Carl Bernstein: Donald Trump is 'dangerous beyond any modern' President, says Watergate journalist - Independent

Carl Bernstein: Donald Trump is 'dangerous beyond any modern' President, says Watergate journalist

His comment followed an outflux of top staff at the White House

• Rachael Revesz 
• @RachaelRevesz 
• Wednesday 2 August 2017 10:43 BST

Carl Bernstein has said Donald Trump is “dangerous beyond any modern presidency”, responding to the dismissal of the President’s former chief of staff.

Shortly after Reince Priebus was fired from the White House and replaced by former Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, veteran journalist Bernstein took to Twitter to name what he saw as an even bigger problem.

“The problem is not the chief of staff. The problem—dangerous beyond any modern presidency—is the president,” he wrote.

Mr Bernstein, known for being one of two Washington Post reporters that brought down the Richard Nixon administration after revealing it broke into the DNC headquarters in the 1970s, has been a vocal opponent of the President.

He has spoken against the President’s alleged willingness to work with the Russians during the election campaign and Mr Trump's attempts to block the ensuing investigation, as well as his relentless attacks on former opponent Hillary Clinton and his alleged promotion of his business activities whilst in the White House. Mr Trump has denied colluding with Russia.

Mr Bernstein has also said that the President’s firing of former FBI director James Comey during the Russia investigation in May was a “dangerous” situation and Mr Trump’s attacks on the press were more dangerous than Nixon’s.

Earlier this month he told CNN: “We are in the midst of a malignant presidency. That malignancy is known to the military leaders of the country, it’s known to the Republican leadership in Congress who recognise it, and it’s known to the intelligence community and the presidency of Donald Trump is not functioning.”

Since he gave the interview, former Press Secretary Sean Spicer stepped down, Mr Priebus was sacked and former Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci was fired after 10 days in the role.

In March, two months after the President was inaugurated, Mr Bernstein declared it would be “impossible” for Mr Trump to regain the trust of Americans.

“He is someone who has lied at will all of his adult life. Lying has been a key element of his advance in business,” he told CNN, where he is employed as a political commentator.

“He has never been known as someone who tells the truth. There’s an almost pathological, compulsive element to his lying and we’ve seen it since he’s been President.” 

The US State Department is considering dropping "democracy" from its key mission statement - Washington Post

The US State Department is considering dropping "democracy" from its key mission statement as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson orders his department to redefine its purpose to the world.

The draft statements under review right now are similar to the old mission statement, except for one thing - any mention of promoting democracy is being eliminated.

According to an internal email that went out on Friday, the State Department's Executive Steering Committee convened a meeting of leaders to draft new statements on the department's purpose, mission and ambition, as part of the overall reorganisation of the State Department and USAID. (The draft statements were being circulated for comment on Friday and could change before being finalised.)

Under Donald Trump, US democracy is laughable

--The State Department's draft statement on its purpose is: "We promote the security, prosperity and interests of the American people globally."

--The State Department's draft statement on its mission is: "Lead America's foreign policy through global advocacy, action and assistance to shape a safer, more prosperous world."

--The State Department's draft statement on its ambition is: "The American people thrive in a peaceful and interconnected world that is free, resilient and prosperous."

Compare that to the State Department Mission Statement that is currently on the books, as laid out in the department's fiscal year 2016 financial report:

"'The Department's mission is to shape and sustain a peaceful, prosperous, just, and democratic world and foster conditions for stability and progress for the benefit of the American people and people everywhere. This mission is shared with the USAID, ensuring we have a common path forward in partnership as we invest in the shared security and prosperity that will ultimately better prepare us for the challenges of tomorrow.'"

Trump administration 'shuts war crimes and genocide prevention office'

Former senior State Department officials from both parties said eliminating "just" and "democratic" from the State Department's list of desired outcomes is neither accidental nor inconsequential.

"The only significant difference is the deletion of justice and democracy," said Elliott Abrams, who served as deputy national security adviser for global democracy strategy during the George W Bush administration. "We used to want a just and democratic word, and now apparently we don't."

