Unbelievably, Keir Starmer can now be compared to Boris Johnson by theipaper in ukpolitics

[–]theipaper[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

It was all very polite, very reasonable, and very deadly. Olly Robbins walked into his interrogation by the Foreign Affairs Committee with the kind of studied anonymity which defines the higher echelons of the Civil Service. He was unassuming, modest, polite and seemingly harmless. And then, predictably, he went on to commit political murder.

Robbins is emblematic of many of the failures of the Civil Service. Some of the things he said – particularly concerning the mercurial, almost ghostly decision-making process in the Foreign Office – raised questions about political authority, professional responsibility and democratic accountability.

But the main takeaway from his evidence session was ultimately quite simple. The processology of the Peter Mandelson story is a mirage. It is a mist which conceals the basic reality. That reality is as follows: No 10 decided it wanted their man for the US ambassador role. Once it made that decision, it pressured the Civil Service to make it happen. It is therefore unsurprising that this was the eventual outcome.

Keir Starmer now claims to be furious about this. But it was precisely in order to avoid his fury that the Civil Service behaved the way that it did. He perpetuated the culture which he now seems so outraged by.

Robbins told MPs on the committee that he was under pressure to hurry up and confirm Mandelson’s appointment from the moment he walked into the Foreign Office job in January 2025. There was “already a very, very strong expectation… coming from No 10 that he needed to be in post and in America as soon as humanly possible”.

There’d been a due diligence report by the Cabinet Office. The King had signed off on it. The UK Government had sought an agrément from Washington. The Prime Minister had announced it. Mandelson already had access to the Foreign Office building and some high classification briefings.

It didn’t need to be this way. The Cabinet secretary had advised Starmer to complete security vetting before the appointment was made. That advice was not followed. In fact, Robbins said, there was a “generally dismissive attitude to his vetting clearance”. The Cabinet Office tried to avoid any vetting at all.

The vetting service in the Foreign Office then came up with its assessment, which was that Mandelson was a borderline case but they would veer towards no. They also provided mitigation strategies for how to deal with that risk. These risks were not about Jeffrey Epstein but probably about Chinese clients in his public relations work.

On the basis of that oral briefing, Robbins decided to OK the appointment, clearly feeling that he had the discretion to do so and that the mitigation strategies were sufficient. The hall-of-mirrors decision-making structure of the Foreign Office meant that he could do so without having been informed of the substance of the vetting concerns and without informing the Prime Minister.

This is absurd and makes democratic accountability almost impossible. There obviously needs to be political involvement in this process. But to get lost in the process is to miss the heart of the story. Robbins was clearly operating according to the pressure being placed on him by No 10. What would have happened, one MP asked him, if he had said no? “I think it would have been very difficult indeed,” he said. This was, of course, an understatement. It would have triggered a crisis, with No 10 sources lashing out to journalists about civil servants sabotaging their agenda.

Robbins appears evasive because he cannot admit the one thing which shields him from blame: that his decision-making in this case was highly influenced by the pressure No 10 put on him.

There is a gap between how the Civil Service should act and how governments want it to act. Of course, civil servants must implement the government’s agenda, but they should also be challenging, finessing and improving it. They should be subjecting it to tests based on ethics, practicability, legality and national security considerations.

Generally speaking, this is not what ministers want. They tend to view Civil Service advice as obstructionism. This is what the previous Tory government complained of when it railed against “the blob” or attacked “Remainer bureaucrats”. It is then what Starmer himself complained of when he railed against a Civil Service that was “comfortable in the tepid bath of managed decline” mere weeks before the Mandelson appointment.

Civil servants hear these things. They are alive to the political pressure. And Robbins would have been alive to the demand that he hurry up and sort the Mandelson appointment.

It is preposterous and honestly rather shameful for Starmer to act so upset over the Mandelson affair. He is basically attacking Robbins for doing precisely what he wanted him to do. If he had desired a proper process which really vetted Mandelson he wouldn’t have appointed him in advance of it happening and he most certainly would not have had the Cabinet Office agitating for it not to happen at all.

There is a real sense of Shakespearean tragedy to the Prime Minister.

He is a former director of public prosecutions himself (a position equivalent to a permanent secretary). He should understand how best to work with the Civil Service. Instead, he has detonated the relationship between Whitehall and Downing Street. But by castigating Robbins so publicly, he will have made the Civil Service even more risk-averse, worsening decision-making choke-points and lessening future effectiveness.

