Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ Category

Donald Trump’s Pop-Culture Presidency Enters Its Thriller Phase (Opinion) – Variety

Ever since Donald Trump appeared on the horizon of presidential politics, he has mirrored the pop culture of the past. Thats because Trump, in one way or another, has always been an actor a man whose image precedes his reality. For 35 years, he has been a genius at one thing: stroking and manipulating the image machine of modern media. Trump went on the campaign trail as an insult-comedian/talk-radio-host/pompadoured-Elvis/reality-TV-mogul/badass-in-chief, and whenever I read now about how Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush blew it, I always think: None of those mere mortals ever stood a chance. They were fighting a superhero of populist sleaze who didnt need facts and figures he just needed the best lines. Trump remains one of the only people you could name who is not primarily in theentertainment business yet created himself as a character, a figment of larger-than-life fantasy. Thats what autocrats do: They dont sell reality, they sell mythology.

Pop culture is the metaphysical realm in which Trump operates. To most Washington insiders, his signature phrase of Youre fired! on The Apprentice was just a catchy piece of kitsch. What they missed is how Trumps use of that phrase, for all its comic braggadocio, was profoundly nostalgic, because it returned you to an earlier America, one in which you could be fired. (Yes, you can still be fired, but now, for the most part, youre downsized phased out of the workforce, replaced by a robot or a worker in Guangdong Province.) Trump was never an old-fashioned patriarch-executive who had the backs of his employees, but he played one brilliantly on TV.

Now, he plays the president on TV. But, of course, he isnt just playing.

With Trump, the reason the pop metaphors keep coming is that theyre often the only things that explain whats going on. The rise of a monomaniacal entertainer-in-chief like Trump was prophesied by A Face in the Crowd, the still-startling 1957 Hollywood drama in which Andy Griffith played a folksy demagogue with a sixth sense for how to harness the power of television. It was prophesied, as well, by Network, where Peter Finchs Howard Beale becomes a cult of personality riding the waves of his viewers rage (Im mad as hell, and Im not going to take this anymore!), though how telling and Trumpian it is that Beale turned out to be a tool of corporate forces. When Ned Beatty makes his big speech near the end of Network about how the whole world is one giant corporation, he might be the representative of Big Oil or the Russian government, explaining to Trump what will be required if he wants their continued support.

Early on in Trumps presidency, when he was making his bumbling phone calls to Taiwan or the leader of Australia, he became, briefly, a Sacha Baron Cohen character: the tyrant-buffoon of The Dictator. And now, just this week, he has become a figure out of Dr. Strangelove: a version of Gen. Jack. D. Ripper, lashing out at North Korea with the threat of nuclear attack. At the end of last year, I said that Rogue One: A Star Wars Story had become a powerful (if inadvertent) metaphor for the coming Trump presidency, because of its dramatization of the force of the Death Star through the imagery of nuclear detonation. Many readers responded by saying that no, the Rebel Forces were the Trump insurgents those who would now drain the swamp and deconstruct the administrative state. (One wants to ask Steve Bannon: Hows that working out for you?)

Yet for some of us who greeted Trumps presidency, from day one, with fear and loathing, the issue of nuclear weapons has always been at the center of our trepidation. Now, here he is, threatening to rain fire and fury down on North Korea in a way that echoes Harry S. Trumans ominous warning to the Japanese, and then when challenged doubling down on the threat. Anyone who thinks that this is just a way of diverting attention from the Mueller investigation is guilty of diverting their own attention. Earth to people with heads in the sand: This is terrifying! And its real.

To say, however, that the Trump presidency has entered its countdown-to-zero Hollywood thriller phase is not to trivialize whats going on. Its to understand that Trump is suddenly acting like an unhinged president out of a movie because he has unleashed this egregiously reckless threat through the lens of his pop-culture-fed imagination. Hes a leader who has begun tofeel cornered: not just by the provocations of North Korea, but by a presidency that isnt going his way and by a Russia investigation thats heading directly his way. And so hes lashing out, asserting his nuclear manhood. Its policy by toxic tantrum. Hes tweeting his way to Armageddon.

What the Trump presidency could now be turning into, for the first time, is a nightmare-suspense drama in which the people around the president regardless of their political affiliation come to realize that the man in the Oval Office has decided to play a game of nuclear chicken in which he threatens the survival of the planet, and that something has to be done. Kind of like Air Force One, only with the president asthe man who must be stopped.We could all sit around and cast that movie. But the point is that we dont have to, because its already a movie (at least, in parts of Donald Trumps brain). Its key dramatic question may come down to this: Who will be the hero? Who will step in to save the day?