The mission statement is important because it sends a signal about American priorities and intentions to foreign governments and people around the world, said Mr Abrams, who was considered by Mr Tillerson for the job of deputy secretary of state but rejected by President Trump.

"That change is a serious mistake that ought to be corrected," he said. "If not, the message being sent will be a great comfort to every dictator in the world."

Tom Malinowski, who served as assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labour for the Obama administration, said the new proposed mission statement brings US foreign policy into closer alignment with that of some of America's chief adversaries, including Russia.

Rex Tillerson 'could quit as Secretary of State'

"It's a worldview similar to that of Putin, who also thinks that great powers should focus exclusively on self protection and enrichment, rather than promoting democracy," he said. "By removing all reference to universal values and the common good it removes any reason for people outside the United States to support our foreign-policy. That said, I appreciate the honesty with which Tillerson projects his cynicism."

Mr Malinowski also predicted that the change, if it becomes permanent, would sow confusion throughout the ranks of the State Department's civil and foreign service because hundreds of State Department officials work on congressionally funded programmes every day that are meant to promote democracy and justice abroad.

Adding to the confusion, Mr Trump occasionally trumpets democracy promotion, for example when it comes to Cuba or Venezuela. But in his inauguration speech, Mr Trump made clear that democracy promotion would not be a feature of his foreign policy.

"We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to follow," Mr Trump said.

The changes in the State Department mission statement may not seem very significant viewed in isolation. But Mr Tillerson has made several statements and decisions that indicate he plans to lower the priority of democracy and human rights in US foreign policy.

In his first speech to his State Department employees, he said promoting American values "creates obstacles" to pursuing America's national security interests. In March, he broke tradition by declining to appear personally to unveil the State Department's annual human rights report.

In another example, the State Department will soon eliminate the www.humanrights.gov website and move its content to an alternative web address, www.state.gov/j/drl, a State Department official said.

"It's just so gratuitous. What efficiency is achieved or money is saved by taking something that is prominent on the Internet and hiding it?" said Mr Malinowski. "The consequence is that it's the 9,456th signal sent by the administration that they don't care about promoting American values."

The State Department declined to comment.

The Washington Post

Vladimir Putin Doesn't Understand the Limits of Donald Trump's Power - TIME

Vladimir Putin Doesn't Understand the Limits of Donald Trump's Power

Simon Shuster

August 1, 2017

There are still many in Russia who take pleasure in watching the White House consumed by infighting and stumbling from one setback to another, most recently the failure to push through health care reform and the rapid hiring and firing of foul-mouthed communications director Anthony Scaramucci. But the more common feeling around the Kremlin these days might seem familiar to many Republicans. After observing Trump in office for more than six months, there is a mix of disappointment and foreboding.

President Vladimir Putin seems particularly out of sorts. By now he has realized that betting on Trump represents a mistake he has made before with Western leaders, and his decision on Sunday to expel hundreds of diplomats and other personnel from the U.S. embassy in Moscow shows that he’s ready to cut his losses. “There was nothing more to wait for,” his spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said in explaining the decision on Monday. “It was all pretty obvious.”

And Putin should have known better. His closest alliances with the West have all gone the same way. Whether it was Jacques Chirac in France, Silvio Berlusconi in Italy or Gerhard Schroeder in Germany, each was built on a personal rapport with an incoming head of state, always another man, usually also a blowhard. Each collapsed when that leader was confronted by the limitations of democracy: term limits, a free press, an independent legislature, an unhappy electorate, or any of the other checks and balances built into their constitutions. But with each new attempt at a friendship with the West, Putin seemed to hope that his counterparts could override these curbs on their authority the same way Putin has done in Russia.