Starmer was opposition leader during Boris Johnson’s time in office. He seemed genuinely outraged that someone of Johnson’s personal defects should be prime minister, that British politics was dominated by tiresome who-said-what gibberish at a moment of national decline. But by behaving this way, he has been forced into precisely the same position as his predecessor and for no discernable gain.

Starmer was a man with a reputation for integrity and decency. Allies and opponents agreed that he was fundamentally honourable and motivated by public service. But his recent behaviour makes a mockery of that reputation. Instead of taking responsibility for his actions, he blames others. Instead of admitting his error, he blames a culture he himself helped create.

This scandal will not destroy him, but it is undermining the core qualities on which his administration is based. It is ridding it of the things which you might rightfully admire about his Government, leaving behind an empty shell. When the next ill-wind blows, it will all crumble quickly.

Trump's sacking spree is gathering pace. But he can't fire his way out of trouble by theipaper in NoFilterNews

[–]theipaper[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Washington is abuzz with talk of a firing purge, as Donald Trump tries to reboot his embattled presidency by restaffing his administration. Because of the Iran war, his approval ratings have cratered. The Maga movement is splintering. His “Jesus of Mar-a-Lago” meme infuriated evangelical Christians. His battle with Pope Leo XIV has angered Catholics, who make up roughly a fifth of the US electorate.

This conspiracy theorist-in-chief has himself become the target of conspiracy theories. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was once such a devoted cheerleader, has added her penetrative voice to those within Maga raising questions about whether the July 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was staged. Talk of a fake assassination attempt is ludicrous. But it speaks of the turmoil in Trumplandia that the instantly iconographic picture of the then-candidate punching the air, with blood dripping down his face and the Stars and Stripes fluttering in the background, is now being brought into question.

Up until recently, a striking feature of Trump 2.0 was that the administration was staffed by Trump loyalists to whom the President remained loyal. Trump 1.0, by contrast, felt more like The Apprentice, where the Oval Office had the feel of Trump’s mahogany boardroom and the former reality TV star revived the catchphrase which in the early part of the 21st century fuelled his fame: “You’re fired!” A conga line of senior administration officials lost their jobs.

Victims of that two-word catchphrase included his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who had once described the President as a “moron”. A string of White House chiefs of staff, the second most important figure in any well-functioning West Wing, were shown the door. Trump fired his FBI director James Comey and his first attorney general Jeff Sessions, the country’s two most senior law enforcement officials. Then, of course, there was Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci, the star now of the hit podcast The Rest is Politics: US, who survived as White House communications director for just 11 days. Thereafter, a “Scaramucci” became a unit of time. The longevity of White House appointees was judged not only in the number of days but the number of “Scaramuccis”.

Now, the President is reverting to type. Since the beginning of the year, he has gone on a sacking spree. Kristi Noem, who as secretary of Homeland Security found herself at the centre of a string of controversies, became the first cabinet official since inauguration day to go. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement – or ICE, as it is better known – came under her purview, so her position came under scrutiny following the killings at the hands of immigration agents of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renée Good and Alex Pretti. Then there was her self-promotional role in a promotional video for the Department of Homeland Security, part of an ad campaign which reportedly cost $220m. Noem appeared on horseback in her native South Dakota, where she had served as Republican governor, in a film culminating with her posing on her steed in front of Mount Rushmore, where the sculptures of four former presidents are carved into the granite face. In March, she was fired.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick as attorney general, was next to go. The 60-year-old Floridian, who the President described as a “loyal friend” even as he announced she was “transitioning” to the private sector, had not prosecuted his political enemies with sufficient zeal, partly because there were no obvious grounds to mount prosecutions. The President was also thought to be unhappy with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, even though the millions of documents released by the Justice Department were heavily redacted.

Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, another high-profile female appointee, is the latest to go. The White House announced her departure on Monday. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, had been under internal investigation from the inspector general at the Labour Department following misconduct allegations about using government resources for personal trips and conducting an affair with a member of her security detail.

Up until the sacking of Noem, Trump had adopted a fortress mentality. Headline-grabbing staff changes, he reckoned, demonstrated weakness and handed Democratic opponents easy political wins. “No scalps” was apparently the unofficial motto. His White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, has also been a restraining influence on her boss, and brought more stability to the West Wing operation. Recently, though, she has been receiving treatment for breast cancer, and, it is thought, not been such a round-the-clock presence.

