own ruination.

Should his picture be placed by the definition of Self fulfilling prophecy as a real life example?

[cubby]

Collins is running, apparently.

I really hope the Maine DNC is ready to go - while she's betrayed her gender and country, she still has a great reelection machine in place. It will be a tough campaign.

[Moonstream]

Nothing is going to stop the White House from making sure senators get their holiday card this year, not even the impeachment.

Nothing is going to stop the White House from making sure senators get their holiday card this year, not even the impeachment.

A White House staffer was seen delivering packages to Senate offices that included a Christmas card and a letter President Trump penned to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday, Sen. Chris Murphy, of Connecticut, tweeted this afternoon.

"True story: there is a White House staffer going around the Senate delivering to each office, as a package, the incoherent, scathing Pelosi letter AND...wait for it...a giant 16x12 White House Christmas card (along with, implausibly, a second smaller Christmas card). What a day," Murphy tweeted.

The letter Murphy is referring to berated House Democrats and railed against his impeachment.

Trump wrote in his indignant six-page missive that Democrats would come to regret their efforts when voters cast ballots next fall.

Employing falsehoods and exaggerations, Trump bemoaned the process as woefully broken, wildly claiming that "(m)ore due process was afforded to those accused in the Salem Witch Trials."

He accused Pelosi of portraying a "false display of solemnity" during the impeachment process.

Stay classy Donald.

[Skroe]

Only the Best People, entry #4186
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/18...ficials-leave/

Pentagon’s Policy Chief Under Fire as Senior Officials Head for the Exits
Current and former officials point to John Rood as a major source of frustration in the U.S. Defense Department policy shop.

Three years into U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration, the Pentagon is bleeding senior policymakers faster than it can replace them, an exodus that many current and former defense officials largely blame on a toxic work environment created by John Rood, the Defense Department’s top policy official.

Soon after the Senate confirmed Mark Esper as Pentagon chief this summer, the new defense secretary pledged to rebuild the senior ranks of the department. But friction within the Pentagon’s policy shop, particularly frustration with Rood’s leadership style, has stymied progress. Nearly a dozen current and former officials who spoke to Foreign Policy on condition of anonymity pointed to Rood as a major contributor to the departures and the Pentagon’s struggle to fill the empty posts.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said the department has the “utmost confidence” in Rood’s “expertise and professionalism.”

“He has demonstrated effective and constant leadership over the past two years as Under Secretary for Policy in a difficult, demanding and vital role in the Department with responsibility for aligning civilian and military policy across the globe in accordance with the Secretary’s focus on the National Defense Strategy,” Hoffman told Foreign Policy.

Insiders noted that the department’s staffing problem runs deeper than Rood. The Pentagon’s civilian leadership has struggled to recruit top talent since the beginning of the Trump administration. Many national security experts signed “Never Trump” letters that disqualified them for roles in the administration; still others refused to work for Trump. The shallow bench got even thinner after Defense Secretary James Mattis resigned a year ago and the department’s senior leadership fell into chaos. During the nearly seven months following Mattis’s departure that the Pentagon went without a permanent leader, the number of empty or only temporarily filled Senate-confirmed posts rose to a high of 19 in July.

“I don’t know that policy has ever had a chance to get its legs under it in this administration so far,” said one former defense official.

But though Esper has tried to fill that gap, moving forward with key nominations and empowering the civilian leadership, the effort has been fraught. While the Senate confirmed Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett and Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy this fall, other nominations have languished, including comptroller and chief management officer. Now, less than one year before the presidential election, it may be too late in the administration to attract new talent. And if the Senate doesn’t act before the end of the year on six pending nominations for top Pentagon jobs, those would-be appointees will have to be renominated.

“There’s a very tricky election coming up so this is a natural time for people to leave,” said Jim Townsend, a former Pentagon official who is now a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “It makes it triply hard. It’s Trump, it’s late in an administration, and so it is really hard to find people to fill these jobs.”

Despite Esper’s efforts, the departures keep piling up. Six senior officials have tendered their resignations in the past month, including four who require Senate confirmation to replace: Navy Secretary Richard Spencer, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Affairs Randy Schriver, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs James Stewart, and Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Kari Bingen. Steven Walker, the director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and Tina Kaidanow, the senior advisor for international cooperation in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, are also stepping down.

Of 59 Senate-confirmed positions, 15 are currently vacant, according to a department spokesperson–and that number will rise to 18 when Schriver, Stewart and Bingen depart. Adding to the strain on the senior leadership, multiple officials, including Stewart, are serving in two senior roles at once.

