Day: October 4, 2019

Stevenson’s army, October 4

Extra weekend reading: the Volker testimony to the House committees;  the texts released by the House committee chairs.
The texts show a bureaucratic political game, as described in the first part of this Post column: twice Amb. Sondland, a political appointee who donated $1 million to the Trump inaugural committee, tries to cut off Amb. Taylor, the career official now acting ambassador [charge] in Kyiv, when Taylor raises the link between military aid and investigating the Bidens. But after Taylor raises the point a second time, Sondland very formally gets into the record “there is no quid pro quo.”  You can read; you decide.
CJR has a good explanation of how hard this issue is for the news media.
I especially liked this section: The press, on the whole, does not consistently use language commensurate with overt wrongdoing. (The Times’s print headline this morning, calling Trump’s admission a “brash public move,” is a case in point; so was Jonathan Karl’s claim, on ABC, that “this is becoming less a question of what the president did than a debate over what is right and what is wrong.”) As journalists, we’ve been taught to believe that the biggest scandals are those that require intense, meticulous digging; as human beings, we’ve been taught to believe that no right-minded person would own up to wrongdoing in such a haphazard way. And so, as ever with Trump, we seek rationality in the irrational. The effect, as the Washington Post’s Ashley Parker wrote recently, is that “Trump’s penchant for reading the stage directions almost seems to inoculate him from the kind of political damage that would devastate other politicians….
When it comes to Trump and his media supporters, shamelessness and misinformation are two sides of the same coin. The more shameless Trump is, the less we can see the boundaries between right and wrong, between believable and unbelievable. If you’ll say anything, nothing is implausible, which, in turn, makes a wild conspiracy sound just as plausible as the truth. Someday, the house of cards might collapse. But not today.

Yesterday I noted the pro-oil decision that angered farmers. Today the administration made a pro-farmer announcement on ethanol.

So far only CNN seems to have the story that Trump told Xi in June that he would go easy on Hong Kong while the trade talks continued.
Earlier this week, I noted that NYT said the administration actually did a cost estimate on Trump’s suggestion of a border moat filled with snakes and alligators. We haven’t seen that estimate. Maybe it’s on the supersecret WH server. But Peter Singer, tongue in cheek, has his own estimate, roughly $2.5 billion in set-up costs, plus annual operating costs of $1.8 billion.

My SAIS colleague Charlie Stevenson distributes this almost daily news digest of foreign/defense/national security policy to “Stevenson’s army” via Googlegroups. I plan to republish here. If you want to get it directly, To get Stevenson’s army by email, send a blank email (no subject or text in the body) to stevensons-army+subscribe@googlegroups.com. You’ll get an email confirming your join request. Click “Join This Group” and follow the instructions to join. Once you have joined, you can adjust your email delivery preferences (if you want every email or a digest of the emails).

Tags : , ,

Bizarre

I got into the office this morning to find this in my email:

President Donald J. Trump Announces Intent to Appoint Individual to a Key Administration Post
  President Donald J. Trump today announced his intent to appoint the following individual to a key position in his Administration:

Richard Grenell of California to serve concurrently as Special Presidential Envoy for Serbia and Kosovo Peace Negotiations and Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Federal Republic of Germany.

That, plus multiple requests to comment from outlets that broadcast in the Balkans.

So I’ll try to do that here: it’s bizarre. I had assumed that the recent appointment of Matt Palmer as Special Representative for the Balkans, if it did anything, ensured that no one else would get the job of resolving the remaining issues between Kosovo and Serbia as well as within Bosnia and Herzegovina. Now the Administration has chosen to name in addition a controversial political figure who has managed to deeply offend Berlin, one of America’s most important allies, to handle the sensitive issues in the Belgrade/Pristina talks.

What does that signify?

To me, it communicates confusion and disorder in US policy, not the clarity of purpose and desire to cooperate with the European Union that is required. What might the relationship between Palmer and Grenell be? I don’t know. Political appointee Grenell clearly outranks professional diplomat Palmer because he has an ambassadorial title (never mind he is presumably closer to the White House), but if one has the Balkans and the other has the Pristina/Belgrade dialogue, the logical chain of command would be the opposite.

In short: this is an appointment likely to cause even more uncertainty about US policy than already prevails. I suggest the press try to get Palmer and Grenell to clarify. Not me.

Tags : , ,
Tweet