Not too long ago, reports surfaced that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had nearly resigned at some point over the summer over quarrels with the president on our policies toward Qatar and Iran among other things. It became known that Tillerson had referred to the president as “a moron,” which the Secretary never denied. Naturally, all of that news was accompanied by rumors that Tillerson would soon quit or be forced out of his position.
Yet, there was some rather serious pushback against the idea that Tillerson would be fired. John Hudson of BuzzFeed News reported that any attempt to axe Tillerson would come at a heavy cost to the president due to a suicide pact:
In recent weeks, Tillerson’s top aides have expressed increasing exasperation over questions about the secretary’s fate. Their view is that, yes, Tillerson has been frustrated by the president’s tweets and fights over staffing decisions, but has no intention of leaving his job.
One US official expressed confidence in Tillerson’s status due to a so-called “suicide pact” forged between Defense Secretary James Mattis, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, and Tillerson, whereby all three cabinet secretaries vow to leave in the event that the president makes moves against one of them.
Maybe this suicide pact never existed. Or maybe it is no longer operative. There’s no mention of it in today’s breaking stories about Tillerson’s imminent demise.
According to the reports, chief of staff John Kelly has crafted a plan that would see Tillerson replaced at the State Department by CIA director Mike Pompeo. In turn, Pompeo would be replaced at Langley by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas.
This is sure to unsettle the intelligence community and the foreign policy establishment. Pompeo is already seen as too political for the CIA, but he’s a lamb in that category compared to the combative Senator Cotton.
Perhaps this is why the news is being presented as John Kelly’s decision. The New York Times says Kelly “developed the transition plan” but it’s “not immediately clear whether Mr. Trump has given final approval” to it. The Washington Post says “the plan, hatched by White House chief of staff John F. Kelly, is expected to be set in motion over the next few weeks, and has broad support within Trump’s inner circle,” but likewise won’t say whether Trump has signed off.
Clearly the White House is floating this rather than simply announcing it, and they want Kelly’s imprimatur to help ward off the expected backlash. On one level, it’s clear that Tillerson is going to go soon, one way or the other. Opponents of Pompeo and Cotton can’t seriously think that they can fight these moves by keeping Tillerson in place. The suicide pact no longer makes sense given that Tillerson doesn’t want to stay much past the new year.
It’s also difficult to oppose a president when he wants to fill key positions with people he trusts, and Pompeo has already been confirmed once by the Senate while Cotton is a member of the Senate, so defeating their confirmations would be a major uphill climb.
Still, I can’t think of any responsible person on either side of the political divide who will welcome these moves, mainly because both men are so obviously ill-suited for the positions they’d be filling.
We’ll have to watch carefully for the backlash. Defense Secretary James Mattis has a lot of juice but he probably won’t wage a frontal assault. If he attempts to cut this off, it will be subtle and have some deniability. He may not fight it at all if he concludes it’s a battle he has no prospect of winning, but we’ll then have to see how that sits with him. Will he start looking for the exit, too?
“ill suited…”
One of the salient features of Crackpot Cabinet (and TrumpWorld overall) is how remarkably ill-suited (not to say supremely unqualified) each Trumpite stooge is for the position they hold. It’s a feature, not a bug. Goldman Boy Mnuchin is the only one whose past could traditionally have predicted his position. (I continue to hold the traditional view that generals are not to be named “Defense” secretaries.)
As for Rexxon T, it’s not too far down the memory hole to remember Der Trumper crowing about his CEO alliance, haha. Yes, indeed, one “CEO” was too many!
The Big Picture, of course, is that the incompetent CEO of FailedNation, Inc. doesn’t have the sense (or ability) either to name stooges he can work with or hold onto them long enough for them even to memorize their functions and responsibilities. It’s all just a chaotic game of musical chairs, of “stirin’ the shit”, in the worst failed-CEO tradition—a talent which I will grant to Trumper, as his many failed biznesses make abundantly clear.
