#steven k. bannon

[garythingsworld]

Steve Bannon Fires a Warning Shot at Deep State Gangsters and Thugs: "One thing I have to Say to Merrick Garland, Lisa Monaco, Jack Smith, Tish James, Alvin Bragg, - You Wait. The Hunted are About to Become the Hunters" (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

[rainblog]

The Breitbarting of America

During (and after) the 2016 US election, the term 'gaslighting' was thrown around a lot. Taking its name from the movie 'Gaslight', 'gaslighting' is the use of psychology to manipulate someone so that they question their own sanity. Lately, it seems to have acquired a broader meaning: to try to make people doubt what they know by creating an atmosphere of uncertainty in which every fact seems open to question. There's been a lot of this kind of gaslighting recently, but what's happening right now is something different. Let's call it Breitbarting.

Breitbart News is a far-right news and opinion service. It has always aspired to be controversial, deploying a well-tested suite of tactics to arouse reactions. The perfect Breitbart headline is something like "Birth control makes women unattractive and crazy" or "There's no hiring bias against women in tech, they just suck at interviews" (these are both genuine headlines from Breitbart). Headlines like this, which make the accompanying story almost superfluous, always have a double purpose. On the one hand, they pander to the beliefs of the base that Breitbart courts, 'confirming' what their supporters already think is true. On the other -- and just as importantly -- they are written to provoke a reaction from progressives. By goring the sacred cows of liberalism, the headlines generate an outraged, often disproportionate reaction. That reaction draws more attention to the story (not too incidentally increasing readership and bringing more ad dollars into Breitbart's coffers) and further stirs up Breitbart's right-wing readership, creating a self-sustaining reaction that whips both sides into a frenzy.

The former chairman of Breitbart, Steven K. Bannon, now acts as Donald Trump's chief strategist. As a campaign adviser, he played a crucial role in shaping Trump's successful election campaign, courting controversy and playing to the base with an almost record-setting mixture of lies and distortions. Now, as a special counselor to the president, he may be the key policymaker in the new administration.

To see how he is using his position, take a look at Donald Trump's so-called 'Muslim ban', apparently co-authored by Bannon and senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller. An executive order issued by the President temporarily bans travel to the US by citizens of seven selected Muslim majority countries. The countries in question -- Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Yemen, Libya and Somalia -- seem to have been chosen not because their citizens are particularly active in terrorism against the United States, but because they are mostly of limited commercial importance to Donald Trump and his backers. Currently exempted from the ban are wealthy Gulf states, most notably Saudi Arabia -- the homeland of fifteen out of nineteen of the September 11th attackers and the birthplace of the Wahhabi ideology that inspired Al-Qaeda and ISIS -- as well as other important Muslim-majority countries that have ongoing problems with militant Islamism, including Egypt, Pakistan and Indonesia.

Terrorism is a real problem, even if it's one that politicians and other opportunists have systematically inflated for their own ends over the last fifteen years. But as a measure against terrorism , it is clear that the ban will be almost completely ineffectual. If you really believe that terrorism is an urgent, critical threat to the United States, and that travel bans are an effective defense against this threat -- both positions taken by Donald Trump during his campaign -- why would you implement a ban so selective and porous as to be next to useless? And wouldn't you want to begin by targeting countries that might reasonably be seen as 'higher risk', instead of giving those countries a special pass? And wouldn't you work with those responsible for enforcing it -- DHS and ICE -- rather than simply springing it on them with no notice and no guidance on how to put it into effect? It seems almost as if it was designed not to work.

The 'Muslim ban' is actually worse than ineffective. Not only does it offer no real protection against Islamist terrorism, it may even increase the threat. By reinforcing the idea that the US is implacably hostile to Muslims, it greatly helps Islamist terrorist recruiters and drives a further wedge between the United States and moderate Muslims throughout the world. So why do it?

View the ban as a Breitbart headline, and its logic immediately becomes clear. Just like a Breitbart headline, the ban simultaneously sends a signal to Trump's right-wing base -- Donald Trump takes action against terrorism, Donald Trump fulfills his campaign promises, Donald Trump dares to do what others won't -- even as it inspires an outraged reaction from progressives. The final, diabolical touch was hinting that visa applications from Christian citizens of Muslim countries would be prioritized: nothing arouses more fury on the left than the suggestion that Christianity should be given special treatment.

That reaction is an integral part of the package. It sends an additional message to Trump supporters that liberals want to let Muslims in to kill us all. To progressives, protesting the ban is a moral act, taking a stand in the name of an open, liberal and democratic society. To conservatives, it looks like conspiring with the enemy.

The executive order that created the ban has already been challenged in court, and may yet end up before the Supreme Court (a court which, thanks to Republican stonewalling in 2016, will not have a liberal majority). But whatever happens, Bannon wins. If the Court upholds the executive order, the power of the Executive branch to take arbitrary actions of this kind will be confirmed. If the ban is ruled unconstitutional, Bannon gets to paint a picture of 'activist judges' driven by 'political correctness' blocking Donald J. Trump's efforts to keep America safe. He cannot lose.

The so-called ban is a monstrous piece of political cynicism. The goal is not to increase security but to create chaos. Instead of reducing the risk of terrorism, it increases it. It has an immediate, measurable human cost, with ordinary people who have tried to enter the United States legally being treated like criminals and sent away. It sends a hateful message to Muslims and foreigners everywhere, discouraging immigration by letting would-be immigrants know that they can expect to be arbitrarily abused. And it further deepens -- as it is intended to -- political divisions within the country. It is a Breitbart headline played out in the public space.

This is what we all have to look forward to: a sometime Leninist and now hard-right professional agitator using all the power of the presidency for acts of political theater whose end goal is to undermine civil society and democratic institutions. Congratulations, America, you've just been Breitbarted.

[eveningnetwork]

Stephen Bannon Agrees to Testify to Jan. 6 Panel

Stephen Bannon Agrees to Testify to Jan. 6 Panel

Washington — Steven K. Bannon, an ally of former President Donald J. Trump, who was involved in a plan to overturn the 2020 elections as a criminal trial for parliamentary insults is approaching, investigates the attack on the House of Representatives. I have notified the House Committee. According to two letters obtained by the New York Times, I am now ready to testify. His decision is…

[cpandf]

Commentary on the TimCast IRL featuring guest Steven K. Bannon of Rumble War Room

Commentary on the TimCast IRL featuring guest Steven K. Bannon of Rumble War Room

Here’s a link to the blog entry with the Rumble video. https://americafirst.blog/2022/02/07/timcast-irl-oregon-implements-outdoor-mask-mandates-parents-revolt-w-steve-bannon-youtube/ I highly recommend watching the video before reading my commentary. You don’t have to but it’s worth every minute of it and will give you more context. Mr. Bannon is absolutely brilliant. It’s easy to see why Trump…

[filmcenter2012]

They claim they’re replacing them to stop people stealing the mail, RIGHT! So they can steal the election is more like it. It’s happening across the country. I received a IG from someone in NJ & another from @jkcmandan about Wisconsin! Please raise the alarm everywhere you know anybody. There are alternate ways; I’m voting in person (I’d rather die for my vote than getting COVID in a club or restaurant! early voting, register early, take the day off, cause you won’t have, rent, food or job if Trump is re elected! Fu#k @kanyewestt_official and his entire tribe, I vote him off the planet, along with all the Trumps and Steven Miller’s, Steve Bannon, His B#tch Mitch and his thug A.G Bill Barr! I am pissed 😡 if you can’t tell ✊🏾🤬 https://www.instagram.com/p/CD-Pd2_goIq/?igshid=2ze3ki9zcqam

[yourreddancer]

Why Tillerson called him a moron

Why Tillerson called him a moron

Published by digby on January 18, 2020

Oh My God, he’s even dumber and more unstable than we knew. This is bad.

This excerpt from the new book by Leonnig and Rucker called “A Very Stable Genius” is stunning. It had been leaked before that former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had called Trump a “fucking moron” after a meeting at the Pentagon when members of the administration attempted to educate him about — well, everything. We knew that he said he wanted to bring the nuclear arsenal back to the level it was at the cold war but it’s always been a mystery as to what exactly made Tillerson blurt out that comment in a room full of Generals and other high-level members of the administration.

Now we know:

Trump organized his unorthodox worldview under the simplistic banner of “America First,” but Mattis, Tillerson, and Cohn feared his proposals were rash, barely considered, and a danger to America’s superpower standing. They also felt that many of Trump’s impulsive ideas stemmed from his lack of familiarity with U.S. history and, even, where countries were located. To have a useful discussion with him, the trio agreed, they had to create a basic knowledge, a shared language.

So on July 20, 2017, Mattis invited Trump to the Tank for what he, Tillerson, and Cohn had carefully organized as a tailored tutorial. What happened inside the Tank that day crystallized the commander in chief’s berating, derisive and dismissive manner, foreshadowing decisions such as the one earlier this month that brought the United States to the brink of war with Iran. The Tank meeting was a turning point in Trump’s presidency. Rather than getting him to appreciate America’s traditional role and alliances, Trump began to tune out and eventually push away the experts who believed their duty was to protect the country by restraining his more dangerous impulses. […]

What follows is such an amazing story that it makes it even more shocking that Republicans have circled the wagons so tightly around him. They are all traitors as far as I’m concerned:

Just before 10 a.m. on a scorching summer Thursday, Trump arrived at the Pentagon. He stepped out of his motorcade, walked along a corridor with portraits honoring former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs, and stepped inside the Tank. The uniformed officers greeted their commander in chief. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Joseph F. Dunford Jr. sat in the seat of honor midway down the table, because this was his room, and Trump sat at the head of the table facing a projection screen. Mattis and the newly confirmed deputy defense secretary, Patrick Shanahan, sat to the president’s left, with Vice President Pence and Tillerson to his right. Down the table sat the leaders of the military branches, along with Cohn and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon was in the outer ring of chairs with other staff, taking his seat just behind Mattis and directly in Trump’s line of sight.

They had put together a presentation using terms they thought would appeal to the braindead president. It wasn’t good. They wrote things like “the post-war international rules-based order is the greatest gift of the greatest generation” and gave a 20-minute presentation about the alliances that keep the world safe. They greatly misunderstood how he thinks:

…His ricocheting attention span led him to repeatedly interrupt the lesson. He heard an adviser say a word or phrase and then seized on that to interject with his take. For instance, the word “base” prompted him to launch in to say how “crazy” and “stupid” it was to pay for bases in some countries.

Trump’s first complaint was to repeat what he had vented about to his national security adviser months earlier: South Korea should pay for a $10 billion missile defense system that the United States built for it. The system was designed to shoot down any short- and medium-range ballistic missiles from North Korea to protect South Korea and American troops stationed there. But Trump argued that the South Koreans should pay for it, proposing that the administration pull U.S. troops out of the region or bill the South Koreans for their protection.

“We should charge them rent,” Trump said of South Korea. “We should make them pay for our soldiers. We should make money off of everything.”