Follow this link:
Donald Trump's Pop-Culture Presidency Enters Its Thriller Phase (Opinion) - Variety

Donald Trump, Swamp King, Is Officially Swimming in Washington Money – Vanity Fair

Dusk outside the Trump International Hotel in Washington, DC, onJuly 14, 2017.

By Evelyn Hockstein/The Washington Post/Getty Images.

In what many believed was an improbable coup for a New York billionaire, Donald Trump managed to win the presidency in part by promising to drain the swamp in Washington. He would excel in this purgation of corruption, he argued, because he had so much experience benefiting from it. The phrase was repeated at rallies, in debates and television interviews, at town halls and in tweets until it became a sort of mantra. Under his administration, gone would be the days of greedy politicians lining their pockets and looking out for their own interests instead of worrying about the American people, he promised.

Nine months after the election, however, it seems the opposite is true. A distinctly Trumpian swamp has displaced the old as a new breed of G.O.P. and foreign lobbyists have ascended alongside the young administration. At the center of this new Washington power structure is Trumps D.C. hotel, which has quickly become the best place to see Trumps swamp creatures at workmixing and mingling over sabered bottles of champagne while pouring money into the presidents pockets. According to The Washington Post, the Trump Organization has turned a close to a $2 million profit in the last four months at its Trump International Hotel. The historic, gilded building, carved into the Old Post Office Building, sits just five blocks down Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House and has drawn the president for dinner several timesbecoming a de facto parlor room for members of his Cabinet, his innermost circle, and his most fervent supporters hoping catch a glimpse of it all.

A $1.97 million profit in a third of a year, especially in a hotels first year, is nothing to sniff at. Its particularly impressive, however, since the Trump Organization had projected that it would actually lose $2.1 million during the first four months of 2017 as it established itself in Washington and tried to gain its footing with guests and the local convention business, according to the Post. The Trump Hotel swung open its doors last fall, in the final stretch of the presidential race. Two days before the election, I stayed a night, and was one of a small handful of people who had booked a room, sat at the bar, and dined at the lobby restaurant.

But the election unexpectedly swung Trumps way, and so did profits. The Post reports that guests paid an average of $652.98 a night to stay there, likely making it the most expensive hotel in the city and surpassing what the company had anticipated by 57 percent (in November, I paid about $200 less for my room). Visitors to the hotel have also hurdled over what the Trump Organization expected in terms of food and drinks, as well, topping $8.2 million.

While President Trump turned over the management of his properties to his two sons before he took office, he still retains an ownership stake in the hotel. This prompted immediate ire from ethics experts and lawmakers, who questioned whether or not he was in violation of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution, which prevents a president from accepting gifts or money from foreign governments. At issue was whether a foreign official staying at his hotel, which hed continue to personally profit from while occupying the Oval Office, constituted a violation of the clause.

A number of people believed it did, and were ready to act on it. On the day of his inauguration, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington sued the president, claiming that Trumps seat in the White House has given his new International Hotel in D.C. unfair benefits and advantages. The suit was followed by a similar one brought by a D.C. restaurant a couple months later. In January, Trump tried to quell concerns by promising to donate any foreign-government profits he receives at his properties to the U.S. Treasury Department. A few months later, however, a spokesperson for the Trump Organization argued that it was proving difficult to calculate the exact amount and said that the company is not totally keeping track of where hotel guests come from.

Even so, the Department of Justice defended the Trump Organizations right to accept payments from foreign governments, in a legal brief filed in the CREW case in June, arguing that because stays and service at a Trump-owned property are fair-value exchanges, they do not violate the Emoluments Clause. The presidents critics arent convinced: that same month, attorneys general for the state of Maryland and Washington, D.C., filed a suit claiming that he has violated the Constitution. The suit alleges that Trump is deeply enmeshed with a legion of foreign and domestic government actors, constituting unprecedented constitutional violations.

These cases face uphill legal battles, but they add to the list of areas in which President Trump is under siege. He faces an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller into his campaigns connections to Russian actors who interfered with the presidential election. On Capitol Hill, Republicans are paying less and less attention to the presidents legislative demands or domestic agenda (that hes spent the last couple days attacking Mitch McConnell likely wont help this matter). The courts, too, have proved generally unsympathetic to the administrations arguments in favor of its travel bans, immigration orders, and environmental deregulations, many of which have become tied up in litigation. Infighting among his own staff has made it nearly impossible to keep any of this under control.

Governing, it turns out, is hard to do, and unbelievably, being president of the United States is not a walk down easy street. Being president and someone who owns a hotel within spitting distance of the White House, however, is much simpler. Certainly, it is more lucrative, and Trump doesnt need McConnell or Muellers help to cash those checks.

