Mediaboss Marketing

Every year since 1896, on or near George Washingtons birthday, a member of the U.S. Senate has read aloud the first presidents farewell address on the Senate floor. The party of the reader alternates every year.

Lets hope the assembled senators are particularly attentive this year.

We cant know, of course, what George Washington would make of our current president or the state of partisan politics in America. But we can make a pretty good guess.

Lets start by considering Washingtons farewell address. The first presidents final message to the American people is among the most eloquent statements of American values and our political culture ever written. It is not as widely taught today as it was during the first century of the nations history, and when it is thought of, it is most often remembered for Washingtons admonition against foreign entanglements. But perhaps even more important today are his arguments against despotism and factionalism, or what today we would call party loyalty.

At the time Washington wrote his address, the presidency wasnt constrained by term limits. Yet, immensely popular as he was, he decided to retire and not seek a third term He was humble about his considerable contributions to building the new nation.

Washington thought that both patriotism and a due regard for the peculiar value of his services should lead him to the shade of retirement from public life. And his wisdom on the need for a norm of presidential retirement has echoed through our history so much so that Washingtons judgment has now been enshrined in the Constitution as a mandate. There can be little doubt that Washington would see the push by President Trumps most rabid supporters for his perpetual service (as in the hashtags #Trump4Eva or #KingTrump) as anathema.

Republican Senators, also, would be targets of his ire. Before the Senate trial Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) made it clear that he didnt intend to be an impartial juror in the impeachment trial of Trump. As he said, I am trying to give a pretty clear signal I have made up my mind. Im not trying to pretend to be a fair juror here. His performance during the trial was true to his word.

To some degree, this sort of partisanship is not unexpected. But can we not hope for anything better? Facing much the same question at the end of his career, it is striking how prescient George Washington was and how sternly he warned against the raging partisanship he feared.

When Washington delivered his final address, political parties were in their infancy. Even then, he saw the dangers of division. As Washington put it, parties serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community.

Washington seems especially prescient in his warning against demagoguery and its link to factions and political parties, which he worried would over time become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

It wasnt a single party Washington condemned: It was the party system and the competition for power that he feared. As he put it, the alternate domination of one faction over another would eventually lead to despotism. He feared greatly [t]he disorders and miseries which result [and] gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Washington also predicted how a party leader would gain and keep power. At worst, he said, a party head agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, [and] foments occasionally riot and insurrection. [This] opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Surely that, too, echoes in todays heated Twitter-filled rhetoric.

Washingtons predictive pessimism was eerily accurate. But he also offered hope, calling us to our better natures and envisioning a government adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, [and] uniting security with energy.

Today, I think Washington would look at the party system and see his fears rather than his hopes realized. He would see a small minority faction of one of the parties, led by an unprincipled man dedicated to his own elevation and built on the ruins of public liberty. Were Washington to speak to the leaders of the Republican Party, to which I formerly belonged, he would warn: That way lies despotism.

Paul Rosenzweig was a deputy assistant secretary of Homeland Security in the George W. Bush administration. He is a senior fellow at the R Street Institute.

Link:
Op-Ed: George Washington has a warning for Donald Trump and all of us - Los Angeles Times

President Donald Trump said he will travel to South Carolina before the state's Feb. 29 Democratic presidential primary,setting up a potential messaging war between the White House and his Democratic rivals ahead of the vote.

Trump made the announcement Tuesday afternoon at Joint Base Andrews, where he took questions on the tarmac from Washington reporters before boarding Air Force One with U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

"I'll be going to South Carolina. They're working that out now," the president said of the potential visit, saying it will probably be Feb. 28, the day before the Saturday primary.

"Look, we have a big voice and we might as well use it," Trump said.

Joe Jackson, theRepublican National Committee'sSouth Carolina spokesman, could not confirm details of the trip but said Republicans would welcome the appearance.

"We're always happy to have the president in South Carolina," Jackson told The Post and Courier. "South Carolina went big for President Trump in 2016 and will do so again in 2020."

Trump has made a habit of making appearances in the early states holding Democratic presidential nominating contests as a means of both turning the spotlight on himself and upstaging his potential challengers.

So far, the president has made stops in both Iowa and New Hampshire. On Friday, Trump plans to travel to Nevada, which will be holding its caucus Saturday.