RELATED

Russian President Vladimir Putin attends the Navy Day celebration in St.Petersburg

RISK REPORT

How U.S. Sanctions Are Working (Or Not) in 5 Countries

They have always let him down, though none quite as spectacularly as President Trump. The U.S. Congress sent Trump a veto-proof bill on July 27 imposing new sanctions on Russia for its alleged interference in the U.S. presidential elections last year, not even a month after the two Presidents met for the first time during the G20 summit in Hamburg, Germany. To many in Moscow, the legislation proved Trump to be a feckless leader, unable to make good on his earnest promises to “get along” with Russia. “Since Trump cannot handle his own lawmakers, it means he is weak,” the Russian political analyst Alexei Makarkin wrote in an analysis of the sanctions bill.

But the point Makarkin missed was the one that Putin also seems incapable of getting his head around: that members of the U.S. Congress, including the Republicans, are not Trump’s “own lawmakers.” They represent a co-equal branch of government, much like the judiciary that has repeatedly blocked Trump’s agenda on immigration.

That confusion over the limits on executive authority goes back to the early years of Putin’s presidency, when he established control over the Russian media and began to assume that his Western counterparts could do the same in their countries. During a summit in 2005 with then-President George W. Bush, Putin refused to believe that the U.S. commander-in-chief does not have the power to muzzle American journalists. “Don’t lecture me about the free press,” Putin said, according to Bush’s memoir. “Not after you fired that reporter.”

It took a moment for Bush to realize what Putin was talking about. “Vladimir,” he said, “Are you talking about Dan Rather?” The veteran broadcaster had been forced to apologize and resign from CBS News a few months earlier, not due to any White House fiat but because of a flawed report on Bush’s service in the National Guard. In Putin’s eyes, the incident showed that the American posturing about freedom of the press was a charade. Bush tried to set him straight. “I strongly suggest you not say that in public,” he recalls telling the Russian President. “The American people will think you don’t understand our system.”

But that’s just it – he doesn’t. A few years into my stint as a reporter in Moscow, I lost track of the number of officials who tried to explain to me that there is no such thing as an independent journalist. One official even started our interview by exclaiming that American reporters are all just secret agents in disguise. This is how Pavel Astakhov, then the Kremlin ombudsmen for children’s rights, greeted me one afternoon in 2013: “The CIA is here!” he shouted, laughing, to his assistant. “Send him in!”

He wasn’t entirely kidding. In Russian officialdom (and among the public generally) people often assume that the West functions a lot like Russia, with a tame judiciary, a subservient media and a ruling clique that pulls all the strings. This view of the world makes it easier to brush away foreign criticism: if everyone is corrupt, no one has the right to judge. But a lot of very senior officials in Moscow also happen to believe this.

They tended to believe, for instance, that Trump would be able to override the other branches of government in pursuing his agenda, especially when it comes to easing U.S. sanctions against Russia. On a deeper level, they believe that power in the U.S., like in Russia, is concentrated in the hands of the executive, while the rest is mostly democratic window dressing.

And that conviction is not likely to budge amid the latest lesson in American civics. On Russian state television channels, Trump’s failure to silence the media and force his agenda through Congress and the courts has simply been cast as further proof that the U.S. is run by some all-powerful cabal – only this time the cabal has turned on the U.S. President.It is a new twist on a familiar narrative, and it suggests that the Kremlin still holds out hope for Trump getting a grip on the American system and steering it toward an alliance with Moscow. “We have fed the hope that the situation will change,” Putin lamented on Sunday in a televised interview. “But it seems that if this change does come, it won’t be soon.”

Who's Afraid of Donald Trump? Good Question - TIME

Who's Afraid of Donald Trump? Good Question.

Alex Altman,Zeke J Miller

Jul 29, 2017

Donald Trump doesn’t scare Washington anymore.

That was the lesson from a week of stinging defeats for the President, from the halls of Congress to the homepage of Breitbart. Not long ago, Trump could tank a company’s stock price with a Twitter blast and cow Republican allies into silence when he trampled political norms.

But these days, Trump doesn’t have much juice in the capital.

The President was disengaged throughout much of the Senate’s dramatic fight over healthcare reform, even though his administration made the repeal of the Affordable Care Act its first big legislative priority. When Trump finally waded into the fray late in the game—after Republican leaders had failed to rally the votes for the plan they crafted and Trump blessed—his tweeted threats failed to sway GOP Senate holdouts.