Follow this link:
Donald Trump, Swamp King, Is Officially Swimming in Washington Money - Vanity Fair

Donald Trump’s Twitter Account Is Very Much in Violation of Twitter’s Terms of Service – GQ Magazine

Photo Illustration/Getty Images

Threatening to nuke someone is a "violent threat," no?

While Donald Trump was running for President, his Twitter account was an obnoxious clearinghouse of racist MAGA nationalism, unfounded attacks on his opponents, and Pepe avatar replies. Since Donald Trump has become President, his Twitter account... well, honestly, it's still all of those things. But now that he has the power of the office of the presidency behind him, his Twitter has additionally become a place where random and seemingly improvised rants double as actual policy statements. When Trump tweeted about his decision to ban transgender people from the military, it came out that he hadn't even consulted with the heads of various branches of the military. He was just flying by the seat of his golf pants.

This combination of Trump's improvisational style, the immediacy of Twitter, and international politics has proven to be a potent and terrifying one. When news broke that North Korea had successfully miniaturized a nuclear warhead, what we'd hope a president would do is gather with his top foreign policy advisers and go over all the implications of what every possible statement could be. How will any statement affect our relationship with South Korea and Japan, countries that are more directly in North Korea's line of fire? How will it affect our relationships with the United Nations, an organization that just unanimously voted to sanction North Korea (which means the not-so-small feat of getting support from China)? How will North Korea receive it and are we escalating or deescalating the situation? But that's not what happened. Instead Trump "improvised" and said that we'd bring "fire" and "fury" like the world has never seen if North Korea keeps threatening us.

This is terrifying as it is, but this morning things got scarier as Trump took his threats to Twitter. Yes, Donald Trump is going to use Twitter as part of his means of handling a Nuclear crisis. This means that the most delicate of all geopolitical conflicts will likely be navigated at the whims of Trump watching Fox News.

So that right there is Donald Trump threatening North Korea with nuclear war via tweet. That's a thing that happened in the real world. GQ's Jay Willis predicted this might happen! This is the latest and most clear-cut example of why we need Twitter to shut down Donald Trump's account. They certainly have cover to, as Kal Penn pointed out this morning:

The fact is, Donald Trump is terrifying without Twitter. He's the kind of President who is going to make sweeping and off-the-cuff statements threatening nuclear war from his golf course. But at least if we limit him to needing to make actual statements to say things, his (few adult) advisers will occasionally get the chance to explain to him why something is a bad idea. But as long as President Trump has Twitter, he will always be exponentially more dangerous. Who knows, if Sean Hannity is in an extra bad mood one night, and makes the case why nuclear war wouldn't be so bad, we may find our President tweeting us into World War III. So please, Twitter. Do the right thing. Delete the President.

MORE STORIES LIKE THIS ONE

Read the original here:
Donald Trump's Twitter Account Is Very Much in Violation of Twitter's Terms of Service - GQ Magazine

Why Does Trump Still Refuse to Criticize Putin? – The Atlantic

President Trump is most comfortable when hes on the verbal offensive. He loves a good war of words, whether his target is a foreign adversary, a foreign ally, a Republican rival, or Rosie ODonnell. According to a New York Times tally, Trump has attacked 351 separate people, places, and things on Twitter alone since July 2015.

The president has demonstrated that tendency this week, with his escalating, improvised threats against North Korea and his parallel assault on Mitch McConnell, his most important ally in Washington.

Those feuds make Trumps refusal to criticize Russian President Vladimir Putin all the more conspicuous.

How Trump's Transgender Ban Compromises His Military Authority

On July 30, Putin announced that Russia was forcing the U.S. State Department to reduce its staff in Russia by 755 people. (For the most part, those who were laid off were Russians working for the embassy, not American diplomats.) Trump, who often cant let a provocation on cable news go unanswered for more than a few hours, was uncharacteristically quiet.

He finally broke his silence, after a fashion, on August 3, the day he signed a bill increasing sanctions on Russia in retaliation for interfering in the 2016 election. Trump had opposed the legislation, but it passed Congress with veto-proof majorities, leaving him little choice but to sign it. There are many reasons Russo-American relations are strained: Russian anger at expansion of NATO, longstanding global rivalries, the Russian annexation of Crimea and intervention in Ukraine, years of Russian human-rights abuses, and Russian tampering with the election. Trump chose to place blame for the rocky state of the relationship not on any of those issues, and certainly not on Putin, but squarely on Congress. Just for good measure, he tossed in an unrelated jab at the failure of an Obamacare repeal-and-replace plan:

There was still not a word about Putins forced cuts at the U.S. embassy. Finally, on Thursday, Trump weighed in. His comments were surprisingnot only did he not criticize Putin, but he thanked him:

I want to thank him because were trying to cut down our payroll, and as far as Im concerned Im very thankful that he let go a large number of people because now we have a smaller payroll. There's no real reason for them to go back. I greatly appreciate the fact that weve been able to cut our payroll of the United States. Were going to save a lot of money.

