Harvey Gives Trump a Chance to Reclaim Power to Unify - New York times

Harvey Gives Trump a Chance to Reclaim Power to Unify

By GLENN THRUSHAUG. 29, 2017

Hurricane Harvey was the rarest of disasters to strike during the Trump presidency — a maelstrom not of Mr. Trump’s making, and one that offers him an opportunity to recapture some of the unifying power of his office he has squandered in recent weeks.

Now a tropical storm as it continues to inundate the Texas and Louisiana coasts, Harvey is foremost a human disaster, a stop-motion catastrophe that has already claimed at least 10 lives and destroyed thousands of structures. But hurricanes in the post-Katrina era are also political events, benchmarks by which a president’s abilities are measured.

Mr. Trump is behaving like a man whose future depends on getting this right.

The president will visit Corpus Christi on the Texas gulf coast on Tuesday, as Harvey regains strength and hurtles toward Louisiana. The visit, aides say, is intended to highlight his commitment to coordinating long- and short-term federal responses with local officials. During a White House news conference on Monday afternoon, Mr. Trump announced that he planned to make a second trip to the region, as early as Saturday. That one to Texas and to Louisiana.

In announcing his trips, he used the dulcet, reassuring and uplifting language of prior presidents. His rhetoric was strikingly different from his much-criticized pronouncements at a news conference this month when he equated the actions of leftist protesters in Charlottesville, Va., with the violent, torch-wielding alt-right activists who hurled anti-Semitic and racist epithets.

“We are one American family,” the president said Monday, reading from a statement as he stood next to President Sauli Niinisto of Finland. “We hurt together, we struggle together and, believe me, we endure together. We are one family.”

Hurricane Harvey: What Happened and What’s Next AUG.

A ‘500-Year Flood’ Could Happen Again Sooner Than You Think. Here’s Why. AUG. 28, 2017

A storm that is ravaging low-lying areas gives Mr. Trump a chance to reclaim the presidential high ground. But many of those in the president’s orbit are worried Mr. Trump will not be self-controlled enough to maximize the moment.

President Barack Obama comforting a Hurricane Sandy victim in October 2012 in Brigantine, N.J. Credit Jim Watson/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Senior officials, led by John F. Kelly, the chief of staff, have gingerly urged the president to stick to a script vetted through official channels. And Mr. Trump has toned down his presence on Twitter — mildly — relying more on the kind of official statements and news media availability used to by his predecessors. But no one, including Mr. Kelly, expects him to remain silent or on message if he comes under criticism over his response to the storm.

Local officials, for their part, do not care about Mr. Trump’s mood. They simply want him to pay attention to their plight.

“In a week or two, after something like this, people tend to forget about you,” said Joe McComb, the Republican mayor of Corpus Christi, which sustained less damage than nearby Rockport, Galveston and Houston. “Getting him down here is a way to make sure he’s making a commitment. He’ll see what happened for himself. He’s rough and gruff, but I think he’s got a good heart.”

During his news conference Monday, Mr. Trump repeatedly praised the joint response of federal officials, echoing his upbeat tweets over the weekend. Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, who has been in contact with the president, Vice President Mike Pence and other federal officials, gave the White House an “A-plus” for quickly declaring the state a disaster area and mobilizing federal resources.

Still, Harvey — a sluggish rainmaking behemoth that has already dumped as much as three feet of rain in some places — is unpredictable, and much of the worst damage might be wreaked over the next few days. And, as Hurricane Katrina proved 12 years ago in New Orleans, initial coordination between federal, state and local officials can quickly give way to acrimonious finger-pointing, with dire political consequences for all of those involved.

Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, who spent Monday in fast-flooding Houston, praised Mr. Trump’s initial response and his efforts to coordinate with local officials. But Mr. Cruz also cautioned against complacency while the rain was still falling.

The president promised Monday to push a major recovery package through Congress and predicted, with some justification, that it would garner widespread bipartisan support — even though his conservative Republican allies opposed a similar aid package for Northeast states after Hurricane Sandy in 2012.

In August 2005 on Air Force One, President George W. Bush inspected the damage Hurricane Katrina caused New Orleans. Credit Susan Walsh/Associated Press

“A lot of these guys, including Ted Cruz, really turned their backs on us after Sandy,” said Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York, who serves on the House Committee on Homeland Security.

Brock Long, the administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, sought to allay anxiety about the federal commitment, saying his agency planned to be in Texas “for years” after Harvey.