Lisa Murkowski was the primary target of Trump’s ire. On Wednesday, the President took aim at the Republican senator from Alaska, tweeting that Murkowski, a moderate in her fourth term, “really let the Republicans, and our country, down yesterday. Too bad!” Then Trump tapped his Interior Secretary, Ryan Zinke, to ramp up the pressure. Murkowski received a phone call warning that a vote against the bill could jeopardize her state’s chances of getting approval from the administration on energy projects.

Senators Debate Health Care Bill On Capitol Hill

OBAMACARE

Healthcare Repeal Failed. Here's What's Next for the Senate

How did Murkowski respond? By standing her ground. First, she went public with the threat, which embarrassed the administration and led Democrats to threaten an investigation. Then she went to the Senate floor early Friday morning and cast one of the three votes required to tank the Republican repeal plan.

Sen. John McCain, whom Trump targeted for derision during the 2016 campaign, joined Murkowski and Maine’s Susan Collins in voting against the bill. His decisive vote followed impassioned pleas from Vice President Mike Pence and a call from Trump himself, Republican officials say.

When the President went to war on his own attorney general this week, conservative media outlets normally friendly to Trump leapt to Jeff Sessions’ defense instead. Breitbart News, one of Trump’s top cheerleaders, called Sessions “a man who embodies the movement that elected Donald Trump President.” Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh criticized Trump’s handling of the spat. Outside groups rallied Tea Party leaders and lawmakers to Sessions’ defense, and Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley publicly warned his committee would not consider another nominee for the post this year. The battles lines had been drawn, and conservatives stood on Sessions’ side.

Meanwhile, congressional Republicans were making life difficult for Trump on another sensitive front. Both houses of Congress voted nearly unanimously to impose new sanctions on Russia, sending a bill to Trump’s desk that the White House has criticized. The move put the President in a bind: veto the bill—which Congress can override anyway—and risk looking as though he was taking a soft line on Moscow in the midst of deepening investigations into whether members of his campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election. Or sign it and risk retaliation from President Vladimir Putin.

White House officials expect Trump to sign the legislation, but to issue a signing statement outlining his reservations on the bill. What’s clear from the vote tally is that House and Senate Republicans didn’t much care about putting the President in a predicament. After all, they’d watched Trump twist arms to help get the healthcare repeal bill over the line in the House, only to turn around and call the legislation “mean.”

Even the military pushed pause on their commander in chief’s orders this week. In a series of tweets this week, Trump announced that transgender men and women would no longer be able to serve in the U.S. armed forces. The decree caught the Pentagon by surprise, with even the Joint Chiefs left unaware beforehand of Trump’s order. The Pentagon swiftly put the burden of clarifying the policy on the White House, and informed commanders that Trump’s tweets had no practical effect until that happened.

Trump remains a formidable foe. He has the bully pulpit of the presidency at his disposal and a loyal base that has largely stuck with him through the fumbles and controversies that marred his opening months in office.

But the series of sharp rebukes this week highlighted how quickly Trump’s political capital has eroded. Presidents are typically near the apex of their influence in the months after an election, riding high off their inauguration and enjoying a honeymoon in the polls. But Trump is shattering convention there as well. His approval rating hasn’t been north of 40% in more than a month, setting new records for unpopularity so soon into an administration. Maybe it’s no wonder few people in town seem afraid of him.

Quartet says Qatar talks possible but no concessions - CNN News

Quartet says Qatar talks possible but no concessions

By Sarah El Sirgany and Jay Croft, CNN

Updated 0325 GMT (1125 HKT) July 31, 2017

Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (CNN)The four Arab countries leading an embargo against Qatar are ready to talk but not to back down from their demands, the quartet's foreign ministers said in a joint press conference Sunday in Manama, Bahrain.

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir

"Dialogue doesn't mean there are concessions," Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir said.

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt have been enforcing an economic and diplomatic boycott of Qatar since June 5, saying the Gulf country supports terrorism.

