Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ Category

Donald Trump’s lost opportunity – Washington Post

There are many ways to evaluate the Trump presidency at the six-month mark. What I am struck by is the path not taken, the lost opportunity. During the campaign, it was clear that Donald Trump had many flaws, but he tapped into a real set of problems facing the United States and a deep frustration with the political system. Additionally, he embraced and expressed somewhat inconsistently a populism that went beyond the traditional left-right divide. What would things look like at this point if President Trump had governed in the manner of a pragmatic, jobs-oriented reformer relentlessly focused on the forgotten Americans of whom he often speaks?

We have an interesting template to assist our imagination. After Trumps election, a small group of pro-Trump intellectuals, from both left and right, banded together to launch a journal, American Affairs, that promised the discussion of new policies that are outside of the conventional dogmas. Its the best forum for the articulation of the ideology behind Trumps rise, and there has been so much interest in the journals views on various subjects that the editors opened the second issue with a brief summary of their editorial stance.

On trade, immigration and foreign policy, the editors endorse modest changes to standard U.S. policies, some of which the administration is pursuing. But on the central questions of domestic economic policy, American Affairs seems markedly different and genuinely populist. Taking on the subject at the center of Republican ideology, taxes, the editors profess to be quite skeptical of the conservative orthodoxy that reflexively prescribes tax cuts as the cure-all for every ill. Although corporate tax reform is warranted, the editors say, reducing upper-income tax rates is unlikely to address core economic challenges in any significant way. Instead, they recommend eliminating mechanisms by which the rich evade taxation. In addition, the journal denounces financial deregulation and calls for higher taxes on hedge-fund and private-equity managers. It embraces large and direct government expenditures on infrastructure, warning against relying heavily on the private sector. On health care, the editors come out openly in favor of universal coverage and suggest two options, a single-payer system or a version of the Swiss system, which is basically Obamacare with a real mandate.

Needless to say, this has not been the Trump agenda. But reading these intelligent ideas raises the interesting question, why not? All of the policies proposed above would have helped the forgotten people whose cause Trump champions.

There have been two cardinal features of the Trump presidency so far. The first is that, far from being a populist breakout, it has followed a fairly traditional Republican agenda repeal Obamacare, weaken Dodd-Frank, cut taxes, deregulate industry. Trumps anemic infrastructure plan is little more than tax credits for private investors. The only real break with Republican tradition has been on foreign policy, where Trump is pursuing a truly bizarre and mercurial agenda that seems to be inspired by his own personal passions and peeves instituting the travel ban, demanding payment from allies, embracing autocrats who flatter him and his family.

(Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

The second defining feature of the Trump administration has been incompetence. As many have pointed out, had Trump chosen to begin his presidency with a large infrastructure bill, he would have put the Democrats in a terrible bind. They would have had to support him, even though this would have enraged the partys base. Instead, Trump chose health care, a complicated, difficult issue sure to unite his opposition and divide Republicans. Consequently, very little has actually been done. Obamacare has not been repealed, no money has been appropriated for the border wall, NAFTA is still standing, and there is no tax reform bill, nor an agreement to raise the debt ceiling. Even in deregulation, an area of broad presidential authority, little of substance has been accomplished. Many of Trumps executive actions have been to review various measures. An environmental activist told me that he has tried to cheer up his staff by pointing out that the Trump administrations words have rarely been followed by successful deeds.

Trump could have quickly begun reshaping American politics. He discerned voices that others didnt, understood what those people wanted to hear and articulated much of it. But when it came time to deliver, it turned out that he had no serious idea or policies, nor even the desire to search for them. He just wanted to be president, meeting world leaders, having Oval Office photo ops and flying on Air Force One, while delegating the actual public policy to House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) or Vice President Pence. So far, Trump has turned out to be something far less revolutionary than expected a standard-issue, big-business Republican, albeit an incompetent one, wrapped in populist clothing.

Read more from Fareed Zakarias archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.

More here:
Donald Trump's lost opportunity - Washington Post

What Anthony Scaramucci tells us about Donald Trump’s White House – CNN

What that staff shuffle tells us about President Donald Trump is a lot more than you might think.

Spicer, remember, is not and never has been a "Trump guy." He was brought into the White House at the urging of Reince Priebus, the Republican National Committee chairman-turned-White House chief of staff. Prior to his time at the RNC, Spicer kicked around a number of party committees and campaigns. He was a creature of Washington, not a creature of Trump.

The move from Spicer to Scaramucci reflects a decision by Trump to surround himself almost entirely with people loyal first and foremost to him -- as opposed to the Republican Party or the Washington establishment.

And it comes as Trump hunkers down for what appears to be an inevitable collision with Robert Mueller, the former FBI director who is leading the special counsel's investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 campaign and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Trump has always kept his inner circle small -- in his business life and in politics. And that inner circle shrinks down to family and friends when the chips are down. The chips -- whether the Trump administration wants to admit it or not -- are very much down at the moment. And so, Trump is turning to the people he trusts most -- his immediate family and friends that he has known for a very long time.