The question is when the last remaining allies of FailedNation will begin to understand that there is nothing to be gained by holding up their end of the bargain any longer and head for the rising Great Powers.
Why, it’s as if the incumbent president were deliberately engaged in the total destruction of the United States, internally and externally, as a functioning entity capable of interfering in a foreign adversary’s plans for expansion….
Obviously, Trump seeks to rebuild the national security institutions under Trumpism (obedience to his cult). This is more rabid an impulse because of the retired national security leadership who are still carrying water for Hillary Clinton. Cotton’s mission (being from Arkansas and so locally motivated) is to purge the Clinton influence from the CIA. That will pretty much incapacitate the intelligence community with the chaos and bureaucratic pushback from those who think their jobs will last longer than the Trump administration.
A similar process is likely envisioned for State. I don’t think that Pompeo will last long at State. My sense is that somehow he will be recycled into Congress or into a governorship somehow to set him on the Presidential bench as impeachment insurance. And so that Cotton can carry his wrecking crew to State.
A responsible opposition party would be already publicly discussing how to deal with the most expensive e national security establishment in the world in a deliberately set era of ballooning deficits. And will have a reorganization thoroughly talked through and ready to go when that opposition party (or coalition) retakes power. Silent policies can never be argued to become popular policies. A starting exercise would be to limit the cost of national security to $1000 per person and budget from there, then asking what sort of strategy would provide the US the same or better homeland security and what that would require in narrowing of the national interests that we can expect outside the homeland. It has been so long since there has been a public discussion of what we want national security to achieve. And a congruence between our stated motives and the way we project power.
Just like Sanders and Warren are advocating a Marshall Plan program to rebuild Puerto Rico after the departure of the FEMA wrecking crew (which IMO should see economic parity with US states as its goal), there should be a parallel to the discussions that went on from the end of World War II until the enactment of the National Security Act of 1947 about re-architecting our national security institutions for a world of multi-polar powers that might look as strange as a NATO without the US and UK, a China-dominated Shanghai Cooperation Organization that includes Russia, and a India-dominated Commonwealth Organization that still retains Britain, Australia, and New Zealand.
The wrecking crew is thinking big. The opposition must think bigger and in a direction that public will want after experiencing the wrecking crew.
You are correct that looming deficits and ballooning debt will, sooner or later, force a reckoning on defense budgets. You also make a fair point that Democrats need to get out in front of these issues, offering real policy options.
I have long argued that the Democrats should have a system of shadow secretaries, much like the UK. Some set of Democratic leaders could name a shadow national security team to elaborate on their party’s plans when they regain a majority in Congress and control of the White House. In some ways, Brookings, CSIS, and CNAS fulfill that role, but without the imprimatur of the party.
However, I urge the Democrats to use some tactical discretion when discussing defense budgets. Openly advocating a 50% cut in defense spending (which your $1000 per capita would achieve, if my math is correct) is a good way to drive moderates and national security types away from the Democratic party. It would certainly alienate most of the senior defense establishment, who depend on contractors for cozy retirement deals. I think many good junior officers could be convinced to support this, because real reform might open new opportunities for them. For example, buying cheaper aircraft in greater quantities provides more squadron command slots.
With that proviso, I repeat my assertion that making this a Democratic plank is foolhardy at this time. At the risk of sounding like some of the more feverish posters on this site, I fear that we are headed for some type of constitutional crisis.
I can imagine, for example, a President essentially barricading himself in the White House, ignoring multiple court orders and arrest warrants, but a Congress that steadfastly refuses to impeach.
In such a situation, military officers may have to interpret the spirit and letter of the Constitution for themselves. Their firmness in placing norms and traditions above the whims of a petty king might make the difference in resolving such a crisis. However, they are fragile, fallible humans, just like the rest of us – so do you want to cloud their judgement by hanging a 50% cut in defense spending over them?