Trump went into his usual idiotic rap about NATO, saying they were worthless freeloaders because they didn’t “pay their dues.” He yelled at the Generals for letting them get away with it and scolded top officials for the fact that they didn’t collect the money.

It was all money, money, money, that’s all he knows or cares about. He is unable to see the world in any other terms.

“We are owed money you haven’t been collecting!” Trump told them. “You would totally go bankrupt if you had to run your own business.”

He would know. His businesses went bankrupt four times and his daddy bailed him out of every other hare-brained scheme he got into.

Mattis tried to explain that alliances are important to American defense.

“This is what keeps us safe,” Mattis said. Cohn tried to explain to Trump that he needed to see the value of the trade deals. “These are commitments that help keep us safe,” Cohn said.

Trump ignored them and started babbling about how he wanted to tear up the Iran nuclear deal.

“It’s the worst deal in history!” Trump declared.

“Well, actually . . .,” Tillerson interjected

“I don’t want to hear it,” Trump said, cutting off the secretary of state before he could explain some of the benefits of the agreement. “They’re cheating. They’re building. We’re getting out of it. I keep telling you, I keep giving you time, and you keep delaying me. I want out of it.”

Then he jumped to Afghanistan demanding to know why American hadn’t “won” yet.

Trump unleashed his disdain, calling Afghanistan a “loser war.” That phrase hung in the air and disgusted not only the military leaders at the table but also the men and women in uniform sitting along the back wall behind their principals. They all were sworn to obey their commander in chief’s commands, and here he was calling the war they had been fighting a loser war.

“You’re all losers,” Trump said. “You don’t know how to win anymore.”

Then he started in on the war crimes:

Trump questioned why the United States couldn’t get some oil as payment for the troops stationed in the Persian Gulf. “We spent $7 trillion; they’re ripping us off,” Trump boomed. “Where is the f—ing oil?”

Trump mused about removing General John Nicholson, the U.S. commander in charge of troops in Afghanistan. “I don’t think he knows how to win,” the president said, impugning Nicholson, who was not present at the meeting.

“I want to win,” he said. “We don’t win any wars anymore . . . We spend $7 trillion, everybody else got the oil and we’re not winning anymore.”

That’s your isolationist peacenik president expressing his belief that America should be a kinder, gentler nation that doesn’t use the military to achieve its goals.

Trump by now was in one of his rages. He was so angry that he wasn’t taking many breaths. All morning, he had been coarse and cavalier, but the next several things he bellowed went beyond that description. They stunned nearly everyone in the room, and some vowed that they would never repeat them. Indeed, they have not been reported until now.

“I wouldn’t go to war with you people,” Trump told the assembled brass.

Addressing the room, the commander in chief barked, “You’re a bunch of dopes and babies.”

The book describes the scene that followed and it’s really something:

For a president known for verbiage he euphemistically called “locker room talk,” this was the gravest insult he could have delivered to these people, in this sacred space. The flag officers in the room were shocked. Some staff began looking down at their papers, rearranging folders, almost wishing themselves out of the room. A few considered walking out. They tried not to reveal their revulsion on their faces, but questions raced through their minds. “How does the commander in chief say that?” one thought. “What would our worst adversaries think if they knew he said this?”

Tillerson in particular was stunned by Trump’s diatribe and began visibly seething. For too many minutes, others in the room noticed, he had been staring straight, dumbfounded, at Mattis, who was speechless, his head bowed down toward the table. Tillerson thought to himself, “Gosh darn it, Jim, say something. Why aren’t you saying something?”

Still a good question. This makes me wonder if they really would refuse to follow an unlawful order as everyone assures us they would do.

The more perplexing silence was from Pence, a leader who should have been able to stand up to Trump. Instead, one attendee thought, “He’s sitting there frozen like a statue. Why doesn’t he stop the president?” Another recalled the vice president was “a wax museum guy.” From the start of the meeting, Pence looked as if he wanted to escape and put an end to the president’s torrent. Surely, he disagreed with Trump’s characterization of military leaders as “dopes and babies,” considering his son, Michael, was a Marine first lieutenant then training for his naval aviator wings. But some surmised Pence feared getting crosswise with Trump. “A total deer in the headlights,” recalled a third attendee.

A profile in courage to be sure. But what would anyone expect from him? Anyone who would agree to be Trump’s lapdog is not someone we could expect to ever stand up to him. I hope everyone remembers this when Pence inevitably runs for president.

Others at the table noticed Trump’s stream of venom had taken an emotional toll. So many people in that room had gone to war and risked their lives for their country, and now they were being dressed down by a president who had not. They felt sick to their stomachs. Tillerson told others he thought he saw a woman in the room silently crying. He was furious and decided he couldn’t stand it another minute. His voice broke into Trump’s tirade, this one about trying to make money off U.S. troops.

“No, that’s just wrong,” the secretary of state said. “Mr. President, you’re totally wrong. None of that is true.”

Tillerson’s father and uncle had both been combat veterans, and he was deeply proud of their service.

“The men and women who put on a uniform don’t do it to become soldiers of fortune,” Tillerson said. “That’s not why they put on a uniform and go out and die . . . They do it to protect our freedom.”

There was silence in the Tank. Several military officers in the room were grateful to the secretary of state for defending them when no one else would. The meeting soon ended and Trump walked out, saying goodbye to a group of servicemen lining the corridor as he made his way to his motorcade waiting outside. Mattis, Tillerson, and Cohn were deflated. Standing in the hall with a small cluster of people he trusted, Tillerson finally let down his guard.

“He’s a f—ing moron,” the secretary of state said of the president.

They thought they could educate him that they could make him understand what the job of president actually is. It was impossible. He is a headstrong, spoiled little child, in over his head, but such an egomaniac that he thinks he can bluster through it by simply making decisions on the fly without any consideration of the facts or grasp of the consequences.

“We were starting to get out on the wrong path, and we really needed to have a course correction and needed to educate, to teach, to help him understand the reason and basis for a lot of these things,” said one senior official involved in the planning. “We needed to change how he thinks about this, to course correct. Everybody was on board, 100 percent agreed with that sentiment. [But] they were dismayed and in shock when not only did it not have the intended effect, but he dug in his heels and pushed it even further on the spectrum, further solidifying his views.”

The people in the meeting decided to cover up what they knew. They described his ignorant temper tantrums like this in public:

“He asked a lot of hard questions, and the one thing he does is question some fundamental assumptions that we make as military leaders — and he will come in and question those,” Dunford told Mitchell on July 22. “It’s a pretty energetic and an interactive dialogue.”

These people should have to answer for their cowardice. I know there’s no rulebook for some like Trump but there was no rules book for Hitler or Osama bin Laden either. These leaders are expected to stand up when the country is threatened. And there is no doubt that it was threatened and still is, maybe more than ever.

The whole story is even worse than what I’ve excerpted above. If you can read the Washington Post story or even the book, I urge you to do it. I only wish the Republican establishment cared enough about this to read it as well but they don’t. They care about their own political futures and are afraid that Trump will destroy them with his cult.

And many of them may actually be as mind-blowingly stupid as he is as well and they don’t see what a problem it is to have such an arrogant moron running the world’s only superpower. If there’s one thing right-wingers take as an article of faith it’s that expertise is nothing but a scam and the guy at the end of the bar can run the world better than the pointy-headed elites. They got what they wanted.

We won’t find out if a majority of Americans agree until next fall. I’m not sure if enough of them do, honestly.

[dobyfriday]

Challenge: Cry

CPS To Set New Graduation Requirement: Acceptance Letter « CBS Chicago

John Siracusa’s Followup

Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?

The Big Short

Daring Fireball: The Mac Pro Lives

Pepsi’s New Kendall Jenner Ad Was So Bad It Actually United the Internet | WIRED

Sebastian Gorka DrG (@SebGorka) | Twitter

Exclusive: The most powerful Briton in America on what it’s really like in Donald Trump’s White House

EXCLUSIVE: Sebastian Gorka Backed Anti-Semitic Militia – The Forward

Katharine Gorka - Wikipedia

DUDE Wipes

Fatburg

The Joy Of Ear-Cleaning : NPR

How Gross Are Your Bathroom Habits - BuzzFeed News

Karen Pence is the vice president’s ‘prayer warrior,’ gut check and shield - The Washington Post

Why Was Steve Bannon’s Hot Tub Allegedly Filled with Acid?

Why We Cry on Planes - The Atlantic

What Makes Max Cry

“You Stay, I Go.” (The Iron Giant, 1999) - YouTube

All Good Things… (Star Trek: The Next Generation) - Wikipedia

Toy Story 3 - The Furnace - YouTube

The Visitor (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine) - Wikipedia

Snoop Pearson killed - YouTube

Parks and Recreation - Leslie’s Finally Ready (Episode Highlight) - YouTube

Ron Swanson Scotland - YouTube

Interstellar (2014) - IMDb

Jurassic Bark - Wikipedia

The Sopranos - Silvio whacks Adriana - YouTube

Imposter, a song about the Mars Science Laboratory - YouTube

Good Will Hunting (1997) - Ending “He’s Not There” - YouTube

Daybreak (Battlestar Galactica) - Wikipedia

Jonathan’s Cochlear Implant Activation 8 mo., Rt Ear cont’d - YouTube

Rachel’s Cochlear Implant turned on for the first time - YouTube

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 (Snape’s Death Scene - HD) - YouTube

The Wire - Stringer Bell Death - YouTube

The Wire Clip: Bodie and Poot Kill Wallace - YouTube

The Wire Clip: Bodie and Poot Kill Wallace - YouTube

Radiohead - Everything In Its Right Place (Kid 17 Version) - YouTube

The Wire - Bodie gets killed. - YouTube

The Wire - Farewell to Baltimore (Season 5 Ending Montage) HQ - YouTube

Dumbledore’s death scene (Half-Blood Prince) - YouTube

The burial of Dobby the house elf - YouTube

Deus Ex Machina (Lost) - Wikipedia

Harry_s Sacrifice Scene from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows- Part 2 Movie (2011) - YouTube

Dead Poets Society (Final Scene) - YouTube

The West Wing - End of “Two Cathedrals” (Season 2 Episode 22) on Vimeo

Mary Oliver reads a poem from Dog Songs - YouTube

Sir Nicholas Winton - BBC Programme “That’s Life” aired in 1988 - YouTube

Mister Rogers defending PBS to the US Senate - YouTube

Murakami defies protests to accept Jerusalem prize | Books | The Guardian

Bridge of Spies (2015) - IMDb

Election Profit Makers Mixtape - YouTube

What Makes Merlin Cry

The Day of the Doctor - Wikipedia

I Dreamed a Dream - FULL SCENE -  Anne Hathaway - Les Misérables - YouTube

In which I learn the net weight of our daughter | The answer… | Flickr

Vincent Van Gogh Visits the Gallery - Vincent And The Doctor - Doctor Who - BBC - YouTube