The quartet issued 13 demands that included shutting down Qatar's al Jazeera TV network and severing ties with Iran.

Qatar denies the charges and calls the demands a breach of its sovereignty.

Emergency air corridors

As part of their restrictions, the quartet countries severed transport links to Qatar, closing their airspace to Qatari-owned or registered flights. The airspace closures cost Qatar Airlines about 50 flights a day, according to CNNMoney.

The state-run Saudi Press Agency (SPA) said Sunday that Qatar Airways can now use nine designated air corridors for emergencies under an agreement with the countries' aviation authorities.

One of the nine aviation corridors will be over the Mediterranean Sea and will be managed by Egypt's National Air Navigation Services Company, according to the SPA.

The Saudi aviation authority said in a statement that "this procedure affirms our commitment to safety of the International air navigation. And as it is customary in such circumstances to agree on alternative air corridors for emergencies overseas under our supervision to ease navigation and support air safety."

However, Qatar's Ministry of Transport and Civil Aviation Authority denied that the four countries had dedicated emergency air routes for Qatari aircraft.

"The Ministry of Transport and Communications and the Civil Aviation Authority confirm that those countries have issued no navigation announcements as followed at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and call upon the blockade countries to not leak such incorrect news before the ICAO Coincil's extraordinary session, scheduled for tomorrow Monday in Montreal, Canada," the ministry said in a statement.

'Real intention'

The quartet Sunday said negotiations are possible if Qatar shows "real intention" to stop supporting terrorism and interfering in neighboring countries.

Bahraini Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed bin Mohammed Al-Khalifa, said none of the demands were dropped.

"It has to be black or white," Al-Jubeir said, saying Qatar either funds terrorism or it doesn't.

The four countries also rejected charges about Saudi Arabia's handling of Qatari travel for Hajj, an annual Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia. It is scheduled to start August 30 this year.

Qatar alleges travel restrictions

Qatar's National Human Rights Committee said Saturday that Saudi Arabia is restricting Qatari access into the country for the rituals of Hajj and Umrah.

Foreign Minister of Qatar Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani

Foreign Minister of Qatar Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani

Qataris may enter Saudi Arabia through only two airports; and those living outside of Qatar must first return to Doha before entering Saudi territory, the committee said.

The Qatari committee also said similar "violations" occurred during Umrah in the month of Ramadan.

In defending Saudi Arabia, the quartet called the criticism "unacceptable." The joint statement said Qatar was obstructing its own citizens from attending the pilgrimage.

"We reject what Qatar is doing in politicizing (the pilgrimage)," Al-Jubeir said. "The Qatari pilgrims are welcome."

The Observer view on Donald Trump’s unfitness for office - Guardian

The Observer view on Donald Trump’s unfitness for office

Observer editorial

The incompetence and infighting at the White House dismay America’s allies and encourage its enemies

‘Like some kind of Shakespearean villain-clown, Trump plays not to the gallery but to the pit.’

Sunday 30 July 2017 09.10 AEST

The sense of things falling apart in Washington is palpable – and a matter of growing, serious international concern. Donald Trump’s latest asinine act of gesture politics, the forced resignation of his chief of staff, Reince Priebus, has shone a spotlight on the extraordinary chaos inside the White House. Even normally sober, experienced Washington observers now refer to the West Wing as a viper’s nest of seething rivalry, bitter feuds, gross incompetence and an unparalleled leadership vacuum.

Like some kind of Shakespearean villain-clown, Trump plays not to the gallery but to the pit. He is a Falstaff without the humour or the self-awareness, a cowardly, bullying Richard III without a clue. Late-night US satirists find in this an unending source of high comedy. If they did not laugh, they would cry. The world is witnessing the dramatic unfolding of a tragedy whose main victims are a seemingly helpless American audience, America’s system of balanced governance and its global reputation as a leading democratic light.