Yet uncertainty abounds. In addition to the as-yet-untold toll on people and property, there is the unpredictable element of Mr. Trump’s emotional weather, which can shatter the prevailing harmony in an instant, through a tweet or a taunt.

The news and stories that matter to Californians (and anyone else interested in the state), delivered weekday mornings.

“So far, he’s been aggressive and forward-leaning, which is encouraging,” said Jon Meacham, a presidential historian. “It’s possible he can get through a cycle, the politics and the substance of a disaster, for the first time in his eight months in office. But you know somebody is going to say something that bothers him, something critical that he sees on cable, and suddenly it becomes fake news, fake weather.”

So far, the storm has done little to diminish Mr. Trump’s propensity for muddying moments of presidential leadership by picking fights with the news media or his political opponents. On Monday, moments after gravely reading his tribute to national resolve and the spirit of emergency workers in Texas, Mr. Trump enthusiastically defended his decision to pardon Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., as Hurricane Harvey made landfall on Friday.

But this time is different, people around Mr. Trump insist.

The president, who prefers to skim rather than delve, has seldom been more engaged in the details of any issue as he is with Harvey, according to several people involved in disaster response.

Mr. Trump, one aide said, was fascinated by the long-term effect of water damage on structures in the Gulf Coast, peppering FEMA and National Security Council briefers with detailed questions about the flooding in Houston and Galveston. As the extent of the projected devastation became apparent over the weekend during a meeting at Camp David, he shook his head in disbelief and compared the situation to problems he experienced when managing his family’s apartment buildings in New York. “Water damage is the worst,” he told one staff member, “tough, tough, tough.”

Mapping the Devastation of Harvey In Houston

Pounding rains and rapidly rising floodwaters caused by Hurricane Harvey pummeled the city of Houston, a metropolitan area of 6.6 million.

Still, many of the most substantive conversations about the relief efforts — including interactions with elected officials — have been routed through Mr. Pence, who has played a similar role in pushing the president’s legislative agenda.

But a week ago, as they prepared for the storm to hit Texas, Mr. Trump and his aides were acutely aware of President George W. Bush’s slow response to Katrina, and the awful optics of a disengaged president flying high above the disaster to view the damage in a dry, cosseted presidential plane.

Despite a reputation for political sang-froid, Mr. Trump appeared genuinely moved by the early images of devastation in Texas — just as he was motivated by images of children killed in chemical weapons attacks in Syria before ordering airstrikes against the government of President Bashar al-Assad in April, his aides said.

In Texas, as in the Mideast, Mr. Trump and his team saw an opportunity to exhibit decisiveness and to project strength.

In recent days, the president has frequently harked back to his decision a year ago to tour flood-ravaged sections of Baton Rouge, La. — a visit that he viewed as a turning point in his presidential campaign.

When reports of flooding in the Mississippi River city hit the news, the Trump campaign immediately dispatched Mr. Pence to tour the affected areas, in part because Hillary Clinton, Mr. Trump’s Democratic rival, forewent a visit of her own. When Kellyanne Conway, then the newly appointed campaign manager, told Mr. Trump that his running mate was en route to Louisiana, he responded by asking aides, “Can I go too?” according to three campaign officials familiar with the exchange.

When Mr. Trump offered to donate thousands of bottles of water to the recovery effort, Ms. Conway made one suggestion, according to a former Trump associate: He had to strip the “Trump Ice” labels off first.

Transgender members in U.S. military may serve until study completed: Mattis - Reuters

#POLITICSAUGUST 30, 2017 / 10:17 AM

Transgender members in U.S. military may serve until study completed: Mattis

Reuters Staff

Eric Vidal

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Tuesday current policy regarding transgender personnel serving in the military would remain in place until he advises President Donald Trump on how to implement his directive on a transgender ban.

Mattis said in a statement he would set up a panel of experts serving in the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security to provide recommendations on implementing the ban.

He said he would advise the president after the panel reports it recommendations, and “in the interim, current policy with respect to currently serving members will remain in place.”

Trump signed a memorandum on Friday directing the U.S. military not to accept transgender men and women as recruits and halting the use of government funds for sex-reassignment surgeries for active personnel unless the process is already under way.

A White House official who briefed reporters about the memo on Friday declined to specify whether transgender men and women who are currently active in the military could continue to serve based on such criteria.

The memo called on Mattis to submit a plan to Trump by Feb. 21, on how to implement the changes.

Mattis said he expects to issue other guidance “including any necessary interim adjustments to procedures, to ensure the continued combat readiness of the force until our final policy on this subject is issued.”