In a recent gaggle with reporters, Esper played down the recent spate of resignations, attributing the departures to the “rhythm” of Washington.

“That’s a normal rotation, folks have been at it hard for two years now, two-plus years,” Esper told traveling press on the way back from Europe. “[We want to] get people in place as quickly as possible, if not confirmed, at least acting, and keep moving the Pentagon forward.”

A Pentagon spokesperson noted that the department has made several new hires since the summer. In policy, seven formerly vacant deputy assistant secretary of defense positions, which do not require Senate confirmation, have been filled: Heino Klinck, for East Asia; David Lasseter, for countering weapons of mass destruction; Pete Marocco, for Africa; Mike Ryan, for Europe and NATO; Chad Sbragia, for China; Reed Werner, for South and Southeast Asia; and Tom Wingfield, for cybersecurity policy. However, many vacancies remain, including the top Middle East and Afghanistan policy positions.

But current and former officials blame Rood, the undersecretary of defense for policy and a former industry executive who assumed the job in January 2018, for a steady drumbeat of departures over the past year. These sources pointed to a hostile work environment, saying that Rood is frequently “abrasive” toward his staff.

One defense official recounted an episode in which Rood was verbally abusive, yelling, cursing, and slamming his hand on the table. Though the issue was minor, Rood would not let it go, dragging the dispute out for several days.

The defense official also blamed Esper’s front office, largely made up of holdovers from former acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan’s team, for the stagnation. The front office has been unable to make key personnel decisions, the official said.

Another frustration among Pentagon civilians is the perception that Rood does not stand up to his military counterparts in the Joint Chiefs of Staff, which has grown more powerful over the past three years as the policy shop struggled to fill key positions. Current and former officials say staffers at the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, sometimes referred to as OSD(P), feel Rood does not have their backs.

“He never did much to advance the civil service and he doesn’t rely on the advice of OSD(P),” said a second former defense official. “You get the impression that he doesn’t trust his own staff.”

For example, when the administration was negotiating options for a Fort Trump in Poland, the office recommended a limited, rotational presence instead of a permanent footprint, recounted the second former defense official. Rood would not sign off until the Joint Staff approached him separately to back the plan, the former official said.

When it came to Syria policy, Rood relied on the advice of Gen. Kenneth McKenzie—who served as director of the Joint Staff from July 2017 until March, when he assumed command of U.S. Central Command—at times over the objections of his civilian staffers. Rood and the senior military leadership “really didn’t want to do anything to balance” the U.S. support for the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces with the need to manage the broader relationship with Turkey, a NATO ally that views the YPG as a terrorist threat on its border, according to the former defense official. Mattis was frequently forced to step in to ease the tension and restore balance, the former official said.

“There was this tension between short-term operational objectives, which require us to work with the SDF, and long-term strategic goals like competition with Russia,” said the second former defense official. “You undermine Turkey, you undermine your ability to counter Iran and Russia because they step in to fill the gap.”

Rood “never seemed to fully appreciate that argument,” the former official added.

Other former defense officials defended Rood.

“I have known and worked with John in various capacities for decades. My working relationship with him at OSD was always excellent,” said David Trachtenberg, former deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, in a statement provided to Foreign Policy by a department spokesperson. “I think the fact that John and I both previously served in OSD Policy contributed to our understanding of the importance of civilian oversight of the military and our appreciation of the talent and professionalism of the Policy workforce.”

A third former defense official said Rood was frustrated by the shallow bench and lack of expertise at the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and often turned to the Joint Staff for help on tough issues.

“Many were a mile wide and an inch deep,” the third former defense official said. “There was a lot of pressure, and frustration with the depth of knowledge in policy that Rood felt very responsible for alleviating.”

Loren DeJonge Schulman, who formerly served on the National Security Council staff and in the Pentagon, called on Esper to empower the civilian leadership of the department, noting the increased tensions between civilian and military leaders in the Pentagon in recent years.

“With all these gaps, it’s critical that Esper ensure that all of his acting officials are empowered to represent the department in their policy areas, whether at the White House, in Congress, or inside DOD’s,” said DeJonge Schulman, who is now the deputy director of studies at the Center for a New American Security.

Whatever the cause, time is running out for Trump’s Pentagon to staff up. Despite the vacancies, Esper must continue to make policy decisions and grapple with global crises.

“The odds of him getting a full slate by the end of this term are small. But the Department still has to function effectively, and he owes it to those in uniform to ensure that civilian oversight and policymaking are as effective as they should be, regardless of what officials are on [Esper’s] org chart,” DeJonge Schulman said.


