He uses pandemic to cover firing of experts and hiring of more incompetent loyalists
By
Terry H. Schwadron, DCReport Opinion Editor
As we know, even in
the midst of a national emergency, Donald Trump could find time and bandwidth
to continue his retribution campaign.
He dismissed Michael
Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence agencies, for doing “a
terrible job,” satisfying his own thirst for vengeance for anyone who actually
adhered to law and practice over blind loyalty to Trump himself.
Indeed, asked about it the next day, Trump underscored his action by saying, Atkinson “was no Trump supporter, that I can tell you.”
Indeed, asked about it the next day, Trump underscored his action by saying, Atkinson “was no Trump supporter, that I can tell you.”
It was an act that we
once would have labeled corruption, by Democrats and Republicans – that is
using the office for personal purposes – if Congress and too many Americans had
not since become inured by so many like instances.
The firing of the
inspector general for the intelligence agencies reflects the continuing Trump
insistence for personal loyalty over experience of almost any kind.
The reason this
particular act still sticks in the craw is not only because of the timing, but
because it reflects the continuing Trump insistence for personal loyalty over
experience of almost any kind. It is exactly that kind of attitude that has led
to such confusion in messaging and such bureaucratic delays in addressing both
coronavirus effects and the economic mess it has created.
Governors and medical personnel are complaining loudly about a reality at total odds with Trump’s description of the current state of crisis response. We see a White House rewrite of recent history to glorify the Trump administration while the emerging record shows a documented case of delay and confusion.
At heart: a disdain
for science and expertise.
Once Congress
reconvenes later this month, we have other such cases lining up in bad judicial
appointments and national security appointments who bring no experience.
Trump has nominated
Judge Justin Walker, a counselor to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell
(R-Ky.), to U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, despite less
than six months as a district court judge and an “unqualified” rating from the
American Bar.
Trump also announced that Stephen Feinberg, a New York billionaire who owns military contractor DynCorp International, will lead a White House executive board that reviews the effectiveness and legality of foreign intelligence. He has no particular experience but a lot of loyalty.
Trump also announced that Stephen Feinberg, a New York billionaire who owns military contractor DynCorp International, will lead a White House executive board that reviews the effectiveness and legality of foreign intelligence. He has no particular experience but a lot of loyalty.
Ratcliffe Redux
All this reflects the
preliminaries before we take our ringside seats to look in as Trump nominee
Rep. John Ratcliffe, a Texas Republican with absolutely no credentials, comes
before the Republican-majority Senate for confirmation as director of national
intelligence.
By contrast, Trump’s
appointment of Rep. Mark Meadows, his most ardent congressional defender from
North Carolina, as White House chief of staff, required no such Senate
approval.
It is especially
interesting to see these changes come about now, just after having finished
reading “A Very Stable Genius” by Washington Post reporters Phil
Rucker and Carol Leonnig, a book that underscores the Wild West spontaneity of
an uncontrolled West Wing. And, the change comes as this White House has
reflected an unparalleled inability to manage national effects of a global
coronavirus panic.
Apart from the
skill-sets of the new appointees, it is notable just how many senior officials
and cabinet officers this White House has churned through, and Trump’s
preference to use acting titles for more and more appointees just to avoid
Senate review.
That review should
prove particularly important this time since Ratcliffe’s name was withdrawn
previously for lying about his record as a prosecutor in Texas, and now has
been put forward only because the temporary holder of the job, Richard Grenell,
the controversial ambassador to Germany, is even less qualified.
Bad or Worse
The Washington Post editorialized against
approval of Ratcliffe, a rabid defender of Trump during the House impeachment
proceedings, as being an aggressive attacker of the findings of U.S.
intelligence services – as is the wont of Trump.
Actually, the
editorial went further, rejecting the false and bad choice being offered
through Ratcliffe’s nomination.
The editorial noted
Trump believes he can force the Senate to swallow his choice because the
alternative is to retain the even more objectionable Grenell — despite having absolutely
no experience in the intelligence world and a record of insulting Europeans.
As the appropriate
federal rules prescribe, if Ratcliff is not confirmed Grenell can remain in the
post for seven more months. Trump would force the Senate to choose between the
two.
In replacing Joseph
Maguire, a former SEAL, both Grenell and Ratcliffe are Trump loyalists first,
and ill-equipped to oversee 17 government intelligence agencies.
Last summer, the previous Ratcliffe nomination lasted five days before withdrawing, an act drawing approval from senators from both parties. They said he lacked any qualifications for the job – and had lied about his successful prosecution of terrorists cases in which he was never involved.
Last summer, the previous Ratcliffe nomination lasted five days before withdrawing, an act drawing approval from senators from both parties. They said he lacked any qualifications for the job – and had lied about his successful prosecution of terrorists cases in which he was never involved.
When he scrapped the
appointment, Trump conceded that the White House had never vetted Ratcliffe
before nominating him.
Maybe Mark Meadows can
take care of that part this time.
Conspiracy Nuts
Both Ratcliff and
Grenell have disputed intelligence agency findings that Russia intervened in
the 2016 election — or since — to aid Trump.
Ratcliffe has promoted the conspiracy theory that the investigation into the meddling was the result of “a secret society of folks within the Department of Justice and the FBI” trying to prevent Trump’s election.
During the House impeachment hearings, Ratcliffe demanded an investigation of the whistleblower in the Ukraine matters. As director of national intelligence, Ratcliffe presumably could just order such an investigation himself.
Ratcliffe has promoted the conspiracy theory that the investigation into the meddling was the result of “a secret society of folks within the Department of Justice and the FBI” trying to prevent Trump’s election.
During the House impeachment hearings, Ratcliffe demanded an investigation of the whistleblower in the Ukraine matters. As director of national intelligence, Ratcliffe presumably could just order such an investigation himself.
Trump fired the
previous acting director, Joseph Maguire, after a member of his staff briefed
the House Intelligence Committee that Russia had “developed a preference” for
Trump in 2020. The absence of such reporting in the coming months would, no
doubt, make interference easier.
Clearly, the question
for Republican senators is whether to politicize the workings of intelligence
for a president who does not even want to sit through briefings.
They could easily just
insist on a more qualified candidate.
If coronavirus has no
other effect, perhaps it can underscore the country’s need for competence over
Trump personal loyalty.