Toy story3-Ending.. - YouTube

Who Lives, Who Dies, Who Tells Your Story - YouTube

Meanwhile (Futurama) - Wikipedia

Iron Giant Superman - YouTube

Synecdoche, New York (2008) - IMDb

Mozart Symphony #40 in G Minor, K 550 - 1. Molto Allegro - YouTube

10000 singing Beethoven - Ode an die Freude _ Ode to Joy - YouTube

Team Dresch - Wikipedia

Saving Private Ryan (1998) - IMDb

Neutral Milk Hotel - Holland, 1945 - YouTube

What Makes Alex Cry

Let’s Cry! on Spotify

The 10 Best Steven Universe Songs :: TV :: Lists :: Paste

Will I - Musical Rent - YouTube

The Mountain Goats - This Year (Video) - YouTube

[thursdayfilebuzz]

5 Key Takeaways From President Trump’s Speech by Glenn Thrush - March 01, 2017 - https://www.nytimes.com/ WASHINGTON — In President Trump’s world, boring is disruptive. After five-plus weeks of gleefully setting the Washington establishment ablaze and declaring a new war with virtually every public utterance, Mr. Trump took the radical step on Tuesday night of delivering a soothing comfort food of an address to a jittery Congress and skeptical public. For the first time since his swearing-in in January, Mr. Trump seemed to accept the fetters of formality and tradition that define and dignify the presidency. And while he touched on all of the hard-edge elements of the economic nationalist agenda that has impelled his executive orders and calls for “revolution,” Mr. Trump brandished a blunter rhetorical ax and, for once, delivered on his promise to speak the Reagan Republican dialect of optimism and reconciliation. Why the sudden shift? Numbers. Mr. Trump’s approval rating is the worst for any new president in recorded history — between 38 and 50 percent at a time when many presidents are in the 60s. Slamming the news media or pro-Obamacare demonstrators energizes his base, but it’s hard to move much higher in the polls without making a less partisan pitch. The other key statistic spurring his sunshine-and-civility adjustment: $54 billion, the amount of federal funding he hopes to siphon from other departments to increase spending at the Pentagon — a budget proposal that is already half-dead on arrival, judging from its lukewarm reception on Capitol Hill this week. Presidents, even those commanding comfortable majorities in both houses, need to get Congress in line, and the only way to do that is to declare peace. Here are five takeaways from the most presidential speech Mr. Trump has ever given — delivered at precisely the moment he needed to project sobriety, seriousness of purpose and self-discipline. Which Donald Trump is real? The split-screen between Tuesday’s temperate Mr. Trump and the everyday Mr. Trump was striking, to put it mildly. “The time for trivial fights is over,” said Mr. Trump, a man who spent the first 48 hours of his presidency bickering about the size of the inauguration crowd. While that statement was meant as a challenge to his establishment critics, it also seemed as if he were coaching himself. All of the previous big-stage speeches delivered by Mr. Trump, from his nomination address in Cleveland last summer to his 16-minute inaugural speech, had a gloomy, mourning-in-America quality. His aides promised a Ronald Reagan-inspired invocation of America’s future in the days leading up to his swearing-in. What he delivered, thanks to his speechwriting team of Stephen Miller and Stephen K. Bannon, was an invocation of “American carnage.” Since his swearing-in, Mr. Trump roved the airwaves and Twitter, lashing out at anyone who opposed him, and many people who didn’t. In just the past couple of weeks, the president has reiterated his description of some news outlets as “enemies of the American people,” while taking his shots at Paris, Sweden, Hill Democrats, the F.B.I., government leakers, President Barack Obama and his own communications staff, among other targets. But on Tuesday, the president rolled the dice, and went for nice. In style, if not substance, Mr. Trump delivered an address that nearly any of his Republican primary opponents — whom he once savaged as establishment stooges — might have delivered had they been standing at the rostrum. “That torch is now in our hands,” Mr. Trump said within the first few minutes of his speech, echoing, if not entirely approaching, the wispy mountaintop oratory of more polished predecessors like Mr. Obama and Mr. Reagan. “And we will use it to light up the world. I am here tonight to deliver a message of unity and strength, and it is a message deeply delivered from my heart.” Mr. Trump has made immense progress sticking to a script, but Wednesday is a new day, and the presidential Twitter finger gets itchy in the middle of the week. The big question is whether his unifying tone represents the mythical, long-awaited pivot point — or was just part of a well-written speech efficiently delivered by a gifted politician learning his new trade. A swift denunciation of bigotry Mr. Trump has been criticized for his sluggish response to violence and vandalism against Jews, blacks and Muslims during his presidency. But the opening words of his speech were dedicated to tolerance and inclusion. “Recent threats targeting Jewish community centers and vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, as well as last week’s shooting in Kansas City,” he said, “remind us that while we may be a nation divided on policies, we are a country that stands united in condemning hate and evil in all of its very ugly forms.” Again, it’s hard to say if his statement reflected a genuine change of approach. Mr. Trump and some allies have suggested that recent bias-related episodes might be false-flag attempts by his opponents to embarrass him. But his words were welcomed in the House chamber, greeted by some of the most sustained applause of the evening. Spiking the football in the first quarter The polls have not been especially kind to Mr. Trump lately, but there is one distinct bright spot: 56 percent of voters in a Politico/Morning Consult poll released on Tuesday said that Mr. Trump was following through on his campaign promises. This is no small matter for a president eager to prove he’s no mere talker. For all its messaging, personnel and operational struggles, Mr. Trump’s team has relentlessly executed a branding strategy aimed at projecting the image of a man of action fighting against gridlocked and corrupt Washington elites. Every day, Mr. Trump appears before the cameras where he is shown doing stuff like signing executive orders or convening panels of business, labor or political leaders. “It’s been a little over a month since my inauguration, and I want to take this moment to update the nation on the progress I’ve made in keeping those promises,” he said, taking an extended bow for saving jobs at several factories across the country, renegotiating defense contracts, scrapping the Trans-Pacific Partnership, greenlighting two new fuel pipelines and cracking down on illegal immigration and criminal foreigners. Never mind that Mr. Obama, the man Mr. Trump says left him “a mess” to clean up, had accomplished much more at this point in his term — including the stimulus package and a gender pay-equity law. For all his newfound civility and message discipline, Mr. Trump cares most about this takeaway — proving he is an effective president at a time when his administration is being portrayed in the media as short-handed, adrift and conflict-ridden. A serious case of the vagues The president’s speech had admirable length (it clocked in at just over 60 minutes), the requisite number of ovations, about 90, and a succession of punchy pronouncements. What it didn’t have was very much of an explanation on how Mr. Trump plans to govern. There were hardly any details about his proposals on the big-ticket items that will most likely define his first term. That included his Obamacare repeal-and-replace pledge, his plan to overhaul the tax code, the big infrastructure package he’s vowed to ram through, or even his plan to shovel $54 billion into the Defense Department. What’s going on with immigration? Cracking down on illegal immigration is the central pillar of Mr. Trump’s election-winning popularity with white working-class voters, so much so that it was the subject of his most decisive action thus far as president: the bungled rollout of his executive order barring migrants from seven predominantly Muslim nations. But Mr. Trump and his team sent out some seriously mixed messages in the hours leading up to the address. “We will soon begin the construction of a great, great wall along our southern border,” Mr. Trump declared, to the delight of many Republicans in the hall, who gave him a hearty standing ovation. But earlier, in a sit-down with some of the country’s leading news anchors, the president seemed to soften his stance considerably, as he has done previously in private, suggesting that legal status be granted to millions of undocumented immigrants who have not committed serious crimes. Immigration hard-liners, led by his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, have long considered such a stance “amnesty.” Mr. Trump never brought up the topic again — and didn’t touch on his prior reference to legalizing undocumented immigrants — raising questions about what position he’ll stake out in negotiations with Congress. Fact Check: Trump's First Address to Congress: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/28/us/politics/fact-check-trump-congress-address.html -- Steven Macdowall I am drawing the 'Umbrella' this month https://www.instagram.com/stevenhmacdowall

[anarchyandacupofcoffee]

“Bannon seems to see conflict everywhere he looks: paranoid visions of expansionist incursions from all directions. This is symptomatic of what Ludwig von Mises called “warfare sociology.” According to Mises, such an ideology rejects the classical liberal notion of a natural harmony of interests based on the universal benefits of social cooperation and the division of labor. Instead, warfare sociology is rooted in an underlying philosophy according to which no party can gain except at the expense of another. In such a “zero sum” world, conflict among opposing interests is unavoidably endemic.”

He thinks war is inevitable, thereby making war inevitable. This guy is psychotic and shouldn’t be anywhere near the president of the US.

[beforeitsnewsmain]

Steve Bannon Believes Winter Is Coming

By Dan Sanchez, DanSanchez.me. “History is seasonal and winter is coming.” No, that’s not a Game of Thrones quote. It’s the last line of a 2010 documentary called Generation Zero, written and directed by Steven K. Bannon. http://beforeitsnews.com/economy/2017/02/steve-bannon-believes-winter-is-coming-2876491.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=tumblr

[weeklyhumorist]

#BandAFood

Turn up that Buns N’ Roses! It’s #BandAFood on this week’s trending joke game! Here are some of the best on @HashtagRoundUp powered by @TheHashtagGame. Play our comedy hashtag twitter games every Wednesday at 11 am EST.

Let’s play #BandAFood with co-host @delaneyWHmag @HashtagRoundup powered by @TheHashtagGame #WeeklyHumoristHashtags https://t.co/RBuA4E1tGD pic.twitter.com/usjnS48a1K

— Weekly Humorist (@WeeklyHumorist) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood cABBAge pic.twitter.com/HEz2OwQRT0

— Nathan Robson #42 (@NathanMisao) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Tofu Fighters pic.twitter.com/UAg8c5QWLd

— jhawk4life 🇺🇸 (@jhawk4life) April 15, 2020

Buns N’ Roses #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/JAyqcQeZQS

— Jade E. Freeman (@Jade_E_Freeman) April 15, 2020

Oreo Speedwagon #BandAFood

— CookieMan (@pcook102) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Pita, Paul, and Mary pic.twitter.com/7W6QQlB7bz

— Katalina St. Yves (@KatalinaMelody) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Grain Day pic.twitter.com/y6U6mwSzus

— Katalina St. Yves (@KatalinaMelody) April 15, 2020

The Bagels #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/tteCB1rnNZ

— Shari Bee (@Lavendermee3) April 15, 2020

Ramen at Work#BandAFood pic.twitter.com/lUWFQYdm6P

— Edward J Thomas (@UnknownWr1ter) April 15, 2020

Men at Wok #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/kfyNto4HMH

— CK (@charley_ck14) April 15, 2020

The Rolling Scones #BandAFood

— David E (@DaSkrambledEgg) April 15, 2020

The Romaines #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/IVZNMIBpMd

— Dubious James (@DubiousJames) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Mamas and the Pastas pic.twitter.com/w7WbwPD1Sf

— 1SafeDriver.com (@1SafeDriver) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood

Death Cab For Cuties pic.twitter.com/LAA5lIWaJW

— TheRealPatrick (@TheRealPOH) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Soylent Green Day

— darrin stevens (@DarrinWS77) April 15, 2020

Three Corndog Night … #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/3XyPZWu9mB

— Choo-Choo (@ChooChoo_Chewy) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Bananas (i deserve points for this lol) pic.twitter.com/bA04tN1YzB

— Sajie (@Sajie_Angel) April 15, 2020

Peter Paul and Dairy #BandAFood

— Fi 🇪🇺 (@rahhead01) April 15, 2020

Red Hot Chilli Dogs 🌭 #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/FBTTgSLpx0

— Ray Zitto (@RayZitto) April 15, 2020

Imagine Dragonfruit #BandAFood

— Mark Rīter (@MarkRiter) April 15, 2020

Simply Bread..#BandAFood pic.twitter.com/juHIbzjhrN

— MrGee 🦉 (@Owlszaboutthat1) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Pizza Gabriel

— Steve Oh ! (@SteveOl83303976) April 15, 2020

Crosby, Stills and Hash #BandAFood

— John Kilby (@TheKilbyJoke) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Rage Against The Macaroni

*Have to give up carbs, Dammit! So this is fitting.