"We got more votes than any incumbent president in history, in Iowa and in New Hampshire," Trump said, adding, "I went the day before in both cases."

Trump's hints of a potential Palmetto State visit come one week after Vice President Mike Pence made a multi-stop swing through South Carolina on Thursday, which included headlining a Trump campaign fundraiser in Columbia and addressing The Citadel Corps of Cadets.

"I'm here for one reason, and one reason only: And that is that South Carolina and America need four more years of President Donald Trump," Pence said to applause at The Citadel Republican Society's annual Patriot Dinner.

During his public remarks in South Carolina last week, Pence made no mention of Trump's possible visit, but Pence did say he knew Trump would be "jealous" that he got to make the S.C. stop.

Should Trump be able to travel to South Carolina, he will arrive in a state that has all but cleared the way for him to receive all of the state's nominating delegates without contest.

The South Carolina Republican Party's executive committee in September voted to forgo their Republican presidential primary, citingcost as the top reason for scrapping it.

South Carolina is a traditionally Republican state. The governor, both chambers of the state Legislature, fiveof the states seven congressional districts, and both of its U.S. Senate seats are held by Republicans.

In the 2016 general election, Trump won 55 percent of the vote here.

Trump was also the victor in South Carolina's 2016 Republican presidential primary.

Reach Caitlin Byrd at 843-937-5590 and follow her on Twitter @MaryCaitlinByrd.

Read this article:
Donald Trump says he will travel to South Carolina before Democratic presidential primary on Feb. 29 - Charleston Post Courier

Steve Bannon, the brains behind Donald Trumps upset election victory, saw the danger posed by the cash cravings of the First Family. In Fire and Fury, Michael Wolff chronicled Bannon drawing a direct line between purported dark doings at Deutsche Bank and Jared Kushners brushes with the Mueller investigation: This is all about money laundering It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit.

But thats only half the story. Late last year, a federal appeals court sustained subpoenas issued by congressional committees to the German bank for Trumps financial records. Come June, the supreme court will probably rule on the enforceability of those demands together with other cases concerning Trumps tax returns just in time for political convention season. In other words, Deutsche remains relevant to the 2020 elections.

In Dark Towers: Deutsche Bank, Donald Trump, and an Epic Trail of Destruction, David Enrich delivers a master class in financial sleuthing. The New York Times financial editor follows the money, plows through paper and talks to dozens of people in the banks ecosystem. There are names, places and computer files. This is a first-rate read.

Dark Towers traces the banks arc from founding through the second world war to the present, excavates and analyzes Trumps relationship with his lender of last resort, and lays out the ties that bind Justin Kennedy, son of retired supreme court justice Anthony Kennedy, to the Trump family. In case anyone forgot, Brett Kavanaugh clerked for Kennedy pre, who interceded with Trump on Kavanaughs behalf.

Deutsche and its subsidiaries have faced an array of criminal and civil charges in the US and UK

Like a discordant melody that haunts disturbing lyrics, Dark Towers is woven with the life and the 2014 suicide of Bill Broeksmit, a former Deutsche executive. Broeksmit witnessed the banks growth, decline and brushes with the law. His death imparts to Enrichs book an air of mystery, crystalizing Deutsches descent and woes. The bank weighed on Broeksmit to the end.

He left an electronic paper trail. Val Broeksmit, his troubled son, found detailed information about what was going on deep inside the bank.

According to Enrich, there were minutes of board meetings. Financial plans. Indecipherable spreadsheets. Password-protected presentations. And evidence of his fathers misery.

In one email, the elder Broeksmit wrote: Hard to know how banks keep track of the hundreds of billions of dollars flowing through their pipes every day.

Sadly, Broeksmits death is not the only notable Deutsche suicide. Also in 2014, Charlie Gambino, an in-house bank lawyer, hanged himself at his home in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. At the time, Gambino was attempting to navigate Deutsche through its Libor rate-fixing nightmare.

This past November, Tom Bowers, a banker who worked on Trumps account, killed himself. Bowers was an Enrich source with firsthand knowledge of the banks $640m loan on Trump International Hotel & Tower, Chicago.

Deutsche and its subsidiaries have faced an array of criminal and civil charges in the US and UK. Money laundering, Russia and rate-fixing played outsized roles. After the Guardian reported on Dark Towers, Deutsche issued a semi-oblique confession: While elements of the narrative seem to be exaggerated to fit into a storyline, we have long acknowledged and sought to learn from our historical shortcomings.