Was Trump speaking with tongue in cheek? Its possible, but he didnt smile when he said it. (The president has often tried to pass off apparently serious comments as jokes after the fact, in order to defuse situations.) The remark fits with his attempt to cut costs at the State Department and his disdain for traditional diplomacy.

But even if the whole thing was a joke, its still astonishing that Trumps response to Russian retaliation was to thank the retaliators. This doesnt mean the only option is an eye for an eye; a simple public complaint is standard in cases of diplomatic retaliation like this. (Part of the problem is that Trump seems to have two modes: conciliation and escalation. The idea of criticizing without raising the stakes is foreign to him.)

The strange thing about Trumps comments about Putin is not merely that he wont criticize him, but that he goes out of his way to avoid it. The tweet about Russian relations and his remarks on Thursday were hardly the only times this has happened. And thats even leaving aside Trumps repeated praise for the Russian leader during the campaign, when he praised Putins leadership, suggested hed allow the annexation of Crimea, and publicly called on Russia to hack Hillary Clintons emails.

Lets draw a line between what Trump said on the campaign trail and what hes said since the election. Although he had been briefed before November 8, it was after the election that he began getting full intelligence briefings on Russian interference. Since then, there has also been an increasing focus on interference among members of the public, press, and Congress. In other words, Trump has had many more incentives to distance himself from Russia. Instead, hes continued to hold his fire.

On February 4, Trump told Bill OReilly, I do respect [Putin]. Well, I respect a lot of people, but that doesnt mean Ill get along with them. OReilly pressed Trump on Putins murders of dissidents and journalists. Trump wouldnt criticize Putin for those crimes, and suggested the United States was no better. There are a lot of killers. We have a lot of killers, Trump said. Well, you think our country is so innocent?

He has also repeatedly declined to accept the idea that Russia meddled in the election, even though it is the conclusion of all the major intelligence agencies, and even though many of his top aides have said they blame Russia for hacking attacks. In June, he called the attacks a big Dem HOAX.

In early July, during a trip to Poland, he halfway accepted that Russia might have been behind them, then backed off the statement and worked to muddy the waters.

I think it was Russia, and I think it could have been other people in other countries. It could have been a lot of people. I said it very simply. I think it could very well have been Russia, but I think it could well have been other countries. I wont be specific. I think a lot of people interfere. I think its been happening for a long time, its been happening for many, many years.

Yet he added: Nobody really knows. Nobody really knows for sure.

Later that week, Trump had his first face-to-face meeting with Putin, at the G20 summit in Hamburg, Germany. U.S. and Russian accounts of the meeting initially diverged, with the United States saying Trump had pressed Putin forcefully on the hacking, and Russia saying Trump had accepted Putins denials.

Two days later, Trump cleared things up with a pair of tweets that basically confirmed the Russian account:

Given that Trump had already said he was dubious of Russian interference, that tweet reads as an acknowledgment that he accepted their denial. But even if that wasnt the case, Trumps next one made clear that he had no interest in holding Russia to account:

The question is why Trump has worked so hard to avoid criticizing Putinespecially when theres a clear political downside to appearing cozy with the Russian bear.

There is little obvious foreign-policy advantage. During the campaign and early in his presidency, Trump argued that the United States ought to launch a charm offensive in order to improve relations with Russia. Whether that was right or wrong, and whether Congress or someone else is to blame, that approach is obsolete today. As Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and Russia have all admitted, relations are now at a low ebb.

Even if Trump fully believes that Putin is a spotless, admirable leader falsely accused of various crimes, it would be to his benefit to create some separation, and a matter as simple as expulsion of diplomats offers a good chance for Trump to stand up for his country. Putin, like any foreign leader, understands that sometimes a head of state has to shore himself up domestically and would surely interpret a few hostile words from Trump in that light. (Alternatively, even if one believes Trump is a bought-and-paid-for puppet of the Kremlin, why wouldnt he publicly denounce Putin to buy himself some maneuvering room?)