There is also an element of the Scaramucci move that speaks to the President's oft-stated desire to have a staff who lets him be himself.

Scaramucci, in his first appearance at the White House briefing podium Friday afternoon, said that in his conversation in the Oval Office with the President on Friday there was an emphasis on "letting him be himself." Scaramucci added that part of his job is to allow Trump to "express his full identity."

"I think it is very important for us to let him express his personality," he later added.

It's not immediately clear how a "Let Trump be Trump" strategy would differ from the first six months of this presidency.

Trump has, occasionally, spent a day or even a few days allowing himself -- and his Twitter feed -- to be managed. He has delivered a speech straight off the teleprompter on occasion. He has passed on chances to take a swing at someone who has taken a swing at him.

But, inevitably and inexorably, Trump returns back to the brash provocateur which he has been for almost every moment of his 71 years on Earth. He is not someone who likes to be managed -- or tolerates it for very long. What Trump seems to prefer is to surround himself with a group of people with whom he can kibbitz rather than a group of people telling him what to do.

Scaramucci seems to fit that mold perfectly -- in a way Spicer never did.

With the hiring of Scaramucci (among other moves of late), Trump is doing what almost anyone would: Going back to what -- and who -- he knows. In doing so, Trump appears to be willing to live or die, politically speaking, by leaning as hard as he can into doing exactly what he wants to do.

Read more here:
What Anthony Scaramucci tells us about Donald Trump's White House - CNN

Donald Trump’s terrible crowdfunding site was a microcosm of his political career – The Verge

Donald Trumps name is linked to steaks, hotels, vodka, and an isolationist political platform. Some of these ventures have succeeded, many have failed, and the last one has put him in the White House. Less known, however, is the time he tried to clone Kickstarter. The site was called FundAnything, and despite its supposedly ambitious beginnings, its now literally a facade.

FundAnything was founded by Bill Zanker, also a founder of the Learning Annex online education company and co-author of Trumps 2007 book Think Big and Kick Ass in Business and Life. Trump didnt put his name on the site, but he was supposed to be deeply involved. In addition to investing in FundAnything, he promised to promote selected campaigns on his Twitter feed and personally donate money, including a $1 million prize to the first person who beat Kickstarters record-setting $10 million Pebble campaign.

And from the beginning, the site had Trumps populist edge. Zanker boasted that the reign of Kickstarters Brooklyn hipsters is over, referring to Kickstarters New York headquarters. Crowdfunding got traction with creatives and tech, but you go anywhere but the coasts and they dont get it yet, he told AllThingsD. (Apparently, creative and technical people dont live in flyover country.) Trump himself was more dramatic. Peoples lives have been destroyed by this economy and they feel hopeless, he said. FundAnything is a real solution.

FundAnything more or less cloned Indiegogos flexible funding program: people could set a goal and pay a 5 percent fee if they met it, or a 9 percent fee if they didnt. Its most distinctive feature was that instead of focusing on either donation campaigns or creative projects, FundAnything true to its name would fund almost anything. Trump officially launched it by giving suitcases of money to a family funding medical bills, a woman with a small business, and an aspiring singer. (He then filled an aquarium with cash and had visitors grab bills from it.)

FundAnythings site is almost entirely gone today, and its difficult to judge its scale. But it appears to have had a small number of high-profile campaigns: Magician Penn Jillette and comedian Adam Carolla, the most highly publicized users, raised over a million dollars apiece for their respective films Directors Cut and Road Hard. While FundAnything promised to make crowdfunding appealing to the masses, however, Jillette and Carolla already had ties with Trump, since theyd been competitors on Trumps Celebrity Apprentice. Carollas campaign in particular was equally a publicity campaign for FundAnything, which Carolla said offered him a special, lower pricing rate.

Trump all but promoted the site as his personal charity

What might draw a small-time user to FundAnything? Basically, the prospect of getting money and publicity from Trump, who Zanker described as a genius businessman. One press release all but described it as a Trump charity foundation, and Trump promised to tweet about campaigns every week to his 2.2 million (at that point) followers. But his support was, at best, lackadaisical. A few months after launch, Forbes reported that hed only endorsed five campaigns since launch (FundAnything added three more after being contacted) and tweeted about FundAnything a handful of times, mostly with generic promotions for the site.

Trump finally cut ties with the site in late 2014, saying it took too much of my time and too much time to raise the money. Hed posted 27 tweets over the course of eight months, only six of which mentioned specific campaigns besides Jillettes and Carollas. At the time of Forbes article hed put around $92,000 toward campaigns in increments between $2,000 and $40,000 a lot of money for individual recipients, but very little for an entire platform.

