Trump yet to fill top jobs as many fail loyalty test

February 21, 2017

Washington, Feb 21: During President Donald Trump's transition to power, his team reached out to Elliott Abrams for help building a new administration. Abrams, a seasoned Republican foreign policy official, sent lists of possible candidates for national security jobs.

trump

One by one, the answer from the Trump team came back no. The reason was consistent: This one had said disparaging things about Trump during the campaign; that one had signed a letter opposing him. Finally, the White House asked Abrams himself to meet with the president about becoming deputy secretary of state, only to have the same thing happen – vetoed because of the past criticism.

Abrams' experience has become a case study in the challenges Trump still faces in filling the top positions a month into his presidency.

Trump remains fixated on the campaign as he applies a loyalty test to some prospective officials. Many Republicans reacted to what happened to Abrams with dismay, leaving them increasingly leery about joining an administration that cannot get past the past.

As Trump brings candidates for national security adviser to meet with him in Florida this weekend, he presides over a government where the upper echelons remain sparsely populated.

Six of the 15 statutory cabinet secretaries are still awaiting Senate confirmation as Democrats nearly uniformly oppose almost all of the president's choices. Even some of the cabinet secretaries who are in place may feel they are home alone.

It is not just Secretary of State Rex W Tillerson who has no deputy secretary, much less Trump-appointed undersecretaries or assistant secretaries. Neither do the heads of the Treasury Department, the Education Department or any of the other cabinet departments. Only three of 15 nominees have been named for deputy secretary positions.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has a deputy only because he kept the one left over from President Barack Obama's administration.

That does not even begin to cover the rest of the more than 4,000 appointments that a president typically makes. In some cases, the Trump administration is even going in reverse. A senior political appointee at the housing department, who had started the job, was fired this past week and marched out of the building when someone discovered his previous statements critical of Trump.

The president's top Latin America official at the National Security Council was likewise fired after just weeks on the job for complaining about internal dysfunction at an off-the-record discussion at a Washington research organisation, according to officials, who confirmed a Politico report.

The State Department has laid off six top career officials in recent days, apparently out of questions about their loyalty to Trump.

“Many tough things were said about him and by him” before the last year's election, Abrams, who served as President Ronald Reagan's assistant secretary of state and President George W Bush's deputy national security adviser, said in an interview.

“I would have hoped he would have turned toward just hiring the most effective people to help him govern rather than looking back to what we said in that race.”

Trump faces other hurdles, too. With no cadre ready to go from past political service, he has been starting from scratch. His team has been slow to vet candidates, and in some cases his choices have had troubles with their business backgrounds or other matters.

And Democrats have mounted a wall of resistance to his nominations, slowing the process down.

The White House did not respond to requests for comment, but Trump has disputed reports of troubles.

“The White House is running so smoothly, so smoothly,” he told a rally of supporters in Melbourne, Florida, on Saturday. “And believe me, we inherited one big mess, that I can tell you.”

The ill will between Trump and much of the Republican establishment works both ways. Many Republicans who might have agreed to work for the president have been turned off by what they consider his sometimes erratic behaviour and the competing power centres inside his White House.

After firing his first national security adviser, Michael T Flynn, Trump found that his initial choice for a replacement, Robert S Harward, a retired vice admiral, would not take the job.

“The problem is that with each successive episode, it raises the stakes for the next one,” said Peter D Feaver, a Duke University professor who was a strategic planning adviser to Bush.

“It's going to be hard for the next outsider to accept the national security job and not request the ability to make personnel changes.”

Richard N Haass, a former Republican official and now president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said Trump had “ruled out much of an entire generation of Republican public policy types” and alarmed others with his empowerment of Stephen Bannon, his chief strategist, to shape national security. Even some cabinet secretaries appear unable to pick their own staff.

“This is unprecedented, it's untraditional, it's outside the mainstream,” said Haass, whose own name had been floated for a position.

“And so it's just that you'd be signing on for, at a minimum, tremendous uncertainty, and quite possibly for being associated with a set of policies you deeply disagree with.”

Stuart Holliday, an ambassador under Bush, said many Republicans would want to work for Tillerson or Mattis.

“However, the Republican foreign policy bench is not that deep at senior levels,” he said, “especially if you factor in people who took themselves off the field.”

Former Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., said the business veterans that Trump had enlisted for his cabinet were “the most positive thing about his administration so far.”

But he added that the president's disregard for advice could complicate his efforts to fill posts.

“You get the feeling that he's still flying by his own experiences,” he said, “and that's got to concern anyone who cares about these issues.”

For Trump, the challenge is more pronounced because he and his advisers feel they cannot trust some of the senior career professionals still working at the White House or cabinet departments.

Opposition within

Leaks about Flynn and Trump's phone calls with foreign leaders have convinced White House officials that they face an opposition within.

“You have a new administration that also has a fewer people familiar with the processes and systems of government, including the importance of the vetting process,” said Max Stier, chief executive of the Center for Presidential Transition at the Partnership for Public Service.

“You can't operate as they did in the campaign context, with a smaller than usual group – it doesn't work.”

Trump's failure to vet candidates in advance has led to some stumbles. A White House scheduler was fired this past week because of an issue that surfaced in her background check, something that normally would have been completed weeks ago.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 30,2020

New York, Jan 30: Three Indian citizens were arrested by border patrol agents here for entering the US illegally.

US Border Patrol agents stopped a vehicle near Massena in New York state along the county's northern border on January 24. During the vehicle checking, the agents found that two of the passengers were Indian citizens who entered the US illegally and not at a designated port of entry.

Both the passengers were transported to the Border Patrol Station for processing and charged.