After learning that the special counsel had subpoenaed Deutsches records, Trump reportedly wanted Robert Mueller fired

Going back in time, Deutsche was formed in 1870. It financed German industry. Think regional, not global. Along the way, it found the time to bankroll the Nazis and provide construction finance for Auschwitz.

With the fall of the Soviet Union it looked east as would the 45th president for new markets and opportunities. Among other things, the nexus between Deutsche, Trump and VTB, a Kremlin-favored bank, left House Democrats and Enrich puzzled. The author posits: Perhaps this was more than a coincidence.

According to the Mueller report, in the midst of Trumps bid for the Republican nomination Felix Sater, a Trump crony and former convict, repeatedly attempted to arrange for Michael Cohen, Trumps now-imprisoned personal lawyer, and candidate Trump, as representatives of the Trump Organization, to travel to Russia to meet with Russian government officials and possible financing partners.

In a 19 December 2015 email, Sater wrote: Invitations & Visas will be issued this week by VTB Bank to discuss financing for Trump Tower Moscow. Politically neither Putins office nor Ministry of Foreign Affairs [can] issue invite, so they are inviting commercially/business.

Dark Towers provides no conclusive evidence that Trumps funding originated in Russia. Executives denied such ties, Trump Moscow was not built and the redacted Mueller report lacks any mention of Deutsche even as it contains multiple references to VTB. Then again, in December 2017, after learning that the special counsel had subpoenaed Deutsches records, Trump reportedly wanted Mueller fired.

It would be generous to say that when it comes to Trump, where the truth lies is a mystery. Throughout the impeachment proceedings, Trump denied he had dispatched Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to dig for dirt on the Biden family. After acquittal by the Senate, the president admitted it to Geraldo Rivera.

As for Trumps bet on Kennedy and Kavanaugh, it appears to have paid off. In last summers much-awaited census case, Kavanaugh voted that the commerce department decision to add a citizenship question was subject to only minimal judicial review. The fact that the government had been less than forthcoming failed to sway either of Trumps appointees to the highest court.

With the Deutsche Bank subpoena headed for resolution in a matter of months, we may see history repeat itself. Regardless, Dark Towers is an excellent primer for what may well await.

Follow this link:
Dark Towers review: Deutsche Bank, Donald Trump and a must-read mystery - The Guardian

In a manufacturing plant in Dongying, Shandong province, workers are pumping out thousands of brake rotors every day. After spending two weeks touring this factory and a dozen others like it, its clear that Chinese employees on the factory floornot to mention Chinese corporate accountantsexpect to find customers for their products. They know consumers need what theyre producing, whether theyre in China, Europe, Southeast Asia, or, yes, America, whether America imposes tariffs or not.

This brings us to a hard fact: America is not going to win an unqualified, unambiguous total victory in the trade war with China. Chinese consumers and businesses are not hurting any worse than American ones, so we shouldnt hold out for Chinese capitulation to American demands. Rather, we should make limited demands and look for a quick resolution.

There are a number of reasons why tariffs are not having their intended effect on Chinese companies and consumersand why there has not been a corresponding benefit for American companies.

First and foremost, tariffs only serve to onshore manufacturing if there is a domestic manufacturing base ready to meet the sudden new demand for tariff-free goods. To be blunt, America does not have that capacity, and few places other than China do. Take the automotive aftermarket, my industry. In China, the parts and repair aftermarket is projected to reach $188 billion this year alone, and is expected to overtake the U.S. in 2030 in terms of overall market demand. China has built the capacity to serve both the domestic and global market in a way U.S. producers simply havent. For certain parts, like power steering components, there are no quality producers outside of China. When there are no non-Chinese suppliers, a tariff becomes little more than a glorified sales tax on American consumers. Chinese companies feel no effect.

Second, tariffs arent all that hard to circumvent. Many Chinese manufacturing companies are moving to other countries (besides the U.S.) to create their products in tariff-free or reduced tariff countries. Buying component parts or raw material in China and manufacturing them in Mexico is a less efficient way of doing business, surebut its not any harder on Chinese suppliers. Whether companies should be doing this is a separate question. But whether global companies are circumventing tariffs is no question at all. American consumers arent the winners hereinternational trade attorneys are.