Here is the full list of current 15 presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed vacancies on the Department of Defense’s staff:

• Chief management officer
• Undersecretary of defense (Comptroller)
• Undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness
• Deputy undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness
• Assistant secretary of defense for nuclear, chemical, and biological defense
• Assistant secretary of defense for sustainment
• Assistant secretary of defense for special operations/low-intensity conflict
• Assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs
• DoD inspector general
• Director of cost assessment and program evaluation
• Undersecretary of the army
• Secretary of the navy
• Assistant secretary of the navy for energy, installations, and environment
• Navy general counsel

Friendly reminder Donald Trump cannot attract talent to work for his skeleton-crew shambolic Administration, even in the Pentagon. And when he does attract talent, it can't keep it.

[Edge-]

Only the Best People, entry #4186
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/18...ficials-leave/



Friendly reminder Donald Trump cannot attract talent to work for his skeleton-crew shambolic Administration, even in the Pentagon. And when he does attract talent, it can't keep it.

Policy makers are the swamp. Real, manly men govern by their gut and instinct, and have no need for such liberal fluff like "policy".

[mvaliz]

There's always a chance. It's just HIGHLY unlikely unless all of the Senate GOP start suddenly fearing for their jobs/power, which I don't see happening anytime soon.

I think people should remind them that if they don't impeach Dumbfuck McChump, that they're essentially handing his ego an "I can now do whatever I want, and I won't even need Republican support because you'll always bend knee to me!" card.

If they're worried about their base right now... imagine what will happen when Dumbass Dump declares himself President(king) of America for life and starts declaring war on Mexico.

[Shalcker]

Only the Best People, entry #4186
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/18...ficials-leave/

Friendly reminder Donald Trump cannot attract talent to work for his skeleton-crew shambolic Administration, even in the Pentagon. And when he does attract talent, it can't keep it.

Or perhaps there is actual lack of talent, and insufficient incentives to attracts it, Trump or not, with little changing once he is out.

Though 15 vacant out of 59 doesn't look that critical.

[Edge-]

Or perhaps there is actual lack of talent

Considering this problem is unique to Trump, it's not.

and insufficient incentives to attracts it, Trump or not, with little changing once he is out.

The incentives have never been a barrier to getting qualified people in there, and a long list of them. Again, this is unique to Trump and his inability to find anyone worth a damn that actually wants to work in his administration.

[Skroe]

Or perhaps there is actual lack of talent, and insufficient incentives to attracts it, Trump or not, with little changing once he is out.

Though 15 vacant out of 59 doesn't look that critical.

It was stocked full of talent, and top tier at that, just 3 years ago.

There's vast amounts of highly capable people ready to serve their country. Just not under Trump. Trump is a bridge too far.

My own company doesn't work with the US Government anymore because of Trump's immigration policies, for what that's worth.

My brother is a prosecutor (now working on terrorism, gangs and the cartels) and he will not go Federal because he will not work for William Barr specifically. And there is a Federal prosecutor shortage.

There are many, many examples. It is about Trump and his White House. Everyone knows how this ends. Nobody climbs back aboard the Titanic.

The next Democratic President will have more talent interested in serving and righting the ship than they know what to do with.

[Shalcker]

Considering this problem is unique to Trump, it's not.

Is it actually? Quick check seems to suggest it's not:

From 2013: Politics and Vetting Leave Key U.S. Posts Long Unfilled
John Kerry is practically home alone at the State Department, toiling without permanent assistant secretaries of state for the Middle East, Asia, Europe and Africa. At the Pentagon, a temporary personnel chief is managing furloughs for 800,000 civilian employees. There has not been a director of the Internal Revenue Service since last November, and it was only on Thursday that President Obama announced a nomination for commerce secretary after the job was open for nearly a year.
...
One of the worst backlogs is at the State Department, where nearly a quarter of the most senior posts are not filled, including those in charge of embassy security and counterterrorism. The Treasury Department is searching for a new No. 2, the Department of Homeland Security is missing its top two cybersecurity officials and about 30 percent of the top jobs at the Commerce Department are still vacant, including that of chief economist.
...
The White House faults an increasingly partisan confirmation process in the Senate and what officials say are over-the-top demands for information about every corner of a nominee’s life. Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew received 444 questions from senators before his confirmation, more than the seven previous Treasury nominees combined, according to data compiled by the White House. Gina McCarthy, Mr. Obama’s nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, got 1,000 questions from the Senate, White House officials said.

(and another article from 2016)

The incentives have never been a barrier to getting qualified people in there, and a long list of them. Again, this is unique to Trump and his inability to find anyone worth a damn that actually wants to work in his administration.