As his partisan, demeaning and self-admiring speech to the Boy Scouts of America illustrated, Trump endlessly reruns last year’s presidential election campaign, rails against the “fake news” media and appeals to the lowest common denominator in public debate. Not a word about duty, service, shared purpose or high ideals was to be found in his gutter-level discourse before a youthful gathering of 30,000 in West Virginia. Instead, he served up a sad cocktail of paranoia and narcissism. It was all about him and what he has supposedly achieved against the odds.

Which, for the record, is almost precisely nothing. After more than six months in office, and despite full Republican control of Congress, Trump cannot point to a single substantial legislative achievement. The bid to repeal the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, which finally went down in flames in the Senate last week, was the most spectacular and telling of Trump’s failures. His executive orders, such as the racist ban on Muslim travellers and last week’s bigoted attack on transgender people in the military, have mostly run foul of the courts or been pre-emptively ignored by those charged with implementing them.

Trump has instead squandered the political goodwill that traditionally accompanies a presidential honeymoon, shocked and outraged many middle-of-the-road voters who initially gave him the benefit of the doubt, thoroughly alienated Republican party traditionalists, who had tried in vain to swallow their doubts, and undermined the authority of the office of the president. Trump, a supposedly ace chief executive, has now lost a chief of staff, a deputy chief of staff, a national security adviser, a communications director and a press secretary in short order. To lose one or even two of his most senior people might be excused as unfortunate. To lose all five suggests the fault is his.

Perhaps John Kelly, the retired general hired to replace Priebus, can restore some semblance of order to the White House. It looks like a tall order. Kelly has no political experience beyond his brief tenure at the department of homeland security. Perhaps he will find an ally in HR McMaster, another army veteran, who is Trump’s national security adviser. But there is no good reason to believe the internal feuding, and Trump’s inability or disinclination to halt it, will end.

Anthony Scaramucci, the recently appointed, foul-mouthed communications director, has unfinished business with Steve Bannon, Trump’s top strategist. Trump seems determined to undermine his attorney general, Jeff Sessions. Then there is the self-interested leverage exerted by Trump family lightweights Ivanka Trump, Donald Jr and son-in-law, Jared Kushner. On top of all that, Kelly must work out how to handle the ever-expanding investigations of special counsel Robert Mueller into the Trump campaign’s dealings with Russia. A good start would be to halt scurrilous White House efforts to dig up dirt on Mueller and his team.

Yet even if Kelly succeeds in cracking the whip, curbing the in-fighting and containing the Russia scandal, he still has to deal with Trump himself. He has proved far more interested in settling scores, berating adversaries and showing off than in advancing a coherent domestic policy agenda. The next prospective car crash, following the Obamacare pile-up, is a September deadline for a federal budget and linked tax reforms and increased military spending promised by Trump. A budget deal proved impossible last spring and may do so again. If there is no agreement, a government shut-down looms, an outcome in line with current Washington trends. Lazy, feckless Trump has no interest in the onerous business of lobbying Congress or working the phones. He wants quick, easy wins or else he walks away.

This latter is one of several disturbing truths about Trump absorbed, to varying degrees, by Washington’s friends and allies in the past six months. Naive, misguided Theresa May and Liam Fox, the Brexit trade secretary, still seem to think Trump’s word can be trusted and that he will deliver a favourable trade deal. It is one of many delusions explaining why Britain’s government is so disrespected. In sharp contrast, Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor, heads the realist, pragmatic group of leaders who are learning to deal with a post-Obama world where the word of the American president cannot be trusted. In this new world, longstanding US commitments and treaties may not be honoured and future collaboration on key policies, such as climate change, Russia and Chinese military expansionism, is held hostage to presidential whim and the blinkered perspectives of the Ohio bar-room.

Merkel suggested earlier this year that the US (and Britain) could no longer be wholly relied upon. While not entirely true, for instance in the case of Anglo-American security guarantees for Germany and its sheltered exporters, it was plain what she meant. And this lesson has been understood by America’s enemies, too. In provocatively firing off another long-range, possibly nuclear-capable missile last week, North Korea seems to be testing how far it can go, geographically and politically. It is counting on Trump proving to be the blowhard that, until now, he has appeared to be.