With regards to the rest of your post, you remind me of why I often feel alone and unloved in the Democratic Party. A few of us still believe that the US has been a force for good in the postwar world. The system of alliances we constructed, while imperfect, contained the Soviet Union and Maoist China. The historical records recovered after the end of the Cold war show that both of these were, truly, “evil empires.”
I am aware of Pinochet, and Somoza, and the coup in Iran. I am aware that the Chamber of Commerce supported the deindustrialization of the US to the benefit of China and the Fortune 500. I do not claim our foreign policy is always wise, or humane. But by the standards of history, we are a most benevolent empire.
Now, you advocate the wholesale retreat of the US from our alliances and commitments around the world, essentially turning half of the globe over to the brutal kleptocracies in Beijing and Moscow. Perhaps there will be no other option, given our financial realities. In addition, much of academia in the US, and the global intelligentsia, has bought into the black legend of evil US imperialism.
So, I surrender. The new multi-polar arrangements you suggest may well come to pass. If that happens, I predict that the small-L liberals of Eurasia will lament the absence of US flags and footprints in their hemisphere, as they are crushed under the corporatist fascism of Beijing and Moscow.
I will continue to support Democrats, because the Republican Party has been taken over by lunatics. But the relentless desire in some wings of the Democratic Party to apologize for, and dismantle, US leadership in the world, is frustrating.
Of course, after Mr. Trump, there probably won’t be many alliances, or much global leadership, left to defend.
Jim Webb for President! Just kidding – sorry for the long post.
I have no qualm with this analysis , short and to the point
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/everything-falls-away-but-the-racism
Fundamentally correct. And like the post-Civil War cotton barons, it covers the graft of public funds.
The tax cut cum “entitlement reform” heist is by far the biggest so far, but the graft of FEMA funds from Puerto Rico relief and recovery funds is staggeringly larger than what we’ve experienced in the past. It has the appearance of a refusal to apply due diligence.
But even the graft is motivated by racist discrimination in the due process of the law. And trumpeted as so to the world.
White Supremacy is one of Trumps core beliefs. Guess why Puerto Rico and the Dreamers continue to suffer?
Off topic, but I’m sweating bullets over here.
How much of Collins waffling is kabuki for her to actually sign with a few tweaks? And do you think the GOP has the votes to pass this Ragnarok bill?
BooMan wrote awhile ago that he thinks this bill will pass the Senate, where it might die in the reconciliation process. Collins appears to be showing her ass. So is Murkowski.
Donor intimidation applies to both parties. Some politicians are just more enthusiastic about it than others. Collins seems not enthusiastic at all but, like McCain, regularly rolls over. Murkowski does not want the agony of running another independent campaign when billionaires are whipping states.
I think the tax bill is a done deal. At least the stock market thinks so as the Dow is up over 300 points today.
It is far from a done deal, although it’s looking like it will get through the Senate on the first pass.
Do you see some provision they won’t be able to reconcile? I thought SALT would be a stumbling point but the bills seem pretty close as they are.
On a scale of 1 to Donald Rumsfeld, how bad is Cotton?
Off the scale.
Try a grunt who thinks he knows it all.
Tom Cotton always reminds me of Alfred Hitchcock’s Norman Bates from PSYCHO.
It’s at elebenty.
Once again, the one salient fact in all of these seemingly stupid moves is that each one furthers the confusion in the tripartisan centrist federal structure. (DemRats, RatPubs and those unallied with either party…the lifer/worker rats who really run the bureaucracy while the so-called bosses pose at their desks, phone in hand.) This also goes for the centrist political and media opposition’s reactions to it. No one knows what the fuck to do, so no one really does anything except wait for the ongoing storm(s) to die down. All the while of course impotently sniping at the ruckus while collecting massive clickbait monies.