— Becca 🎶 (@Good_Ole_Bebs) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Bruce Springroll pic.twitter.com/tdKsvnmeex

— Ĵậşöñ (@jason_demoe) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Ramens pic.twitter.com/tgJr7AbWSR

— Nathaniel (@23Nate) April 15, 2020

Motley Stew #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/wRzja4pOYa

— Gary Hyett (@gary_hyett) April 15, 2020

Limp Biscuit and Gravy #BandAFood

— GrossMzConduct (@monalisa4068) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Carbs pic.twitter.com/djm352mvvZ

— George M Henderson (@seomac) April 15, 2020

Bread Zeppelin #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/Ka4knXZvh1

— Kim K (@mrskingle) April 15, 2020

Hall and Oatmeal #BandAFood

— Mister Race Bannon (@MrRaceBannon) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Snackson Five pic.twitter.com/E76zyD0Jr4

— Steve Oh ! (@SteveOl83303976) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Jackson Chive

— Paul Ainger (@ainger13) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Pearl’s jam pic.twitter.com/fVcGrrYOsG

— Ellë P✨ (@realellep) April 15, 2020

Dairy Queen #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/1U3x6E0bU4

— Mister Race Bannon (@MrRaceBannon) April 15, 2020

Ace of Bouibase #BandAFood

— Taco Eater (@tacoeater) April 15, 2020

Wham Sandwich#BandAFood pic.twitter.com/7TfyXWLoge

— One Patient Wolf (@Gentleman_John) April 15, 2020

Food Fighters #BandAFood

— Karen (@redheadedkaren) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Scone Roses pic.twitter.com/KT5cb9L8w0

— TheOtherAngeOfTwittter (@TheotherAnge) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Starchies pic.twitter.com/nNlWV0egQe

— Nathan Robson #42 (@NathanMisao) April 15, 2020

Cheerio Speedwagon#BandAFood

— One Patient Wolf (@Gentleman_John) April 15, 2020

John Cougar Melons Camp #bandafood pic.twitter.com/AlDzGLhTmR

— Jessica, Princess of Smiles (@jessica_tadaa) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Tragically Whip pic.twitter.com/owM5bM7vLo

— Ellë P✨ (@realellep) April 15, 2020

The Beet Gees #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/QaiYchMerj

— Shirley Cohen (@Brozafan) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood The Meatles pic.twitter.com/ZZCFudZUro

— Katalina St. Yves (@KatalinaMelody) April 15, 2020

Artichoke Heart #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/YDnK1rZPH8

— Alisun Jane (@AlisunJane) April 15, 2020

Salmon & Garfunkel #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/VouZ0vEdjT

— Jack Miller (@personaugratin) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Cool Whip and the gang

— Sammy is here 520 (@520Sammy) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Nine Inch Snails pic.twitter.com/ArRGrdCSfa

— Ellë P✨ (@realellep) April 15, 2020

Linkin Pork #BandAFood

— Oliver Langmo (@Olivergoesoff) April 15, 2020

ZZ Toppings #BandAFood

— Secluded Susie (@SecludedSusie) April 15, 2020

The Almond Brothers #BandAFood

— CK (@charley_ck14) April 15, 2020

Rage Against the Poutine #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/0LomWJBVeY

— Jack Miller (@personaugratin) April 15, 2020

KFC and The Sunshine Band #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/vK4dfrdrrr

— Jack Miller (@personaugratin) April 15, 2020

Weezer Salad #BandAFood

— AB Normal 🐈 🏳️‍🌈👾 (@kat_woman13) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Nine Inch Kales

— Scotty Ray (@ScottyRay35) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Pail McCartney and Chicken Wings pic.twitter.com/rJwdgtGmQU

— Jimmy Rhythm (@JimmyRhythm) April 15, 2020

Soundgarden Salad #BandAFood @paul_lander

— Weekly Humorist (@WeeklyHumorist) April 15, 2020

Panic! At The Crisco #BandAFood

— David E (@DaSkrambledEgg) April 15, 2020

Garbage Plate #BandAFood pic.twitter.com/drzGH6xlBi

— Thomas Hamilton (@TDanger19) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Cap’n Crunch and Tennille

— michael greer (@mgreer423) April 15, 2020

Yeastie Boys #BandAFood @GMA88

— Weekly Humorist (@WeeklyHumorist) April 15, 2020

ZZ Stove Top Stuffing #BandAFood

— J.K. (@tvwriter) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Gladys Knight & the Chips pic.twitter.com/mT1yeZffW5

— JamieKadriel (@JamieKadriel) April 15, 2020

Scone Temple Pilots.#BandAFood

— Dhanaraj (@Dhanarajtweet) April 15, 2020

Shwarmamas and the Papas #BandAFood

— Ronny Pascale (@ronnypascale) April 15, 2020

David Lee Broth #BandAFood @KitLively

— Weekly Humorist (@WeeklyHumorist) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Korn on the cob pic.twitter.com/HuVsXbRqqr

— Baby carots with legs. (@BabyCarotLegs) April 15, 2020

Justin Beefer #BandAFood

— Ronny Pascale (@ronnypascale) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood Culture Club sandwich

— Mary says stay home.🏡📚🎬 (@MaryG0401) April 15, 2020

Fleetwood Big Mac…#BandAFood

— Tend To Disagree (@tendtodisagree) April 15, 2020

#BandAFood was originally published on Weekly Humorist

[bountyofbeads]

Trump a three time draft-dodger, with no understanding of military history nor foreign policy experience, has not one vein of miltary honor or duty. He thinks of our military as his personal toy soldiers who should jump at his command(like the strike on Iran and sending troops to the southern border) and boost his image. His narcissism prevents him from understanding that the purpose of the military to "protect and defend" the American people and the Constitution. Trump's view of the military endangers our national security and the American people.

Trump questioned why the United States couldn’t get some oil as payment for the troops stationed in the Persian Gulf. “We spent $7 trillion; they’re ripping us off,” Trump boomed. “Where is the f---ing oil?”

‘You’re a bunch of dopes and babies’: Inside Trump’s stunning tirade against generals

By Carol D. Leonnig and Philip Rucker |

Published Jan 17 at 6:00 AM EST | Washington Post | Posted Jan 17, 2020 |

[This article is adapted from “A Very Stable Genius: Donald J. Trump’s Testing of America,” which will be published on Jan. 21 by Penguin Press.]

There is no more sacred room for military officers than 2E924 of the Pentagon, a windowless and secure vault where the Joint Chiefs of Staff meet regularly to wrestle with classified matters. Its more common name is “the Tank.” The Tank resembles a small corporate boardroom, with a gleaming golden oak table, leather swivel armchairs and other mid-century stylings. Inside its walls, flag officers observe a reverence and decorum for the wrenching decisions that have been made there.

Hanging prominently on one of the walls is The Peacemakers, a painting that depicts an 1865 Civil War strategy session with President Abraham Lincoln and his three service chiefs — Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant, Major General William Tecumseh Sherman, and Rear Admiral David Dixon Porter. One hundred fifty-​­two years after Lincoln hatched plans to preserve the Union, President Trump’s advisers staged an intervention inside the Tank to try to preserve the world order.

By that point, six months into his administration, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, Director of the National Economic Council Gary Cohn, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had grown alarmed by gaping holes in Trump’s knowledge of history, especially the key alliances forged following World War II. Trump had dismissed allies as worthless, cozied up to authoritarian regimes in Russia and elsewhere, and advocated withdrawing troops from strategic outposts and active theaters alike.

Trump organized his unorthodox worldview under the simplistic banner of “America First,” but Mattis, Tillerson, and Cohn feared his proposals were rash, barely considered, and a danger to America’s superpower standing. They also felt that many of Trump’s impulsive ideas stemmed from his lack of familiarity with U.S. history and, even, where countries were located. To have a useful discussion with him, the trio agreed, they had to create a basic knowledge, a shared language.

So on July 20, 2017, Mattis invited Trump to the Tank for what he, Tillerson, and Cohn had carefully organized as a tailored tutorial. What happened inside the Tank that day crystallized the commander in chief’s berating, derisive and dismissive manner, foreshadowing decisions such as the one earlier this month that brought the United States to the brink of war with Iran. The Tank meeting was a turning point in Trump’s presidency. Rather than getting him to appreciate America’s traditional role and alliances, Trump began to tune out and eventually push away the experts who believed their duty was to protect the country by restraining his more dangerous impulses.

The episode has been documented numerous times, but subsequent reporting reveals a more complete picture of the moment and the chilling effect Trump’s comments and hostility had on the nation’s military and national security leadership.

Just before 10 a.m. on a scorching summer Thursday, Trump arrived at the Pentagon. He stepped out of his motorcade, walked along a corridor with portraits honoring former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs, and stepped inside the Tank. The uniformed officers greeted their commander in chief. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Joseph F. Dunford Jr. sat in the seat of honor midway down the table, because this was his room, and Trump sat at the head of the table facing a projection screen. Mattis and the newly confirmed deputy defense secretary, Patrick Shanahan, sat to the president’s left, with Vice President Pence and Tillerson to his right. Down the table sat the leaders of the military branches, along with Cohn and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon was in the outer ring of chairs with other staff, taking his seat just behind Mattis and directly in Trump’s line of sight.

Mattis, Cohn, and Tillerson and their aides decided to use maps, graphics, and charts to tutor the president, figuring they would help keep him from getting bored. Mattis opened with a slide show punctuated by lots of dollar signs. Mattis devised a strategy to use terms the impatient president, schooled in real estate, would appreciate to impress upon him the value of U.S. investments abroad. He sought to explain why U.S. troops were deployed in so many regions and why America’s safety hinged on a complex web of trade deals, alliances, and bases across the globe.