Or perhaps increased scrutiny is scaring away people that would pass in older days.


- - - Updated - - -

It was stocked full of talent, and top tier at that, just 3 years ago.

Even if true, that was Obama's politically appointed team, focused on his goals, not Trump's.

There's vast amounts of highly capable people ready to serve their country. Just not under Trump. Trump is a bridge too far.

As far as i see plenty of people might say "Bernie is bridge too far" as well if it'll happen.

My own company doesn't work with the US Government anymore because of Trump's immigration policies, for what that's worth.

My brother is a prosecutor (now working on terrorism, gangs and the cartels) and he will not go Federal because he will not work for William Barr specifically. And there is a Federal prosecutor shortage.

There are many, many examples. It is about Trump and his White House. Everyone knows how this ends. Nobody climbs back aboard the Titanic.

You'll likely see same unwillingness to commit with anyone else.

Because current politics are toxic.

The next Democratic President will have more talent interested in serving and righting the ship than they know what to do with.

That's still quite far away though.

[jeezusisacasual]

Whelp good news about that trade deal right? You know the one with China and Trump being the biggest bestest business man right?


https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-e...es-under-phase

[cubby]

It was stocked full of talent, and top tier at that, just 3 years ago.

There's vast amounts of highly capable people ready to serve their country. Just not under Trump. Trump is a bridge too far.

My own company doesn't work with the US Government anymore because of Trump's immigration policies, for what that's worth.

My brother is a prosecutor (now working on terrorism, gangs and the cartels) and he will not go Federal because he will not work for William Barr specifically. And there is a Federal prosecutor shortage.

There are many, many examples. It is about Trump and his White House. Everyone knows how this ends. Nobody climbs back aboard the Titanic.

The next Democratic President will have more talent interested in serving and righting the ship than they know what to do with.

People severely misunderstand how telling it is that top (or really, any) federal positions remain open. They are the epitome of PLUM employment. Not only do they come, by themselves, with a good salary, insane benefits, and a pension; but they are typically stepping stones to lucrative private jobs - easily six figures. Federal prosecutor positions remaining open is nearly unheard of - those jobs lead almost immediately to private defense firm partner track (or immediate) employment opportunities, which are the sin que non of attorney cap stones and SEVEN figure incomes.

The Trumpsters try and blow off the fact that these positions remaining unfilled (the top DoD spots) is just a normal practice, but it's almost horrifying in both the number and longevity of unfulfilled. But then again, Trumpsters aren't really known for their grasp of reality nor their association with facts and logic.

[Poopymonster]

Can I say a prayer "in a negative way"?

Semi. Psalm 109 was a big one that the Republican congresspeople and officials used for Obama, from email to speaking events. There were bumper stickers in 2017 with the same prayer in regards to Trump, but weren't pushed by Democrat officials or congresspeople.

I'm answering a question, not pushing religion. Yes, the Psalm was used, publicly and on multiple occasions, as a "negative prayer" without discussing the content of it. So please massa Thwart, don infrac me, please dun do it.

[Masark]

Can I say a prayer "in a negative way"?

Possibly.

[Breccia]

In the effort to have impeachment being the worst thing to happen to him all day, Trump announced a bigly yuge tr--

"Nope," replied China, "We'll pay fair market value, thanks."

Yes, the Phase One trade deal's details are still unknown, but Team Trump keeps saying "fifty billion!" while China keeps saying "We'll buy what we bought before and pay a fair price."

"How do you know?"

Well besides China not being criminally stupid, prices only rose five percent. If "fifty billion!" was true, considering how much China bought before, prices would have escalated far further than that. Simply put, besides the usual onus of "Trump saying something doesn't make it true and frequently does the opposite", the numbers simply don't back up China doubling their US Ag purchases in exchange for some tariffs being reduced.

[jeezusisacasual]

The trade war is going so well for him that we have more good news regarding China and South America like this little tidbit

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-us...-idUKKBN1WX1AE

This is the interesting thing as it allows them even more of a way to globalize and spread out their international shipping needs.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKCN1V60AW

The real important aspect is how little the US is being left out of one of the fastest growing economies and how it will effect our population going forward.





China has left the US for cheaper and less powerful suppliers for the products they need. I hope that those farmers whom this will hurt will understand to change what they grow or we will see another year of hurt families.

[Dontrike]

Or perhaps there is actual lack of talent, and insufficient incentives to attracts it, Trump or not, with little changing once he is out.

Though 15 vacant out of 59 doesn't look that critical.

A quarter being empty isn't huge? Anyone should want those jobs, but Trump is poison. Also your attempt at saying there's no more talent is adorable.