Recent months have produced a litany of Trump threats and boasts over North Korea. There was no way, he said, that Pyongyang would deploy an ICBM capable of hitting the mainland US. “It’s not going to happen,” he tweeted. Wrong again, Donald. It did. By conducting its own satellite launch last week, ignoring western concerns, Iran has similarly thumbed its nose at Washington. Iran’s leaders should understand there would be “very serious” consequences if they pursued their ballistic missile programme, Trump had warned. Additional hints from Rex Tillerson, US secretary of state, and Jim Mattis, Pentagon chief, about regime change in Iran further darkened the strategic horizon. But guess what? Tehran took no notice at all. It went ahead anyway.

Or take Russia. Having played Trump to its advantage, Moscow’s open hand is turning into a clenched fist as it threatens reprisals over a new Congressional sanctions package. It was not hard to see this tactical switch coming, once it was clear Trump could not deliver the sort of concessions on Ukraine Putin craves. Except, in his fecklessness and blind vanity and courting Putin to the end, Trump didn’t see it coming at all. You can almost see Putin’s lip curl.

The common factor in all these situations is Trump’s self-induced powerlessness and ignorance, his chronic lack of credibility and presidential authority and consequent perceptions of US and western weakness. And in the case of all three actual or potential adversaries – North Korea, Iran and Russia – these perceptions are highly dangerous. Precisely because US responses, actions and reactions can no longer be relied upon or predicted, by friends and enemies alike, the potential for calamitous miscalculation is growing. This uncertainty, like the chaos in the White House and the extraordinary disarray of the American body politic, stems from Trump’s glaring unfitness for the highest office. As is now becoming ever plainer, this threatens us all.

Amid Show of Military Might in China, Xi Jinping Puts Rivals on Notice - New York Times

BEIJING — China’s president, Xi Jinping, has opened a public campaign to deepen his grip on power in a coming leadership shake-up, using a huge military parade on Sunday, speeches and propaganda, along with a purge in the past week, to warn officials to back him as the nation’s most powerful leader in two decades.

Wearing his mottled green uniform as commander in chief of the People’s Liberation Army, Mr. Xi watched as 12,000 troops marched and tanks, long-range missile launchers, jet fighters and other new weapons drove or flew past in impeccable arrays.

Mao famously said political power comes from the barrel of a gun, and Mr. Xi signaled that he, too, was counting on the military to stay ramrod loyal while he chooses a new leading lineup to be unveiled at a Communist Party congress in the autumn.

“Troops across the entire military, you must be unwavering in upholding the bedrock principle of absolute party leadership of the military,” Mr. Xi said at the parade, held on a dusty training base in Inner Mongolia region, 270 miles northwest of Beijing. “Always obey and follow the party. Go and fight wherever the party points.”

The ceremony was broadcast across the country.

Officially, the display was to celebrate the 90th anniversary of the creation of the People’s Liberation Army. But it was also the highlight of a week of political theater promoting Mr. Xi as a uniquely qualified politician whose elevated status as China’s “core” leader, endorsed by officials last year, should be entrenched at the party congress.

“These military parades could become a regular, institutionalized thing, but this one also has a special meaning this year,” said Deng Yuwen, a former editor at a party newspaper in Beijing who writes current affairs commentaries. “It’s meant to show that Xi Jinping firmly has the military in his grip, and nobody should have any illusions of challenging him.”

The congress will almost certainly give Mr. Xi, 64, a second, five-year term as the party general secretary and chairman of the commission that controls the military, and it will appoint a new team to work under him.

No exact date has been fixed for the congress. An annual legislative meeting early next year will also almost certainly give Mr. Xi five more years as state president.

Some experts have speculated that Mr. Xi may want to retain power after those terms end, although the constitution says he cannot stay on as president. There are no firm rules for maximum terms as party general secretary.

Mr. Xi has accompanied the demands for unity with a vivid warning to officials who step out of line. In the past week, he oversaw the abrupt purge of Sun Zhengcai, a one-time contender for promotion at the congress. Mr. Sun, 53, had been the party secretary of Chongqing, a city in southwest China, until his dismissal in mid-July.