The vehicle driver, also an Indian citizen who originally entered illegally into the US in 2012 and was ordered removed from the country in absentia last December, was charged with alien smuggling, a felony, which carries a penalty of a fine and up to five years of imprisonment for each violation.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 2,2020

Moscow, Jul 2: Russian voters approved changes to the constitution that will allow President Vladimir Putin to hold power until 2036, but the weeklong plebiscite that concluded Wednesday was tarnished by widespread reports of pressure on voters and other irregularities.

With most of the nation's polls closed and 20% of precincts counted, 72% voted for the constitutional amendments, according to election officials.

For the first time in Russia, polls were kept open for a week to bolster turnout without increasing crowds casting ballots amid the coronavirus pandemic a provision that Kremlin critics denounced as an extra tool to manipulate the outcome.

A massive propaganda campaign and the opposition's failure to mount a coordinated challenge helped Putin get the result he wanted, but the plebiscite could end up eroding his position because of the unconventional methods used to boost participation and the dubious legal basis for the balloting.

By the time polls closed in Moscow and most other parts of Western Russia, the overall turnout was at 65%, according to election officials. In some regions, almost 90% of eligible voters cast ballots.

On Russia's easternmost Chukchi Peninsula, nine hours ahead of Moscow, officials quickly announced full preliminary results showing 80% of voters supported the amendments, and in other parts of the Far East, they said over 70% of voters backed the changes.

Kremlin critics and independent election observers questioned the turnout figures.

We look at neighboring regions, and anomalies are obvious there are regions where the turnout is artificially (boosted), there are regions where it is more or less real, Grigory Melkonyants, co-chair of the independent election monitoring group Golos, told The Associated Press.

Putin voted at a Moscow polling station, dutifully showing his passport to the election worker. His face was uncovered, unlike most of the other voters who were offered free masks at the entrance.

The vote completes a convoluted saga that began in January, when Putin first proposed the constitutional changes.

He offered to broaden the powers of parliament and redistribute authority among the branches of government, stoking speculation he might seek to become parliamentary speaker or chairman of the State Council when his presidential term ends in 2024.

His intentions became clear only hours before a vote in parliament, when legislator Valentina Tereshkova, a Soviet-era cosmonaut who was the first woman in space in 1963, proposed letting him run two more times.

The amendments, which also emphasize the primacy of Russian law over international norms, outlaw same-sex marriages and mention a belief in God as a core value, were quickly passed by the Kremlin-controlled legislature.

Putin, who has been in power for more than two decades longer than any other Kremlin leader since Soviet dictator Josef Stalin said he would decide later whether to run again in 2024.

He argued that resetting the term count was necessary to keep his lieutenants focused on their work instead of darting their eyes in search for possible successors.

Analyst Gleb Pavlovsky, a former Kremlin political consultant, said Putin's push to hold the vote despite the fact that Russia has thousands of new coronavirus infections each day reflected his potential vulnerabilities.

Putin lacks confidence in his inner circle and he's worried about the future, Pavlovsky said.

He wants an irrefutable proof of public support.

Even though the parliament's approval was enough to make it law, the 67-year-old Russian president put his constitutional plan to voters to showcase his broad support and add a democratic veneer to the changes.

But then the coronavirus pandemic engulfed Russia, forcing him to postpone the April 22 plebiscite.

The delay made Putin's campaign blitz lose momentum and left his constitutional reform plan hanging as the damage from the virus mounted and public discontent grew.

Plummeting incomes and rising unemployment during the outbreak have dented his approval ratings, which sank to 59%, the lowest level since he came to power, according to the Levada Center, Russia's top independent pollster.

Moscow-based political analyst Ekaterina Schulmann said the Kremlin had faced a difficult dilemma: Holding the vote sooner would have brought accusations of jeopardizing public health for political ends, while delaying it raised the risks of defeat.

Holding it in the autumn would have been too risky, she said.

In Moscow, several activists briefly lay on Red Square, forming the number 2036 with their bodies in protest before police stopped them.

Some others in Moscow and St. Petersburg staged one-person pickets and police didn't intervene.

Several hundred opposition supporters rallied in central Moscow to protest the changes, defying a ban on public gatherings imposed for the coronavirus outbreak. Police didn't intervene and even handed masks to the participants.

Authorities mounted a sweeping effort to persuade teachers, doctors, workers at public sector enterprises and others who are paid by the state to cast ballots. Reports surfaced from across the vast country of managers coercing people to vote.

The Kremlin has used other tactics to boost turnout and support for the amendments.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 15,2020

Jun 15: Oil prices fell on Monday, with U.S. oil dropping more than 2%, as a spike in new coronavirus cases in the United States raised concerns over a second wave of the virus which would weigh on the pace of fuel demand recovery.

Brent crude futures fell 66 cents, or 1.7%, at $38.07 a barrel as of 0016 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude futures fell 81 cents, or 2.2%, to $35.45 a barrel.

Both benchmarks ended down about 8% last week, their first weekly declines since April, hit by the U.S. coronavirus concerns: More than 25,000 new cases were reported on Saturday alone as more states, including Florida and Texas, reported record new infection highs.

"Concerns about the recent uptick in COVID-19 infections in the U.S. and a potential 'second wave' are weighing on oil at the moment," said Stephen Innes, chief global market strategist at AxiCorp.

Meanwhile, an OPEC-led monitoring panel will meet on Thursday to discuss ongoing record production cuts to see whether countries have delivered their share of the reductions, but will not make any decision, according to five OPEC+ sources.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and its allies, collectively known as OPEC+, have been reducing supplies by 9.7 million barrels per day (bpd), about 10% of pre-pandemic demand, and agreed in early June to extend the cuts for a month until end-July.

Iraq, one of the laggards in complying with the curbs, agreed with its major oil companies to cut crude production further in June, Iraqi officials working at the fields told Reuters on Sunday.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.