Third, Chinese consumers are, unfortunately, used to paying duties on goods. For decades, theyve had to pay higher prices to support domestic manufacturers and state-run companies. This is, of course, a violation of WTO rules. Yet that doesnt change the fact that Chinese consumers are more able to weather the increased prices necessitated by a trade warsimply put, years of practice have helped them develop a higher threshold for pain.

Finally, the U.S. is not the only market for Chinese goods, nor its only supplier. As trade tensions ratcheted up with the U.S., China unilaterally lowered tariffs with other nations, fostering alternative markets for their goods and alternative suppliers for their consumers. Chinese companies are also focusing more on their domestic markets. The U.S. is not Chinas only market for trade and commerce.

This isnt to say the trade war will end in an unambiguous loss, either. Chinas economic growth is slowing, so the trade war has built some limited leverage. Ultimately, the Chinese government wants the trade war to end.

America should not think, however, that its leverage is by any means enormous, nor should it think it is likely to develop more anytime soon. The trade war has harmed American companies, brands, and consumers, and the Chinese government knows it.

American trade negotiators need to look for an off-ramp, and they need to accept well less than total victory. They should not expect anything that approximates a balancing of the U.S. trade deficit, nor an end of subsidies to Chinese companies. They should settle for stricter intellectual property enforcement along with a few minor concessions and call it a day.

They should let us all get back to work. And they should let those brake rotors rolling off the line in Dongying, Shandong province take their rightful place in an American consumers vehicle, helping that American get to work and go about his business without having to pay an import tax on an item that is not available anywhere but China.

Morris is Chief Merchandising Officer at US Auto Parts Network, Inc., the parent company of CarParts.com.

Read more:
Donald Trump Will Never Achieve 'Total Victory' in a Trade War with China - The National Interest Online

Of all the topics to occupy the mind of the most powerful person in the United States, one would not expect badgers to make a frequent appearance.

But the rotund, hairy omnivores were apparently an alarmingly regular topic of conversation in the White House during the early months of Donald Trumps presidency, according to Daily Beast reporters Lachlan Markay and Asawin Suebsaeng.

The authors detail Trumps preoccupation in their new book, Sinking in the Swamp: How Trumps Minions and Misfits Poisoned Washington.

Along with detailing the murky underworld of President Trumps Washington, dishing the hilarious and frightening dirt on the charlatans, conspiracy theorists, ideologues, and run-of-the-mill con artists who have infected the highest echelons of American political power, they also discuss Trumps fascination with badgers.

Over two pages, Markay and Suebsaeng explain that Trump would interrogate his former chief of staff Reince Priebus about the black, white and grey creatures.

The questions would arise at such opportune moments as when Priebus was attempting to brief the president on matters of healthcare initiatives, foreign policy, or Republican legislative agenda, they wrote.

Are they mean to people? Trump reportedly asked Priebus, perhaps thinking of badgers very long claws, which they use to dig the burrows that make their home. Or are they friendly creatures?

Trump would also demand to see photos of badgers, ask Priebus to give details on how badgers work, and wanted to know if they had a personality or were boring.

Priebus was also called upon to explain how the critters function and behave, what kind of food they like, and how aggressive or deadly they could be when presented with perceived existential threats.

Markay and Suebsaeng said Trump would frequently derail important policy discussions with questions about the animals.

An obviously enthralled president would stare at Priebus as the aide struggled for sufficiently placating answers, all the while trying to gently veer the conversation back to whether we were going to do a troop surge in Afghanistan or strip millions of Americans of healthcare coverage, they wrote.

Trump did not specify which of the 11 species of badger he especially wanted to understand, but given he appeared to be obsessed with the animal due to its association with Priebuss home state of Wisconsin, it was most likely the American badger scientific name Taxidea taxus that commanded his attention.

Wisconsin is known as the badger state less for the animal which is found in many US states than for its mining history. In the early 1800s, iron ore miners in the state would live inside the caves they were digging, and became known as badger boys or badgers.

The European badger, which is found in the UK, lives in a system of underground tunnels and chambers called a sett. Some setts have a section that is used as a bathroom.

Read more:
'Are they mean?' Donald Trump obsessed with badgers, new book claims - The Guardian