An opening line flashed on the screen, setting the tone: “The post-war international rules-based order is the greatest gift of the greatest generation.” Mattis then gave a 20-minute briefing on the power of the NATO alliance to stabilize Europe and keep the United States safe. Bannon thought to himself, “Not good. Trump is not going to like that one bit.” The internationalist language Mattis was using was a trigger for Trump.

“Oh, baby, this is going to be f---ing wild,” Bannon thought. “If you stood up and threatened to shoot [Trump], he couldn’t say ‘postwar rules-based international order.’ It’s just not the way he thinks.”

For the next 90 minutes, Mattis, Tillerson, and Cohn took turns trying to emphasize their points, pointing to their charts and diagrams. They showed where U.S. personnel were positioned, at military bases, CIA stations, and embassies, and how U.S. deployments fended off the threats of terror cells, nuclear blasts, and destabilizing enemies in places including Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the Korea Peninsula, and Syria. Cohn spoke for about 20 minutes about the value of free trade with America’s allies, emphasizing how he saw each trade agreement working together as part of an overall structure to solidify U.S. economic and national security.

Trump appeared peeved by the schoolhouse vibe but also allergic to the dynamic of his advisers talking at him. His ricocheting attention span led him to repeatedly interrupt the lesson. He heard an adviser say a word or phrase and then seized on that to interject with his take. For instance, the word “base” prompted him to launch in to say how “crazy” and “stupid” it was to pay for bases in some countries.

Trump’s first complaint was to repeat what he had vented about to his national security adviser months earlier: South Korea should pay for a $10 billion missile defense system that the United States built for it. The system was designed to shoot down any short- and medium-range ballistic missiles from North Korea to protect South Korea and American troops stationed there. But Trump argued that the South Koreans should pay for it, proposing that the administration pull U.S. troops out of the region or bill the South Koreans for their protection.

“We should charge them rent,” Trump said of South Korea. “We should make them pay for our soldiers. We should make money off of everything.”

Trump proceeded to explain that NATO, too, was worthless. U.S. generals were letting the allied member countries get away with murder, he said, and they owed the United States a lot of money after not living up to their promise of paying their dues.

“They’re in arrears,” Trump said, reverting to the language of real estate. He lifted both his arms at his sides in frustration. Then he scolded top officials for the untold millions of dollars he believed they had let slip through their fingers by allowing allies to avoid their obligations.

“We are owed money you haven’t been collecting!” Trump told them. “You would totally go bankrupt if you had to run your own business.”

Mattis wasn’t trying to convince the president of anything, only to explain and provide facts. Now things were devolving quickly. The general tried to calmly explain to the president that he was not quite right. The NATO allies didn’t owe the United States back rent, he said. The truth was more complicated. NATO had a nonbinding goal that members should pay at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product on their defenses. Only five of the countries currently met that goal, but it wasn’t as if they were shorting the United States on the bill.

More broadly, Mattis argued, the NATO alliance was not serving only to protect western Europe. It protected America, too. “This is what keeps us safe,” Mattis said. Cohn tried to explain to Trump that he needed to see the value of the trade deals. “These are commitments that help keep us safe,” Cohn said.

Bannon interjected. “Stop, stop, stop,” he said. “All you guys talk about all these great things, they’re all our partners, I want you to name me now one country and one company that’s going to have his back.”

Trump then repeated a threat he’d made countless times before. He wanted out of the Iran nuclear deal that President Obama had struck in 2015, which called for Iran to reduce its uranium stockpile and cut its nuclear program.

“It’s the worst deal in history!” Trump declared.

“Well, actually . . .,” Tillerson interjected.

“I don’t want to hear it,” Trump said, cutting off the secretary of state before he could explain some of the benefits of the agreement. “They’re cheating. They’re building. We’re getting out of it. I keep telling you, I keep giving you time, and you keep delaying me. I want out of it.”

Before they could debate the Iran deal, Trump erupted to revive another frequent complaint: the war in Afghanistan, which was now America’s longest war. He demanded an explanation for why the United States hadn’t won in Afghanistan yet, now 16 years after the nation began fighting there in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Trump unleashed his disdain, calling Afghanistan a “loser war.” That phrase hung in the air and disgusted not only the military leaders at the table but also the men and women in uniform sitting along the back wall behind their principals. They all were sworn to obey their commander in chief’s commands, and here he was calling the war they had been fighting a loser war.

“You’re all losers,” Trump said. “You don’t know how to win anymore.”

Trump questioned why the United States couldn’t get some oil as payment for the troops stationed in the Persian Gulf. “We spent $7 trillion; they’re ripping us off,” Trump boomed. “Where is the f---ing oil?”

Trump seemed to be speaking up for the voters who elected him, and several attendees thought they heard Bannon in Trump’s words. Bannon had been trying to persuade Trump to withdraw forces by telling him, “The American people are saying we can’t spend a trillion dollars a year on this. We just can’t. It’s going to bankrupt us.”

“And not just that, the deplorables don’t want their kids in the South China Sea at the 38th parallel or in Syria, in Afghanistan, in perpetuity,” Bannon would add, invoking Hillary Clinton’s infamous “basket of deplorables” reference to Trump supporters.

Trump mused about removing General John Nicholson, the U.S. commander in charge of troops in Afghanistan. “I don’t think he knows how to win,” the president said, impugning Nicholson, who was not present at the meeting.

Dunford tried to come to Nicholson’s defense, but the mild-mannered general struggled to convey his points to the irascible president.

“Mr. President, that’s just not . . .,” Dunford started. “We’ve been under different orders.”

Dunford sought to explain that he hadn’t been charged with annihilating the enemy in Afghanistan but was instead following a strategy started by the Obama administration to gradually reduce the military presence in the country in hopes of training locals to maintain a stable government so that eventually the United States could pull out. Trump shot back in more plain language.

“I want to win,” he said. “We don’t win any wars anymore . . . We spend $7 trillion, everybody else got the oil and we’re not winning anymore.”

Trump by now was in one of his rages. He was so angry that he wasn’t taking many breaths. All morning, he had been coarse and cavalier, but the next several things he bellowed went beyond that description. They stunned nearly everyone in the room, and some vowed that they would never repeat them. Indeed, they have not been reported until now.

“I wouldn’t go to war with you people,” Trump told the assembled brass.

Addressing the room, the commander in chief barked, “You’re a bunch of dopes and babies.”

For a president known for verbiage he euphemistically called “locker room talk,” this was the gravest insult he could have delivered to these people, in this sacred space. The flag officers in the room were shocked. Some staff began looking down at their papers, rearranging folders, almost wishing themselves out of the room. A few considered walking out. They tried not to reveal their revulsion on their faces, but questions raced through their minds. “How does the commander in chief say that?” one thought. “What would our worst adversaries think if they knew he said this?”

This was a president who had been labeled a “draft dodger” for avoiding service in the Vietnam War under questionable circumstances. Trump was a young man born of privilege and in seemingly perfect health: six feet two inches with a muscular build and a flawless medical record. He played several sports, including football. Then, in 1968 at age 22, he obtained a diagnosis of bone spurs in his heels that exempted him from military service just as the United States was drafting men his age to fulfill massive troop deployments to Vietnam.

Tillerson in particular was stunned by Trump’s diatribe and began visibly seething. For too many minutes, others in the room noticed, he had been staring straight, dumbfounded, at Mattis, who was speechless, his head bowed down toward the table. Tillerson thought to himself, “Gosh darn it, Jim, say something. Why aren’t you saying something?”

But, as he would later tell close aides, Tillerson realized in that moment that Mattis was genetically a Marine, unable to talk back to his commander in chief, no matter what nonsense came out of his mouth.

The more perplexing silence was from Pence, a leader who should have been able to stand up to Trump. Instead, one attendee thought, “He’s sitting there frozen like a statue. Why doesn’t he stop the president?” Another recalled the vice president was “a wax museum guy.” From the start of the meeting, Pence looked as if he wanted to escape and put an end to the president’s torrent. Surely, he disagreed with Trump’s characterization of military leaders as “dopes and babies,” considering his son, Michael, was a Marine first lieutenant then training for his naval aviator wings. But some surmised Pence feared getting crosswise with Trump. “A total deer in the headlights,” recalled a third attendee.

Others at the table noticed Trump’s stream of venom had taken an emotional toll. So many people in that room had gone to war and risked their lives for their country, and now they were being dressed down by a president who had not. They felt sick to their stomachs. Tillerson told others he thought he saw a woman in the room silently crying. He was furious and decided he couldn’t stand it another minute. His voice broke into Trump’s tirade, this one about trying to make money off U.S. troops.

“No, that’s just wrong,” the secretary of state said. “Mr. President, you’re totally wrong. None of that is true.”

Tillerson’s father and uncle had both been combat veterans, and he was deeply proud of their service.

“The men and women who put on a uniform don’t do it to become soldiers of fortune,” Tillerson said. “That’s not why they put on a uniform and go out and die . . . They do it to protect our freedom.”

There was silence in the Tank. Several military officers in the room were grateful to the secretary of state for defending them when no one else would. The meeting soon ended and Trump walked out, saying goodbye to a group of servicemen lining the corridor as he made his way to his motorcade waiting outside. Mattis, Tillerson, and Cohn were deflated. Standing in the hall with a small cluster of people he trusted, Tillerson finally let down his guard.

“He’s a f---ing moron,” the secretary of state said of the president.

The plan by Mattis, Tillerson, and Cohn to train the president to appreciate the internationalist view had clearly backfired.

“We were starting to get out on the wrong path, and we really needed to have a course correction and needed to educate, to teach, to help him understand the reason and basis for a lot of these things,” said one senior official involved in the planning. “We needed to change how he thinks about this, to course correct. Everybody was on board, 100 percent agreed with that sentiment. [But] they were dismayed and in shock when not only did it not have the intended effect, but he dug in his heels and pushed it even further on the spectrum, further solidifying his views.”

A few days later, Pence’s national security adviser, Andrea Thompson, a retired Army colonel who had served in Afghanistan and Iraq, reached out to thank Tillerson for speaking up on behalf of the military and the public servants who had been in the Tank. By September 2017, she would leave the White House and join Tillerson at Foggy Bottom as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs.

The Tank meeting had so thoroughly shocked the conscience of military leaders that they tried to keep it a secret. At the Aspen Security Forum two days later, longtime NBC News correspondent Andrea Mitchell asked Dunford how Trump had interacted during the Tank meeting. The Joint Chiefs chairman misleadingly described the meeting, skipping over the fireworks.

“He asked a lot of hard questions, and the one thing he does is question some fundamental assumptions that we make as military leaders — and he will come in and question those,” Dunford told Mitchell on July 22. “It’s a pretty energetic and an interactive dialogue.”

One victim of the Tank meeting was Trump’s relationship with Tillerson, which forever after was strained. The secretary of state came to see it as the beginning of the end. It would only worsen when news that Tillerson had called Trump a “moron” was first reported in October 2017 by NBC News.