Given Trumps affection for authoritarian leaders and fixation on projecting strength, the simplest explanation for Trumps refusal to criticize Putin might be that he doesnt want to give the impression that he has been cowed into changing his view. Perhaps hes thinking that if he allows his critics to troll him into offering harsh words, it would show that they are stronger than himand if he acknowledges Russian interference in the election, it undermines the legitimacy of his victory in 2016.

In fact, his actions are making him look weak, but not in the way he thinks. His refusal to criticize Putin even in the case of diplomatic retaliation gives the impression that he is intimidated by the Kremlin and doesnt have it in him to be tough. The president has cut off his nose to spite his face, and is now willing to cut off an ear or a lip if he must.

During his only press conference between the election and inauguration, on January 11, Trump fielded questions about his affection for the Russian leader.

If Putin likes Donald Trump, guess what, folks, thats called an asset, not a liability, he said. Now, I dont know that Im going to get along with Vladimir Putin. I hope I do. But theres a good chance I wont. And if I dont, do you honestly believe that Hillary would be tougher on Putin than me? Does anybody in this room really believe that?

Seven months later, it seems clear that she couldnt have been any less tough.

Visit link:
Why Does Trump Still Refuse to Criticize Putin? - The Atlantic

The Russia Investigation Is Getting Dangerously Close to Trump – Vanity Fair

Trump's longtime personal assistant Rhona Graff makes a rare appearance at Olympus Fashion Week in 2005.

By Astrid Stawiarz/Getty Images.

The list of Trump associates to come under Robert Muellers magnifying glass may soon include the presidents longtime assistant, Rhona Graff. Amid the escalating Justice Department probe into Kremlin interference in the 2016 election and multiple congressional investigations, lawmakers reportedly want to speak with Graff, who has served as Donald Trumps gatekeeper for decades.

Graff, a senior vice president at the Trump Organization, first entered the roving spotlight in the Russia saga when Donald Trump Jr. shared a string of e-mails related to his now-infamous meeting with a Kremlin-connected lawyer at Trump Tower last summer, which has emerged as a key focus in the various Trump-Russia investigations. I can also send this info to your father via Rhona but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first, Rob Goldstone, the British publicist and Trump family business partner who helped arrange the controversial meeting, wrote in an e-mail to the eldest Trump son. The exchange raised the possibility that the president himself might have been informed of the alleged Russian government effort to assist his campaign.

It is not apparent from those e-mails whether Goldstone ever connected with Graff about the Trump Tower meetingone question congressional investigators reportedly hope to answer. Since her name is in the e-mail, people will want her to answer questions, Peter King, a Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee, told ABC News. If you go into Trump Tower, youre going to mention her name. Eric Swalwell, who also serves on the House Intelligence Committee, echoed the sentiment. I think we should hear from every individual who is mentioned in the Don Jr. e-mail chain to understand what was happening, the California lawmaker said. Graff is not accused of any wrongdoing.

Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr demurred when asked whether his own committee would be seeking information from Graff. But it is unsurprising that Congress would want to talk to Trumps right hand, who has played a pivotal role in his businesses for years. Graff has reportedly maintained her position in Trumps orbit even since he became president, suggesting that she could be a wealth of knowledge for investigators.

Lawmakers interest in Graff is likely to infuriate Trump. Last month, the presidentwho has continually dismissed the Russia investigation as a witch hunt orchestrated by allies of Hillary Clinton as an excuse for losing the electionsaid that special counsel Robert Mueller would be crossing a line if he began to investigate the Trump family, their finances, and the Trump Organization in a way that exceeded the initial scope of the Russia probe. Calling Graff to testify before Congress, or otherwise requesting information from her, might fall into that category.

News of Graffs involvement comes as Muellers investigation rapidly escalates. At the end of last month, the F.B.I. raided the home of Paul Manafort, Trumps former campaign chairman, for documents related to the Trump-Russia probe. Trumps lawyer John Dowd blasted the aggressive tactic on Thursday, characterizing it as an extraordinary invasive tool that he argued was employed for its shock value to try to intimidate Mr. Manafort and bring him to his [knees]. Investigators are also reportedly seeking information from a handful of Manaforts associates, including his estranged son-in-law Jeffrey Yohai, fueling speculation that the F.B.I. might be trying to pressure Trump allies to turn cooperating witnesses. On Thursday, Manafort switched up his legal team, opting for a Washington firm that reportedly specializes in financial investigations. Mr. Manafort is in the process of retaining his former counsel, Miller & Chevalier, to represent him in the office of special counsel investigation. As of today, WilmerHale no longer represents Mr. Manafort, Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni said in a statement.

More:
The Russia Investigation Is Getting Dangerously Close to Trump - Vanity Fair