FundAnything stuck around for a while after Trumps departure, although its purpose wasnt clear. PC Magazine reviewed it in 2016, praising the platforms flexibility but calling it bare-bones and dated. (In a particularly weird detail, it noted that one of the funding categories was simply called Oklahoma.) But as of today, its a Potemkin website. What appear to be menu buttons and campaign thumbnails are actually part of a large single image, hyperlinked to itself.

Economic anxiety, Kickstarter edition

I emailed and tweeted at several people and organizations who used FundAnything, including Carolla. Only one wrote back: Free the Nipple, which raised $45,000 of its $250,000 goal on the site. At the time, FundAnything was affiliated with Donald Trump. Thus, Free the Nipple declines to comment! Sorry, a representative told me. At publication, Zanker also had not responded to an email asking about his future plans for the site.

Gawker referred to FundAnything as a new crowdfunding scam back in 2013. But unlike some of Trumps other ventures, FundAnything doesnt seem necessarily underhanded or fraudulent, although users might have been more successful on another platform.

It is, however, a striking microcosm of Trumps path to the White House. FundAnything was supposed to take crowdfunding beyond coastal elites (or Brooklyn hipsters) who had, in Trump and Zankers estimation, failed ordinary Americans. It played on real economic fears and Trumps reputation as a brilliant dealmaker, although it wasnt clear how his skills applied to crowdfunding. It appears to have ended up most greatly enriching Trumps associates, albeit perhaps unintentionally. And like his political campaign, Trump launched it with a lot of big promises only to lose interest once the real work started.

See the article here:
Donald Trump's terrible crowdfunding site was a microcosm of his political career - The Verge

Jeff Sessions just got in more trouble and now he’s put Trump in a box, too – Washington Post

The accounts from Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to his superiors, intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, contradict public assertions by Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The Post's Greg Miller explains. (Sarah Parnass/The Washington Post)

Attorney General Jeff Sessions's bad week just got worse. And while his new problems would appear to threaten his job,they also put President Trump in a box when it comes to his apparent desire to be rid of Sessions.

The Washington Post is reporting that Russia's ambassador has said he and Sessions discussedthe 2016 campaign during two meetings last year. That is contrary to multiple public comments made by Sessions in March, when he recused himself from oversight of the Russia investigation.

Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller report that Ambassador Sergey Kislyak's accounts of those meetings were intercepted by U.S. intelligence and that in them he suggested that the two men spoke substantively about campaign issues. Yet Sessions said March 1 that he never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign, and the following day, while announcing his recusal, he said it again: I never had meetings with Russian operativesor Russian intermediaries about the Trump campaign.

This is now the second time that Sessions's accounts of his meetings with Russians have been seriously called into question. During his confirmation hearings this year, he denied having met with any Russians during the campaign. When the Kislyak meetings came to light, he clarified that he thought the exchange was in the context of the campaign only. He then quickly recused himself.

That flub was highlighted this week by none other than Trump. In a New York Times interview, Trump openly suggested that he wouldn't have nominated Sessions in the first place had he known he would recuse himself. Then Trump turned to Sessions's bad answers at his confirmation hearings:

TRUMP: So Jeff Sessions, Jeff Sessions gave some bad answers.

MAGGIE HABERMAN: You mean at the hearing?

TRUMP: Yeah, he gave some answers that were simple questions and should have been simple answers, but they werent.

If Trump does want to get rid of Sessions, it would seem that more of Sessions's bad answers about his meetings with Kislyak are on the table to justify it. The problem for Trump is that using that justification would also lend credence to the idea that there was something untoward about those meetings. Trump has repeatedly suggested that the entire Russia investigation is a hoax and a witch hunt, so the idea that he's suddenly that concerned about Sessions's Russia contacts would be difficult to reconcile.

It would also be difficult to square with other top Trump allies and family members who have failed to acknowledge or be transparent about their meetings with Russians. How could Trump take issue with Sessions's failures to correctly characterize his meetings with Russians but not with Donald Trump Jr., whose meeting seeking opposition research about Hillary Clinton allegedly from the Russian government came to light this month? And then what about Jared Kushner's meetings, which include that one, a meeting with Kislyak and a meeting with the head of a Russian state-owned bank. None of them were disclosed on his security clearance formwhen he joined the White House. Trump would need to explain why Sessions's failures were bad and his son's and son-in-law's weren't.

But Trump nonetheless seemed to get the ball rolling on that front in his New York Times interview. And given that more of Sessions's comments have come into question now, we'll see whether Trump keeps using that as justification for continuing to undermine one of his earliest supporters and top Cabinet officials.

Follow this link:
Jeff Sessions just got in more trouble and now he's put Trump in a box, too - Washington Post

How OJ Simpson paved the way for Donald Trump – BBC News


BBC News
How OJ Simpson paved the way for Donald Trump
BBC News
It seems entirely fitting that OJ Simpson should reappear at this surreal juncture in American life because many of the trends that culminated in the election of Donald J Trump can be traced back to his arrest and trial. Consider first of all the ...

and more »

Here is the original post:
How OJ Simpson paved the way for Donald Trump - BBC News