_______

Trump once again gathered his generals and top diplomats in December 2017 for a meeting as part of the administration’s ongoing strategy talks about troop deployments in Afghanistan in the Situation Room, a secure meeting room on the ground floor of the West Wing. Trump didn’t like the Situation Room as much as the Pentagon’s Tank, because he didn’t think it had enough gravitas. It just wasn’t impressive.

But there Trump was, struggling to come up with a new Afghanistan policy and frustrated that so many U.S. forces were deployed in so many places around the world. The conversation began to tilt in the same direction as it had in the Tank back in July.

“All these countries need to start paying us for the troops we are sending to their countries. We need to be making a profit,” Trump said. “We could turn a profit on this.”

Dunford tried to explain to the president once again, gently, that troops deployed in these regions provided stability there, which helped make America safer. Another officer chimed in that charging other countries for U.S. soldiers would be against the law.

“But it just wasn’t working,” one former Trump aide recalled. “Nothing worked.”

Following the Tank meeting, Tillerson had told his aides that he would never silently tolerate such demeaning talk from Trump about making money off the deployments of U.S. soldiers. Tillerson’s father, at the age of 17, had committed to enlist in the Navy on his next birthday, wanting so much to serve his country in World War II. His great-uncle was a career officer in the Navy as well. Both men had been on his mind, Tillerson told aides, when Trump unleashed his tirade in the Tank and again when he repeated those points in the Situation Room in December.

“We need to get our money back,” Trump told his assembled advisers.

That was it. Tillerson stood up. But when he did so, he turned his back to the president and faced the flag officers and the rest of the aides in the room. He didn’t want a repeat of the scene in the Tank.

“I’ve never put on a uniform, but I know this,” Tillerson said. “Every person who has put on a uniform, the people in this room, they don’t do it to make a buck. They did it for their country, to protect us. I want everyone to be clear about how much we as a country value their service.”

Tillerson’s rebuke made Trump angry. He got a little red in the face. But the president decided not to engage Tillerson at that moment. He would wait to take him on another day.

Later that evening, after 8:00, Tillerson was working in his office at the State Department’s Foggy Bottom headquarters, preparing for the next day. The phone rang. It was Dunford. The Joint Chiefs chairman’s voice was unsteady with emotion. Dunford had much earlier joked with Tillerson that in past administrations the secretaries of state and Defense Department leaders wouldn’t be caught dead walking on the same side of the street, for their rivalry was that fierce. But now, as both men served Trump, they were brothers joined against what they saw as disrespect for service members. Dunford thanked Tillerson for standing up for them in the Situation Room.

“You took the body blows for us,” Dunford said. “Punch after punch. Thank you. I will never forget it.”

Tillerson, Dunford, and Mattis would not take those body blows for much longer. They failed to rein in Trump’s impulses or to break through what they regarded as the president’s stubborn, even dangerous insistence that he knew best. Piece by piece, the guardrails that had hemmed in the chaos of Trump’s presidency crumpled.

In March 2018, Trump abruptly fired Tillerson while the secretary of state was halfway across the globe on a sensitive diplomatic mission to Africa to ease tensions caused by Trump’s demeaning insults about African countries. Trump gave Tillerson no rationale for his firing, and afterward acted as if they were buddies, inviting him to come by the Oval Office to take a picture and have the president sign it. Tillerson never went.

Mattis continued serving as the defense secretary, but the president’s sudden decision in December 2018 to withdraw troops from Syria and abandon America’s Kurdish allies there — one the president soon reversed, only to remake 10 months later — inspired him to resign. Mattis saw Trump’s desired withdrawal as an assault on a soldier’s code. “He began to feel like he was becoming complicit,” recalled one of the secretary’s confidants.

The media interpretation of Mattis’ resignation letter as a scathing rebuke of Trump’s worldview brought the president’s anger to a boiling point. Trump decided to remove Mattis two months ahead of the secretary’s chosen departure date. His treatment of Mattis upset the secretary’s staff. They decided to arrange the biggest clap out they could. The event was a tradition for all departing secretaries. They wanted a line of Pentagon personnel that stretched for a mile applauding Mattis as he left for the last time. It was going to be “yuge,” staffers joked, borrowing from Trump’s glossary.

But Mattis would not allow it.

“No, we are not doing that,” he told his aides. “You don’t understand the president. I work with him. You don’t know him like I do. He will take it out on Shanahan and Dunford.”

Dunford stayed on until September 2019, retiring at the conclusion of his four-year term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. One of Dunford’s first public acts after leaving office was to defend a military officer attacked by Trump, Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council official who testified in the House impeachment inquiry about his worries over Trump’s conduct with Ukraine. Trump dismissed Vindman as a “Never Trumper,” but Dunford stepped forward to praise the Purple Heart recipient as “a professional, competent, patriotic, and loyal officer. He has made an extraordinary contribution to the security of our nation.”

By then, however, Trump had become a president entirely unrestrained. He had replaced his raft of seasoned advisers with a cast of enablers who executed his orders and engaged his obsessions. They saw their mission as telling the president yes.

*********

REMEMBER this is not happening in a vacuum.🤔 The Trump and minions have weakened Zelensky because of their shenanigans and made them more vulnerable to Putin’s Russia. Speaker Nancy Pelosi said it best, "All roads lead to Putin." It should be obvious to everyone that everything Trump touches turns to shit 💩.

Ukraine’s Premier Offers Resignation as Political Infighting Grows

In a leaked audio recording, Prime Minister Oleksiy Honcharuk appears to criticize the economic acumen of President Volodymyr Zelensky

By Anton Troianovski | Published Jan. 17, 2020, 8:20 a.m. ET | New York Times | Posted January 17, 2020 |

MOSCOW — President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine is already juggling multiple international crises: A war with Russia-backed separatists, an unwanted starring role in the impeachment drama gripping Washington, and tensions with Iran over the downing of Ukrainian jetliner.

Now he is facing growing political turbulence at home.

Prime Minister Oleksiy Honcharuk, an ally of Mr. Zelensky, tendered his resignation on Friday after leaks of clandestine audio recordings that appear to show Mr. Honcharuk criticizing the president’s knowledge of economics.

It was unclear whether Mr. Zelensky and the Ukrainian Parliament would accept Mr. Honcharuk’s resignation, or just take it as a public show of contrition and move on. But the developments indicated that Mr. Zelensky, a 41-year-old former comedian, faces a power struggle within Ukraine’s elite, despite landslide victories in the presidential election last spring and parliamentary elections last summer.

Mr. Honcharuk said the recordings of discussions with senior government officials had been doctored and leaked by people seeking to show that he and his team “don’t respect the president,” in hopes of impeding Mr. Zelensky’s efforts to fight systemic corruption.

“Many influential groups that aim to get access to financial flows would benefit from things appearing that way,” Mr. Honcharuk said on Friday in a statement announcing that he had submitted his resignation. “But this is not true.”

There was no clear indication as to who leaked the audio files, in which government officials discuss how to make a presentation about economic policy to Mr. Zelensky. A voice that sounds like Mr. Honcharuk’s can be heard describing Mr. Zelensky’s understanding of economics as “primitive.” The same voice also says, “I am a complete ignoramus in economics.”

Mr. Honcharuk said he was submitting his letter of resignation to Mr. Zelensky in order to “remove any doubt as to our respect for and trust in the president.”

Mr. Zelensky’s office said that the president had received Mr. Honcharuk’s letter and would consider it. For Mr. Honcharuk to leave his post, however, the Ukrainian Parliament would need to vote to dismiss him.

Even if Mr. Honcharuk remains in office, the leak of high-level government discussions hints at the intensity of political infighting in Ukraine, as Mr. Zelensky takes steps to follow through on a campaign pledge to take on corruption and the country’s entrenched interests.

Mr. Zelensky has promised to rein in the business tycoons known as oligarchs, who have long held outsize sway in Ukraine with influential media holdings and deep political ties. Parliament has approved a raft of anticorruption laws in recent months, but analysts say it is too early to judge the effectiveness of the efforts.

“Unfortunately, it is rather difficult to destroy criminal schemes that were built up over decades in the course of several months,” Mr. Honcharuk said.

Mr. Zelensky’s office issued a statement saying the president had ordered law enforcement to find out within two weeks who was responsible for the recordings, which it described as stemming from a meeting between Mr. Honcharuk and other government ministers and central bank officials.

“The unsanctioned surveillance and recording of conversations must not occur in the offices of the state authorities,” the president’s office said. “This is a question of national security.”

The government has also announced a criminal investigation into different allegations of secret surveillance. That inquiry was based on published text messages suggesting that a United States ambassador, Marie L. Yovanovitch, was being watched in Kyiv.

Maria Varenikova contributed reporting from Kyiv, Ukraine.

*********

Iran’s Supreme Leader Rebukes U.S. in Rare Friday Sermon

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told thousands of worshipers that God’s backing had allowed Iran to “slap the face” of the United States with a missile attack.

By Farnaz Fassihi and Ben Hubbard | Published Jan. 17, 2020 Updated 9:29 a.m. ET | New York Times | Posted January 17, 2020 |

Iran’s supreme leader struck a defiant tone in a rare public sermon on Friday, calling the United States an “arrogant power” and telling tens of thousands of chanting worshipers that God’s backing had allowed his country to “slap the face” of the United States.

In his first such address in eight years, the leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, sought to rally supporters and undermine critics after weeks of turbulence in the Middle East that brought Iran and the United States to the brink of war and prompted street protests in Iran over the accidental downing of a civilian jetliner by Iranian forces.

Ayatollah Khamenei offered only scant condolences to the families who lost relatives in the crash, and instead sought to project strength. He dismissed protesters as “stooges of the United States,” lauded Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s foreign operations chief who was killed in an American drone strike, and praised a retaliatory Iranian missile attack on United States forces in Iraq.

“These two weeks were extraordinary and eventful. Bitter and sweet events. Lessons we learned. The Iranian people went through a lot,” he said. “We delivered a slap to U.S.’s image as a superpower.”

He added that President Trump was a “clown” who only pretended to support the Iranian people but would “push a poisonous dagger” into their backs.

The event, choreographed to present an image of power and unity, skirted the accidental downing of a Ukrainian passenger plane on Jan. 8 by Iranian forces that killed all 176 people on board. A lone banner featuring an airplane hung between huge pictures of General Suleimani.

The downing of the jet — followed by three days of denials by Iranian officials — spurred a new wave of protests across the country that Iranian security forces have sought to quell with bullets and tear gas.

On Friday, the Ukrainian foreign minister, Vadym Prystaiko, said that an Iranian representative would travel to Ukraine next week and that Iran had agreed to hand over data and voice recorders from the downed plane after they had been examined by a team of experts from Canada, Iran and Ukraine.

Nearly 45 minutes into his sermon, Ayatollah Khamenei said his “heart burned” for the victims of the crash, but he quickly accused Iran’s enemies of seeking to capitalize on the tragedy to overshadow the killing of General Suleimani and the missile strikes on two bases that housed American troops in Iraq.