Now all of this might quite possibly be a set of truly ignorant moves…a grand, accidental pileup on the freeway of the U.S. government courtesy of an incompetent president…or it may not be. Sometimes I envision Trump receiving…from some supposedly menial night worker at the White House…disappearing ink/”This message will explode in 30 seconds”-type missives from Steve Bannon well after midnight, said missives describing in great detail what moves need to be made in order to further cripple the government.
Other times I think “Naahhhh…Bannon Doesn’t need do things like that, because he has succeeded in imposing a a perfectly reflexive idiot in the White House who will choose the right “wrong” move every time anyway.”
Whatever is up…including Bannon being a red herring in the first place…it’s all about crashing the governmental structure, especially those parts of it that have shown a desire to resist Trump.
We shall see how well that structure holds up when the first real storm happens…a 9/11-level attack, a major disruption of the societal system no matter what the cause or a major war with a power like North Korea.
We shall see.
My own bet?
The structural house of cards will blow away, leaving only the military fairly intact.
Watch.
AG
IF the “suicide pact” story is real, today’s move might be trying to trigger it. And then the top of Defense gets are really loyal Trummpist instead of a guy trying to be one of those chiefs of staff that history books love because they cross three violently replaced regimes.
The military is currently united through its norms. A racist, mistogynist, homophobic, reckless commander in chief will want to purge the military of “disruptive elements”. We don’t even know how many white, male, straight soldiers will take on that mission after 60 years of desegregation and more recent training supporting changes in the Clinton and Obama administrations, we don’t know how many might join the targets of those changes in opposition to being removed from their “career of choice”. Which means that we don’t know the outcome of a grassroots level action that will certainly be interpreted by the powers that be as a mutiny.
Is that likely? Who knows? That’s what “being in uncharted waters” means.
We are well beyond politics as usual.
You write:
That we are.
AG
Just heard CNN say Manafort made some sort of deal. What o what could it ever be?
Bye Rex. Nice to know ya. Did you really think those guys in the suicide pact would follow you?
Rex’s life from noon today. “What’s that Mr Secretary? You want what? Yeah I’m busy just now Rex. Check it out for yourself”.
Cotton is former army captain, as is Pompeo according to Wikipedia. So one less billionaire, one more military man?
Have any of the generals been kicked out or resigned? Or are they just accumulating?
That would be a soft coop. All the top civilian jobs in US gov filled with military. The military is free to run wars as they see fit as there is no longer a civilian in charge of anything connected to US realtions with the world. So, is the donald aware or is he that dumb?
Eh? So much for how CEOs are supposed to be THE BESTEST EVAH for “running” the gubmint. So much for Trump crowing about how Tillerson was such a yuuugely great choice for SoS.
Trump can’t seem to wait to get rid of this CEO and replace him with lesser stooges who’ll probably be more willing to avoid calling Trump a “moron” in public. That apprears to be the main hiring criterion for Trump.
No doubt, once one year is up (something that needs to happen for Rexxon to avoid some big tax bill), Rexxon will be more than relieved to move onto something, anything, else, other than this insanity.
Howard Fineman on MSNBC this afternoon said his sources are telling him that this circles back to Mueller’s investigation.
His sources believe that by putting two Trump supporters who have both been skeptical if not protective of Trump’s role with Russia, could take office on recess appointments and then steer this into a national security reason to shut down Mueller’s investigation.
Smart plan, I am sure it is not Trump’s idea.
Fineman said it was a Kelly concoction.
Now hearing that the Tillerson shakeup story was a story generated from Trump simply to shame Tillerson and “send him a message” as Josh Marshall puts it. He’s not planning to dump Tillerson at all (where would they get another secretary so willing to dismantle the whole department?), just communicating his displeasure. Playing the media like he used to do with Howard Stern and the Post Page Six.
How the hell can anyone with an ounce of self-respect continue to work for him? When — if ever — will venality and agenda-driven complaisance collapse into “Fuck this shit, I’m outta here!” at last?