Trump’s directive created uncertainty for thousands of transgender service members, many of whom came out after the Pentagon said in 2016 it would allow transgender people to serve openly.

The decision appealed to some in Trump’s conservative political base while drawing criticism from advocates of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights.

Civil rights groups filed two new lawsuits on Monday challenging Trump’s ban.

North Korea launch increases focus on risky U.S. shootdown option - Reuters

NEWSAUGUST 30, 2017 / 12:35 PM /

North Korea launch increases focus on risky U.S. shootdown option

Matt Spetalnick and David Brunnstrom

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea’s firing of a ballistic missile over Japan could increase pressure on Washington to consider shooting down future test launches, although there is no guarantee of success and U.S. officials are wary of a dangerous escalation with Pyongyang.

More attention is likely to focus on the prospects for intercepting a missile in flight after North Korea on Tuesday conducted one of its boldest missile tests in years, one government official said.

Such a decision would not be taken lightly given tensions over North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.

And while President Donald Trump has repeatedly vowed that “all options are on the table”, there has been no sign of any quick policy shift in Washington toward direct U.S. military action.

But Pyongyang’s launch of an intermediate-range Hwasong-12 missile over Japan’s northern Hokkaido island underscored how Trump’s tough rhetoric, pursuit of sanctions and occasional shows of military force around the Korean peninsula have done little to deter North Korea’s leader.

“Kim Jong Un has chosen to thumb his nose at the Americans and Japanese by conducting this test,” said David Shear, former U.S. assistant secretary of defense for East Asia.

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has already pledged that the military would shoot down any missile it deemed a danger to U.S. or allied territory.

What is unclear is whether Washington would be prepared to use its multi-layered missile defense systems to intercept a missile like the one that overflew Japan but never directly threatened its territory.

Doing so would essentially be a U.S. show of force rather than an act of self-defense.

“I would think that in government deliberations that would likely be one of the options out on the table,” Shear said.

Some analysts say there is a danger that North Korea would see it as an act of war and retaliate militarily with potentially devastating consequences for South Korea and Japan.

China, North Korea’s neighbor and main trading partner, would also likely oppose such a direct U.S. military response.

A missile is launched during a long and medium-range ballistic rocket launch drill in this undated photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) in Pyongyang on August 30, 2017. KCNA/via REUTERS

Experts say there is no guarantee that U.S. missile defense systems, including Aegis ballistic missile defense ships in the region and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) systems based in Guam and South Korea, would hit their target, despite recent successful tests.

A failed attempt would be an embarrassment to the United States and could embolden North Korea, which this year has already conducted two tests of an intercontinental ballistic missile believed capable of hitting the U.S. mainland.

The United States has spent $40 billion over 18 years on research and development into missile defense systems but they have never been put into operation under wartime conditions.

Mattis this month expressed confidence the U.S. military could intercept a missile fired by North Korea if it was headed to Guam, after North Korea said it was developing a plan to launch four intermediate range missiles to land near the U.S. territory.

If North Korea fired at the United States, the situation could quickly escalate to war, Mattis said.

Not everyone is convinced the U.S. military can defend against North Korea’s growing missile capability.

Some experts caution that U.S. missile defenses are now geared to shooting down one, or perhaps a small number, of incoming missiles. If North Korea’s technology and production keep advancing, U.S. defenses could be overwhelmed.

“If a shootdown fails, it would be embarrassing, though not terribly surprising,” said Michael Elleman, a missile expert at the 38 North think tank in Washington.

“Missile defense does not provide a shield that protects against missiles. Rather, it is like air defense; it is designed to minimize the damage an adversary can inflict,” he said.

One U.S. official said the military would be especially cautious about shooting down a North Korean missile that did not pose a direct threat because of the risk of civilian casualties if it were intercepted over Japan or South Korea, as well as difficulty in determining how Pyongyang might retaliate. The official spoke on condition of anonymity.

U.S. military and intelligence officials warn North Korea could unleash a devastating barrage of missiles and artillery on Seoul and U.S. bases in South Korea in response to any military attack.

Targeting of a North Korean missile in flight that did not endanger the United States or its allies could also raise legal questions. U.N. Security Council resolutions that ban Pyongyang’s ballistic missile programs do not explicitly authorize such actions.

Japan also faces questions over the legality of shooting down missiles in its airspace but not aimed at Japan. Under legislation passed in 2015, Tokyo can exercise a limited right of collective self-defense, or militarily aiding an ally under attack, if it judges the threat to Japan as “existential”.