“As much as we were sad about the crash, our enemy was happy about it,” he said. “They thought they found an excuse to undermine the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and our armed forces and question the Islamic Republic.”

Forgoing Tehran University, where Ayatollah Khamenei usually speaks, he appeared for communal Muslim prayers on Friday at Tehran’s Grand Mosalla, a large complex used as a communal prayer center for Muslim holidays and as an arena for election campaigns.

Crowds streamed in several hours before his sermon began, including schoolchildren, government employees and worshipers from neighboring provinces who had been bused in from their local mosques.

The complex had been outfitted with political messages: American flags were spread on the floor in the entrances so that worshipers could tread on them. Uniformed soldiers handed out posters of General Suleimani and red headbands with “God is Great” written in Arabic.

President Hassan Rouhani, who is seen as a moderate, was in the front row as Ayatollah Khamenei spoke. Former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also sat nearby, as did Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps’ aerospace forces who has said units under his command were responsible for shooting down the plane. Iranian lawmakers, politicians and other citizens have called for his resignation over the downing.

Large banners inside the complex featured the face of General Suleimani and other men who were killed alongside him in United States drone strikes, ordered by Mr. Trump, near the Baghdad airport on Jan. 2. Other banners read, “Death to America.”

Ayatollah Khamenei, 80, Iran’s top political and religious official, delivers Friday sermons only at times of serious crisis that require his intervention. His last such sermon was in 2012, during the Arab Spring uprisings in the region. He also spoke in 2009, during widespread protests in Iran contesting the results of a presidential election that became known as the Green Movement.

In both instances, Ayatollah Khamenei’s reinforced the government’s hard line by ordering people off the streets.

*********

11 Americans Were Hurt in Iranian Strike, Military Says, Contradicting Trump

The servicemembers were treated for concussion symptoms after Iranian missiles hit air bases in Iraq last week. President Trump had said that “no Americans were harmed.”

By Russell Goldman | Published Jan. 17, 2020 Updated 9:08 a.m. ET | New York Times | Posted January 17, 2020 |

Eleven American troops were treated for concussions after Iranian missiles struck two Iraqi bases where the servicemembers were stationed, the military said on Thursday, contradicting earlier statements by President Trump that no Americans had been injured.

The Jan. 8 attack on bases near Baghdad and Erbil, Iraq, were launched in retaliation for the killing of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, a senior figure in Iran’s military, in a drone strike ordered by Mr. Trump.

“While no U.S. servicemembers were killed in the Jan. 8 Iranian attack on Al Asad air base, several were treated for concussion symptoms from the blast and are still being assessed,” Capt. Bill Urban, a spokesman for United States Central Command, said in a statement.

In a speech, Mr. Trump had said that no Americans were hurt in the strike, in which at least a dozen missiles were fired.

“I’m pleased to inform you the American people should be extremely grateful and happy,” the president said on Jan. 8. “No Americans were harmed in last night’s attack by the Iranian regime.”

Captain Urban said the injured troops were taken to American military sites in Germany and Kuwait to undergo screening, and that “when deemed fit for duty, the servicemembers are expected to return to Iraq.”

The lack of American deaths in the strikes was a welcome relief to American officials, who had feared General Suleimani’s killing could set off a larger regional conflict. By Jan. 9, the day after the strike, both countries had publicly said they would de-escalate direct military action.

The general’s death and the subsequent missile strike, however, set other events in motion, including the accidental downing of a Ukrainian passenger jet in Tehran by the Iranian military, in which 176 people were killed, and a resolution by the Iraqi Parliament calling for the expulsion of foreign forces from the country.

*********

In rare Friday sermon, Iran’s Khamenei says U.S. suffered blow to ‘superpower image’

By Erin Cunningham | Published Jan 17 at 9:49 AM EST | Washington Post | Posted January 17, 2020 |

ISTANBUL — Iran's supreme leader said in a rare sermon Friday that the United States suffered a "strong blow" to its "superpower image" following an Iranian strike on U.S. facilities in Iraq, and he urged Iranians to unite amid a worsening economic crisis and escalating tensions with the West.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's top political and religious authority, spoke at the Grand Mosalla mosque complex in central Tehran, where he led Friday prayers for the first time in eight years. His appearance was a nod to the multiple domestic and foreign troubles convulsing Iran, including fallout from the U.S. killing of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, commander of the elite Quds Force, in Iraq earlier this month.

“These are turning points, historical days. The Iranian people are resilient,” Khamenei said Friday amid anti-American chants from the congregation.

Large crowds filled the mosque and surrounding courtyard, and banners with likenesses of Soleimani were draped from its balconies, according to images shown on state television.

“Neither compromise nor surrender — only battle with America!” the crowd chanted.

“For a nation to have the ability to slap the face of the world’s bully, this shows the power of God,” Khamenei said, referring to Iran’s missile strikes on Iraqi military bases hosting U.S. troops on Jan. 8. The barrages, which caused damage but injured fewer than a dozen Americans, were in retaliation for Soleimani’s death, Iranian officials said.

“It was a blow to the United States militarily,” Khamenei said of the attack. “But what matters more is that it was a blow to America’s superpower image. This blow was the strongest of all.”

Leading the weekly sermon in Tehran is a task normally carried out by one of Khamenei’s loyal Shiite clerics. The last time the 80-year-old leader spoke at Friday prayers was in 2012.

At the time, Iran was under growing economic pressure due to international sanctions imposed because of its uranium-enrichment program.

Now Tehran is again suffering economic hardship as a result of a U.S. trade embargo. Iran also faces censure from European nations over its moves away from a 2015 nuclear deal, following a U.S. decision to abandon the agreement in 2018.

This week, Britain, France and Germany formally launched a process that could trigger European sanctions on Iran and lead to the accord’s eventual collapse. The deal curbed Iran’s atomic energy activities in exchange for major sanctions relief.

Khamenei said in his address that Iran was open to negotiations with other nations, except the United States. Still, he criticized Britain, France and Germany as “U.S. puppets” and warned against trusting European negotiators.

“They cover their cast iron hand with a velvet glove,” he said.

At home, Iran is also grappling with a flagging economy and sporadic outbursts of unrest. Last week, Iranian officials admitted that the armed forces shot down a Ukrainian airliner they mistook for a hostile aircraft, killing all 176 people on board.

The disaster and the government’s mishandling of the investigation prompted protests in Tehran and other cities. Khamenei downplayed the demonstrations in his remarks.

Instead, he thanked Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the security branch responsible for the crash, for “offering explanations” of what happened.

“We need to follow up,” he said. “It’s important to follow up, but what matters more is preventing such an incident from happening again.”

*********

11 U.S. troops were hurt in the Iranian missile strike, reversing assurances of no injuries

By Louisa Loveluck and Alex Horton | Published January 17 at 9:36 AM EST | Washington Post | Posted Jan 17, 2020

BAGHDAD — Eleven U.S. troops were injured following the Jan. 8 Iranian strikes on a base in Iraq, defense officials said Thursday, reversing assurances from President Trump and the Pentagon that no Americans had been hurt.

Those troops are still being assessed for concussion symptoms following the blast, Navy Capt. Bill Urban, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, said in a statement. Eight U.S. troops were evacuated to a U.S. base in Germany, he said, and the other three were sent to Camp Arifjan in Kuwait.

“When deemed fit for duty, the service members are expected to return to Iraq,” Urban said.

The missile barrage last week against the sprawling Ain al-Asad air base in western Iraq left deep craters and the crumpled wreckage of living quarters and a helicopter launch site. At least two soldiers were thrown through the window of a meters-high tower.

U.S. officials disclosed numerous concussions as early as Jan. 13 but did not announce their severity or the evacuations until Defense One, a news website focusing on national security, reported those details. At least two dozen soldiers were treated for concussions at the base, a U.S. official said.

The acknowledgment is a departure from initial reports from defense officials and the president, who described as inconsequential the effects of the missile salvos launched in retaliation for a U.S. strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad.

“No Americans were harmed in last night’s attack by the Iranian regime. We suffered no casualties. All of our soldiers are safe, and only minimal damage was sustained at our military bases,” Trump said soon after the attack.

But concussions are not always as immediately evident as shrapnel or gunshot wounds, and in the ensuing days, U.S. troops were assessed for blast injuries. The 11 evacuated were sent for further care and screening “in an abundance of caution,” Urban said.

It is not clear when the personnel were evacuated. On Jan. 12, four days after the attack, Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper described damage to facilities and equipment but offered assurances that there were “no casualties.” Casualties are typically described by the U.S. military as personnel both wounded and killed.

The attacks came in waves for more than an hour and a half. The air turned warm as light filled the night sky and shock waves ripped through the air, soldiers said in interviews, and the impact sent door frames deeper into the ground.

In the aftermath of the attack, Army Lt. Col. Tim Garland said he had combed through the damage assessments with skepticism, believing it was impossible that no soldiers had been killed.

“We all know that the initial report is always somewhat inaccurate. . . . I personally almost lost two of my soldiers,” Garland told reporters at the base, describing how a blast as far as 50 yards from their position blew them out of a guard tower.

“How they survived that, I have no idea. It’s an absolute miracle,” he said. The base hosts about 2,000 troops, 1,500 of them from the U.S.-led coalition.

Commanders placed the base on lockdown at 11 p.m. on Jan. 8 following initial warnings of an attack. Then, before 1:30 a.m., a staff weather officer monitoring radar in the tactical operations center detected an imminent ballistic missile strike.

Soldiers scrambled in response. Nonessential personnel who were not already inside bunkers were sent out to run for cover, said Army Chief Warrant Officer Alex Bender. The staff weather officer closed the door behind him, Bender said, right before an explosion tore through the night.

“I’d just sent him to a bunker when the first round impacted,” Bender said. “I thought: ‘I’ve just killed him.’ ”

Inside the operations room, Bender lay beneath his desk as everything seemed to fall — pin boards, lamps, shards of glass.

The all-clear came shortly before sunrise, and as troops stepped into the open, they passed around cellphones so that people could inform their families that they were safe.

Although there was some speculation that the attacks were designed to avoid casualties, commanders at the base believe that the strikes were intended to kill U.S. troops.

______

Horton reported from Washington.

*********

[biofunmy]

Fear of Intensifying Trade War Ricochets Through Economy

Fears of an escalating trade war between the United States and China ricocheted through the American economy on Tuesday, sending stocks down sharply and prompting businesses large and small to brace for fallout.

For months, investors and companies had been lulled into a sense of security that the world’s two largest economies appeared to be getting closer to a deal to resolve their battle. That calm was shattered this week when the Trump administration threatened to impose a new round of tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese products.

A delegation of Chinese leaders is preparing to travel to Washington for talks later this week, and Trump administration officials pledged to try to get trade negotiations back on track. But it is unclear whether the two sides can defuse the newest tensions.

