Archive for 2017

POLITICO: Breitbart’s war on McMaster bites Bannon.

The attacks on McMaster have put Bannon in an especially awkward position with his new boss, retired Marine general John Kelly, who has been increasingly defensive of McMaster, a longtime friend and fellow general, according to interviews with 10 administration officials and people close to the White House. McMaster, who pushed Bannon off the National Security Council principals’ committee, hasn’t spoken to Bannon in weeks, one senior administration official said.

Trump’s chief strategist has been suspected in the past of orchestrating stories against his colleagues in Breitbart, which he ran before joining Trump’s campaign last August. Kelly has told West Wing staff that he won’t tolerate the infighting or anonymous comments to the press that characterized the tenure of Kelly’s predecessor Reince Priebus.

The continuing flood of negative stories targeting McMaster has served as a constant reminder that the problem was bigger than Priebus, who resigned two weeks ago.

As Ron Radosh asked earlier this week, “Will President Trump Stand with the Bannonites, or the Generals?”

HE’S NOT WRONG: Trump Calls Former Admin ‘Weak and Ineffective’ Where North Korea Is Concerned.

During a brief statement given after a security briefing on Thursday, President Donald Trump touched on the subject of North Korea, specifically where previous administrations were concerned.

Initially, Trump was asked by a reporter if a preemptive strike was on the table. The president responded: “We don’t talk about that. I never do.”

From there, he launched into a commentary on previous presidential administrations and how they handled U.S.-North Korea relations.

“I’m not like the other administration that would say we’re going into Mosul in four months,” Trump said. “I don’t talk about it. We’ll see what happens.”

Pressed by the reporter further, Trump was asked about possible negotiations with the socialist state.

While he said that the U.S. will “always consider negotiations,” he took the opportunity to get a dig in on his predecessors.

“They’ve been negotiating now for 25 years,” he started.

He continued: “Look at Clinton. He folded on the negotiations. He was weak and ineffective. You look what happened with Bush, you look what happened with Obama. Obama, he didn’t even want to talk about it.”

People have been kicking the can down the road for 25 years. Now we’re down the road.

THIS SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN 1979: U.S. To Designate the IRGC, Affiliates as Terrorists.

President Donald Trump signed wide-ranging Congressional sanctions against Iran, North Korea and Russia last week. Known as the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, the law’s Iran section requires the president to extend a terrorism designation pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13224 to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its foreign agents and affiliates by Nov. 1.

The milestone marks the first instance the US will designate the military branch of a foreign country for terrorism.

The law’s Sec. 105 (3) states, “The IRGC, not just the IRGC-QF [the Qods Force, the Guard’s extraterritorial branch], is responsible for implementing Iran’s international program of destabilizing activities, support for acts of international terrorism, and ballistic missile program.”

E.O. 13224 is an authority aimed at freezing the assets of terrorists and their supporters, while isolating them from the US financial and commercial systems, according to Treasury.

All the talk was about Russia, but the more meaningful action may have been taken against Iran.

QUESTION ASKED: Could Trump’s hard line work on North Korea?

Niall Stanage:

The basic thrust of that campaign, in the minds of Team Trump, is to pressure China by raising the specter of instability in the region unless North Korea curbs its nuclear program. The prospect of such instability would concern China because it would call its No. 1 goal — maintaining its economic expansion — into question.

Even some Republicans who have at times been critical of Trump seemed to endorse that approach.

“China should have two options,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told “CBS This Morning” on Wednesday. “Deal with the nut job in your backyard or realize there will be a war in your backyard.”

Independent experts who are broadly sympathetic to Trump’s approach argue that his rhetoric provides an important measure of clarity — even as critics worry that it is raising the temperature to a dangerous level.

“No matter who you are, you understand the president means business in North Korea,” said Harry Kazianis, director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest, a think tank established by former President Richard Nixon. “The dictator in Pyongyang knows he means business as well. There is no mistaking what he is talking about here.”

Others noted that the more modulated approaches favored by other recent presidents have not proven successful.

As has been previously noted, you can always count on Americans to do the right thing – after we’ve tried everything else.

IS THIS THE MONTH OF SJWs BEHAVING BADLY? Being Free.

I WISH I THOUGHT ALL THIS SUDDEN ATTENTION TO CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS ON POWER WOULD LAST UNDER THE NEXT DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT: Can Trump unleash “fire and fury” on North Korea without congressional authorization? “With notable exceptions, such as the Korean War, presidents have generally sought advance congressional authorization for large-scale military actions comparable to the one now under discussion. That is what happened in the cases of the Vietnam War, the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan, and both Iraq wars. Unilateral presidential military actions typically involved situations where the enemy attacked or declared war first (as in the 1989 Panama intervention) or cases where the expected military action was brief and on a very small scale, involving little or no combat (as in the case of President Clinton’s 1994 intervention in Haiti, among many other examples). Unfortunately, this norm has frayed in recent years, in considerable part because President Obama initiated two large-scale wars without congressional authorization – his 2011 intervention in Libya and the still-ongoing war against ISIS. In January, I warned that these precedents were a dangerous ‘loaded gun’ that Obama left to Trump, and urged Congress to reassert its war powers. Whether it will actually do so remains unclear.”