It is surreal. Who would think that the president of U.S. would be the least trusted individual? On another hand why it suddenly became clear to people that they might be careful with Donald Trump? Why miles and miles of film whereby Trump either contradicts himself without blinking or gives an interview which makes all his team members look like liars? Wasn’t it clear months ago that Donald Trump tops the list of those who should never be trusted?
Nikki Halley, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations during her interview with ABC News said that Trump is president of action. I wonder what action exactly did she mean? She also said that Russians are always full of themselves. I would think that unlike Russians, Nikki Haley is full of something else, something way less pleasant.
I realized that she is because Nikki Halley said that Donald Trump is CEO of the country. She has to learn that position of the president of the United States or any other country is very different from the position of CEO. It is less than smart to compare these two positions. She also has to understand that hiring and firing may be within his scope of work, but it does not automatically mean that he can fire anyone just because his middle finger
She also has to understand that hiring and firing may be within president’s scope of work, but it does not automatically mean that he can fire anyone just because his middle finger whispered it to his ear. Unless we are talking about the authoritarian state.
She also said that everybody works at the pleasure of the president. Why is she brainless?
What happened to the U.S.? I really do not know the answer but what I know is that today the American Dream looks more like American Nightmare.
The President No One Wants to Talk ToBy Jonathan Bernstein
Plenty of people were all abuzz over Donald Trump’s suggestion that he might be taping some White House conversations. Of course. After all, it not only contained obvious echoes of Watergate but as a practical matter, it also raised the possibility that if anything illegal or improper has been going on, evidence might be available. Others made the sensible observation that even if nothing comes of this, the increased suspicion of taping will decrease the ability of Trump to receive candid advice from anyone. That’s true, I suppose, although we have no evidence to date that Trump is willing to listen to anything that might be embarrassing if it got out.
In fact — assuming no tapes really exist — there’s a much greater problem for Trump in his public who-said-what fight with James Comey. Yes, it’s bad if the president secretly tapes his own conversations. But it’s even worse, I suspect if the president demonstrates that he’s willing to outright lie about what people said to him in private.
Of course, it’s possible that Trump is telling the truth and Comey’s accounts of their conversations (which we only have secondhand so far, since Comey isn’t talking yet) are false. I’ll say, however, that I doubt very many people who need to speak with the president as part of their job trust Trump in this case over Comey. Comey has a reputation for truth-telling, perhaps to a fault (he couldn’t shut up about what he actually thought about Hillary Clinton’s actions). Trump … doesn’t. So Trump’s problem might not be that people refuse to be candid because he might be taping them to use it against them; his problem might be that no one wants to talk to him without (friendly) witnesses.
1. Molly Reynolds at Lawfare on the obstruction options available to Senate Democrats if they want to retaliate against Trump (or put pressure on Senate Republicans to take action). I’m fairly skeptical that they can be effective. Trump doesn’t seem to care very much about subcabinet nominations going through rapidly, and the legislative agenda just isn’t very heavy, meaning that demands on Senate floor time are less than usual. Meanwhile, if Democrats attempt a bigger shutdown of the Senate, it’s certainly possible for Republicans to retaliate by changing the rules (or, more precisely, the precedents and interpretations of those rules). That’s not to say Democrats shouldn’t attempt to use Senate rules. Just that it’s not entirely clear what their best strategy might be, and one should assume that adoption of a strategy other than total obstruction means they are “spineless” (as some have accused them of being).
2. Lilly Goren at Brookings on women in the Trump administration.
3. Julia Azari and Seth Masket at FiveThirtyEight on whether Comey makes for a constitutional crisis. As I’ve said, I’m not sure what purchase we get on the question by invoking that phrase — but worth reading anyway.
4. Doug Chapin asks some good questions about Trump’s voter fraud commission.
5. Julian Sanchez at Just Security argues that finding evidence of secret collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia is the wrong question to focus on.
6. David Frum details all the weaknesses of a special prosecutor in the Trump/Russia scandal. He’s right about that — but it’s why what’s needed is an independent counsel and a Senate select committee. Both.
7. Nice reporting from David Weigel at the Washington Post on how Republicans are selling their health-care reform bill to their constituents.
8. A good Charles Sykes item on Republicans who don’t much like Trump except for how unhappy he makes liberals. The saddest part about this? While I’m sure some of this is just cynical exploitation, I suspect a part of it is Republicans who really can’t imagine the possibility of someone whom liberals dislike being, well, not good for the nation.
9. And my Bloomberg View colleague Francis Wilkinson on the Trump problem that can’t be fixed. Alas, this was all perfectly obvious a year ago, and yet Republican party actors let it happen when they had a realistic chance to do something about it.
Nikki Haley: Trump is ‘CEO of the country,’ can ‘fire anyone he wants’
By MICHAEL EDISON HAYDEN
“The president is the CEO of the country,” Haley told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” Sunday. “He can hire and fire anyone he wants.”
Stephanopoulos asked Haley if she found herself having to explain to foreign diplomats Trump’s domestic policy decisions, including his surprise choice to fire the FBI director, noting that a fellow U.S. ambassador, Dana Shell Smith in Qatar, tweeted last week that her job was becoming “increasingly difficult.”
Haley demurred at that suggestion, saying that no one in her job at the U.N. had asked her about Trump’s move.
She added that she believes the criticism of Trump stems from discomfort with his propensity to act on his decisions.
“I think what you can see is that this is a president of action,” she said of Trump. “The reason people are uncomfortable is because he acts.”
Stephanopoulos asked the ambassador if the president sought a pledge of loyalty from her, referring to reports this week that the president had asked this of Comey at a January dinner.
Haley said no, but added that in her former position as governor of South Carolina demonstrations of “loyalty and trust” were important to her.
Regarding the president’s tweet this week warning the fired FBI director that he better hope there are no “tapes” of their private conversations, Haley seemed unconcerned by the possibility that the president is taping conversations.
“I assume I’m being taped everywhere,” she said.
Haley also addressed a range of other topics, including North Korea’s latest missile launch Saturday night.
She said there is a growing international consensus to impose further sanctions on North Korea over its nuclear program and that the U.S. will “tighten the screws” on North Korean President Kim Jong Un’s government.
Trump has said in the past that he would be willing to sit down with Kim Jong Un, but Haley said such a meeting would only happen if North Korea meets certain conditions.
“A missile test is not the way to sit down with the president,” Haley said.