After financial markets closed on Monday, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Robert Lighthizer, the United States trade representative, emphasized that President Trump’s threats were not idle.

The market reaction was swift. On Tuesday, the S&P 500 index dropped 1.65 percent, its second straight daily decline.

That spoiled what had been a jubilant mood in the markets. In the first four months of 2019, the S&P 500 soared 17.5 percent, the index’s best start to a year since 1987. Investors shook off concerns that the global economy was slowing, that the Federal Reserve would raise interest rates and that the trade battle between the United States and China would drag on.

“We had all of those more or less resolved,” said Evan Brown, a markets strategist at UBS Asset Management. “We had the Fed become a lot more dovish. We had growth stabilize. And we had what everyone thought was the trade war moving toward a healing phase.”

Some experts said the market’s hot streak this year, along with consistently robust data about the health of the United States economy, might be emboldening Mr. Trump to ratchet up the trade dispute with China.

“He’s never had better cards dealt to him to push China hard than right now,” said Michael Purves, chief global strategist at brokerage firm Weeden & Company. “There’s clearly the risk that he’s going to push this into Friday and beyond.”

Talks are racing against a deadline. The Trump administration is threatening to raise the tariff on roughly $200 billion of Chinese imports to 25 percent, from 10 percent, on Friday.

The administration doubled down after Chinese negotiators walked back commitments, including how the deal would be enforced. They particularly objected to how Mr. Trump’s advisers wanted to codify it, people familiar with the talks said.

The administration wanted the text of the agreement to specify that some of changes that China had promised would be made in Chinese law. But Chinese negotiators insisted that the changes would be carried out through regulatory and administrative actions by the Chinese government, and not cemented in place through legislation in the National People’s Congress.

In a briefing on Tuesday, a Chinese government spokesman did not directly address the American accusations, but said that raising tariffs would not resolve any problems and that China was continuing to negotiate in good faith.

The growing friction led investors and business owners to steel themselves for greater turbulence. On Tuesday, investors battered shares of companies that rely directly or indirectly on international trade and the Chinese economy.

Caterpillar and Deere, industrial equipment makers with large markets in China, dropped 2.3 percent and 1.5 percent. Boeing, one of the United States’ largest exporters, dropped about 4 percent. Shares of semiconductor companies sank more than 2 percent.

In China, share prices plunged as much as 6 percent on Monday after Mr. Trump’s initial threat. They recovered only a small part of those losses on Tuesday.

Brock Silvers, the chief executive of Kaiyuan Capital, an investment management and advisory firm in Shanghai, said there was little optimism that Vice Premier Liu He, who will lead China’s delegation to the United States this week, could persuade the Trump administration to delay the latest increase in tariffs, at least initially.

“Markets had expected a quick agreement, and now seem shocked by the possibility of a prolonged economic conflict,” Mr. Silvers said.

A parade of United States trade associations sounded alarm bells this week that a new round of tariffs risked disrupting their industries, harming the economy and raising prices for consumers.

The auto industry, for example, is worried that tariffs will make imported car parts more expensive, and that China will put retaliatory tariffs on American-made cars sold in China, said John Bozzella, the president of Global Automakers, which represents international car companies.

“Our concern is, as we go back into a phase of tit-for-tat tariffs, that the auto industry would face some significant pain,” Mr. Bozella said.

Tariffs would also hurt the chemicals industry, which depends on China for several chemicals that are not available anywhere else and are critical to American manufacturing, said Cal Dooley, the president of the American Chemistry Council.

“The risks of continuing to use tariffs as a negotiating tactic with China are simply too high — and any potential benefits still unclear,” Mr. Dooley said.

Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s former chief strategist, praised the president on Tuesday for daring to anger big companies by standing up to China.

“This is the biggest move of his presidency — to break ranks with other administrations and confront China’s economic war with America,” Mr. Bannon said.

But not just giant industries could be walloped by a new round of tariffs on Chinese products.

Tiffany Williams, owner of the Luggage Shop of Lubbock in Texas, was already hurting this year from the first phase of duties. They led to a roughly 10 percent increase in the price of the travel bags and accessories that her store sells. Ms. Williams had responded by raising her prices. That, she said, led some customers to shy away from buying high-end bags — which now cost more than $400 each, up from about $370 — and instead buy cheaper luggage.

This week, Ms. Williams said, she started getting calls from wholesalers warning that prices will go up again if Mr. Trump makes good on his threat to increase tariffs on Chinese imports.

“It’s very concerning,” said Ms. Williams, whose grandfather opened the shop in 1951. “It will change what consumers are ready to buy from us.” As she waits to assess the damage, she said, she is holding off on hiring more workers.

Delta Children in New York, which sells cribs that it imports from China, swallowed most of the costs stemming from the first round of tariffs, the company’s president, Joe Shamie, said. He said he had increased prices to retailers by only about 3 percent.

A new round of tariffs? “We can’t absorb them,” said Mr. Shamie, who described his company as the world’s largest seller of cribs. “Our prices will go up drastically.”

The average price of a crib is between $200 and $250, but prices will top $300 if the higher tariffs are enacted, most likely leading some families to forgo buying a new crib, he said.

Delta Children employs 350 workers. If crib sales decline because of the tariffs, Mr. Shamie said, he will have to consider layoffs.

Sahred From Source link Business

from WordPress http://bit.ly/2PQZvrD via IFTTT

[8964vv-blog]

THE DEATH OF WAHG JIAN AND THE TRUTH BEHIND HNA GROUP

PRESS BRIEFING BY MILES GUO

INTRODUCTION TO BRIEFING BY STEVEN K. BANNON

MILES GUO TO ANNOUNCE RETAINING ALEX SPIRO OF QUINN EMANUEL

TO COMMENCE ACTION AGAINST HNA GROUP AND RELATED PARTIES

INVITATION

Dear Mr. Mrs.

You are cordially invited to attend this Press Briefing on Tuesday November 20. 2018

at the Pierre, a Taj Hotel (New York) in the Cotillion Room. We thank you in advance

for your support. Everything is just beginning!

LOCATION

COTILLION ROOM

2nd Floor

The Pierre a Taj Hotel)

2 E 61st St & 5th Ave, New York

PROGRAM

8.30 am Security Check (free Continental Breakfast in the Regency Room)

10:00 10:15 am Steve Bannon introduction to briefing

10.15 10:45 am Miles Guo briefing

10.45 12:00 pm Q & A

12:00 pm End of conference (free lunch in Regency Room)

PLEASE NOTE

To thank all supporters around the world. refreshments will be provided

Bring your press pass and other relevant documents, to register at reception desk.

In order to Facilitate the event arrangement. please respond by 5:00 pm on November 18th

providing your information and contact to one of the following media platforms:

EMAIL pressconference@guo.media

GUO MEDIA: @PressConference

TEL/WHATSAPP/ TELEGRAM SIGNAL: +1 (3321203-1589

[magicwebsitesnet]

Nature Wilbur Ross Changes Story on Discussions of Citizenship Question for Census

Nature Wilbur Ross Changes Story on Discussions of Citizenship Question for Census Nature Wilbur Ross Changes Story on Discussions of Citizenship Question for Census http://www.nature-business.com/nature-wilbur-ross-changes-story-on-discussions-of-citizenship-question-for-census/

Nature

Image

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said he discussed adding a citizenship question to the census with Stephen K. Bannon, the president’s former adviser.CreditCreditErin Schaff for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has shifted his explanation for adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, saying he now recalls discussing it with Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist, according to court documents filed Thursday.

Mr. Ross, who faces a court order to provide a deposition to the plaintiffs in a lawsuit seeking to strip the question from the questionnaire, told a congressional committee earlier this year that he had only talked about the question with Justice Department officials to determine its legality.

Mr. Ross now says Mr. Bannon suggested that he contact Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state whom Mr. Trump appointed to a commission to investigate his unsubstantiated claims that millions of illegal immigrants cast ballots for Hillary Clinton in 2016. The panel was later disbanded, and Mr. Kobach is currently the Republican candidate for governor of Kansas.

Mr. Bannon, whose first name is misspelled as “Steven” in government documents, “called Secretary Ross in the Spring of 2017 to ask Secretary Ross if he would be willing to speak” to Mr. Kobach, according to a document filed by Justice Department lawyers representing Mr. Ross.

It is not clear if Mr. Ross followed up on the suggestion. Calls to Mr. Bannon, who left the White House over a year ago, were not immediately returned.

A spokesman for Mr. Ross said he did not change his version of events but was quoted out of context in coverage about his testimony in March.

“Secretary Ross was responding to a question about an R.N.C. campaign email, not a direct question about the citizenship question,” said the spokesman, Kevin Manning.

But the transcript of the exchange indicates unambiguously that Mr. Ross was asked specifically about the “citizenship question.”

The new details were added “for the sake of completeness,” the secretary’s lawyers wrote.

“Secretary Ross’s story keeps changing, which is exactly why he needs to sit for a deposition. The public deserves answers on the record about who made this decision, when, and why,” said Dale Ho, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, which is a plaintiff in the case.

Immigrant and voting rights groups claim that the addition of the question is intended to discourage immigrants, especially Hispanics, from registering with the census. The decennial count, overseen by the Commerce Department, is used to determine electoral boundaries as well as a host of government programs and benefits.

The lawsuit challenging the addition of the question was filed by New York and other states, as well as localities and advocacy groups. They argue that asking about citizenship would “fatally undermine” the accuracy of the census because both legal and undocumented immigrants might refuse to participate in it.

On March 20, Mr. Ross told the House Appropriations Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Subcommittee that the insertion of the question had been initiated “solely” by officials at the Justice Department, with no involvement from officials in the White House.

“Has the president or anyone in the White House discussed with you or anyone on your team about adding the citizenship question?” asked Representative Grace Meng, Democrat of New York.

“I am not aware of any such,” Mr. Ross testified.

Discrepancies in his account of the drafting of the question “have placed the credibility of Secretary Ross squarely at issue,” Judge Jesse M. Furman, of the Federal District Court in Manhattan, wrote last month in ordering the deposition to go forward.

Judge Furman found that Mr. Ross probably had unique firsthand knowledge of key facts. Indeed, he said, three of his aides had testified that only Mr. Ross could answer certain questions.

On Tuesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit agreed that Mr. Ross could be deposed in the case, rejecting the Justice Department’s argument that his reasons for adding the question were irrelevant. The court acknowledged that depositions of high-ranking officials are rare. But it said there are exceptions, particularly when the officials have knowledge not available elsewhere.

Later on Tuesday, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg granted a temporary stay of the depositions of Mr. Ross and John Gore, a Justice Department official. The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on whether the depositions should proceed.

A version of this article appears in print on

, on Page

A

14

of the New York edition

with the headline:

New Detail on Origin of Census Citizenship Question

. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Read More | https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/12/us/politics/wilbur-ross-commerce-census-citizenship.html |

Nature Wilbur Ross Changes Story on Discussions of Citizenship Question for Census, in 2018-10-13 02:42:19