The party announced last Monday that he was under investigation for violations of “discipline” — usually a euphemism for corruption — and Mr. Sun has since been pilloried in official media. Provincial leaders, including many with a shot at promotion, have called meetings to denounce Mr. Sun as a “tiger,” or corrupt senior official.

“At this point, we can’t say for sure he will be the last big tiger to be brought down before the opening of the party congress,” said Prof. Ding Xueliang, a political scientist at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology who studies the Chinese Communist Party. “We don’t know, other leaders don’t know either.”

For now, Mr. Xi appears to be seeking to ensure that his second-term lineup includes younger loyalists who will defend him and his policies for years to come. Several are poised to join the Politburo, a council of 25 senior central, provincial and military leaders. Up to 11 members of the Politburo are likely to retire at the congress, including five members of the Politburo Standing Committee, a more powerful body with seven members.

The negotiations over the new lineup happen in secret. But the burst of propaganda and warnings appears designed to pressure officials and retired leaders to go along with Mr. Xi’s wishes over who goes up and who steps down.

Mr. Xi is by the estimate of many observers China’s most powerful leader since Deng Xiaoping, who died in 1997. While the military does not have much direct say in politics, its support is essential for Mr. Xi’s long-term authority, said Professor Ding.

“Xi Jinping has spent more time on the military than any other leader,” Professor Ding said by telephone. “He knows clearly that eventually, if he wants to keep in power, if he wants to concentrate power even more, he must make sure the army is with him.”

Mr. Xi’s recent predecessors as national leader, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, also prepared for leadership turnovers with crescendos of propaganda. But the adulation around Mr. Xi has been strikingly worshipful. More than them, Mr. Xi has made a personal case for power.

On Friday, Study Times, a party newspaper widely read by officials, devoted its front page to an adulatory profile of Mr. Xi that said he was blessed by his “red” upbringing with special leadership mettle. It recounted his tough maturation as the son of a veteran revolutionary who was persecuted by Mao, testing the family’s loyalty to the Communist cause, and his seven years working in the dirt-poor countryside during the Cultural Revolution.

The profile has been was widely promoted by party newspapers and websites, and its anonymous author was described as “special commentator,” a title usually used for articles with high-level endorsement.

“I never saw anything like this for Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao,” said Mr. Deng, the former editor, who used to work for The Study Times. “They didn’t get this treatment.”

Mr. Xi, “grew up with an inheritance of red genes, was tempered by harsh setbacks and suffering, and has steeled himself in complicated international struggle,” said the profile, referring to his revolutionary background and career.

“The lion of the east has woken,” it said, referring to China. “But it faces tremendous risks of being surrounded by tigers and wolves and suffering even more intense strategic encirclement, clashes and meddling.”

The profile also said Mr. Xi personally pushed through difficult and contentious policy changes in his first five years in power, including building artificial islands fitted with military installations in the disputed South China Sea.

“In the South China Sea, he personally decided on building islands and consolidating reefs,” said the profile. Mr. Xi had, it said, “built a robust strategic base for ultimately prevailing in the struggle to defend the South China Sea, and has in effect constructed a Great Wall at sea.”

Mr. Xi’s power has already unsettled critics, including some inside the party, who worry that he has destabilized norms of collective leadership that can slow decision-making but also prevent dangerous overreach.

“This over-concentration of authority can really get you in trouble,” Susan L. Shirk, a former State Department deputy assistant secretary for China policy, said in an interview before the parade. “I especially think about foreign and security policy.”

As well as endorsing a new leadership, the congress will endorse a report laying out, in the dry jargon of party documents, Mr. Xi’s broad goals for his next five years. He told senior officials at the two-day meeting that ended on Thursday that the report should treat China’s next few years as a time of great risk.

“Look to the developments that are bring us risks,” he told the officials, according to a report in People’s Daily, the official party paper. “Be ready for the worst, and make the fullest preparations for that, while working toward a good outcome and striving for the best.”