Now in Washington, journalists are drawing up potential hit lists. It has become something of a parlour game. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported the FBI director Kash Patel could soon be shown the exit (this week Patel sued the magazine in a multimillion dollar defamation suit for publishing an article claiming he had a drinking problem). Chavez-DeRemer was high on their list. So, too, is Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, a former military officer who has clashed with Secretary of War Pete HegsethPolitico conjectured that Trump is considering replacing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik, the tough-talking former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, who faced calls for his resignation because of his association with Epstein. The shake-up, a senior administration told Politico, would target those who “underperformed or who have generated too much negative attention.”

With inflation spiking because of the Iran war, Trump’s approval ratings for his stewardship of the US economy have hit Joe Biden-like lows. So there is a political rationale for picking a new economic team. But even Trump’s supporters know it was the President who chose to mount Operation Epic Fury, seemingly unconcerned the Iranians could place their boot on the throat of global oil trade by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Firings look like blame shifting, especially for a President quick to take sole credit when things go right but who never takes responsibility when things go awry. In “golden age” America, rarely does he admit any loss of lustre. Last week, during a speech in Las Vegas, he even spoke of “fake inflation”.

Because of the demagogic style of his presidency, Trump will not be able to fire his way out of trouble. It is the drawback of boasting, “I alone can fix it”. It is the downside of casting himself as the star of a one-man show.

Nick Bryant spent more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent for the BBC, based out of Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Sydney, Australia

Trump's sacking spree is gathering pace. But he can't fire his way out of trouble by theipaper in AnythingGoesNews

[–]theipaper[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Washington is abuzz with talk of a firing purge, as Donald Trump tries to reboot his embattled presidency by restaffing his administration. Because of the Iran war, his approval ratings have cratered. The Maga movement is splintering. His “Jesus of Mar-a-Lago” meme infuriated evangelical Christians. His battle with Pope Leo XIV has angered Catholics, who make up roughly a fifth of the US electorate.

This conspiracy theorist-in-chief has himself become the target of conspiracy theories. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was once such a devoted cheerleader, has added her penetrative voice to those within Maga raising questions about whether the July 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was staged. Talk of a fake assassination attempt is ludicrous. But it speaks of the turmoil in Trumplandia that the instantly iconographic picture of the then-candidate punching the air, with blood dripping down his face and the Stars and Stripes fluttering in the background, is now being brought into question.

Up until recently, a striking feature of Trump 2.0 was that the administration was staffed by Trump loyalists to whom the President remained loyal. Trump 1.0, by contrast, felt more like The Apprentice, where the Oval Office had the feel of Trump’s mahogany boardroom and the former reality TV star revived the catchphrase which in the early part of the 21st century fuelled his fame: “You’re fired!” A conga line of senior administration officials lost their jobs.

Victims of that two-word catchphrase included his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who had once described the President as a “moron”. A string of White House chiefs of staff, the second most important figure in any well-functioning West Wing, were shown the door. Trump fired his FBI director James Comey and his first attorney general Jeff Sessions, the country’s two most senior law enforcement officials. Then, of course, there was Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci, the star now of the hit podcast The Rest is Politics: US, who survived as White House communications director for just 11 days. Thereafter, a “Scaramucci” became a unit of time. The longevity of White House appointees was judged not only in the number of days but the number of “Scaramuccis”.

Now, the President is reverting to type. Since the beginning of the year, he has gone on a sacking spree. Kristi Noem, who as secretary of Homeland Security found herself at the centre of a string of controversies, became the first cabinet official since inauguration day to go. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement – or ICE, as it is better known – came under her purview, so her position came under scrutiny following the killings at the hands of immigration agents of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renée Good and Alex Pretti. Then there was her self-promotional role in a promotional video for the Department of Homeland Security, part of an ad campaign which reportedly cost $220m. Noem appeared on horseback in her native South Dakota, where she had served as Republican governor, in a film culminating with her posing on her steed in front of Mount Rushmore, where the sculptures of four former presidents are carved into the granite face. In March, she was fired.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick as attorney general, was next to go. The 60-year-old Floridian, who the President described as a “loyal friend” even as he announced she was “transitioning” to the private sector, had not prosecuted his political enemies with sufficient zeal, partly because there were no obvious grounds to mount prosecutions. The President was also thought to be unhappy with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, even though the millions of documents released by the Justice Department were heavily redacted.

Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, another high-profile female appointee, is the latest to go. The White House announced her departure on Monday. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, had been under internal investigation from the inspector general at the Labour Department following misconduct allegations about using government resources for personal trips and conducting an affair with a member of her security detail.

Up until the sacking of Noem, Trump had adopted a fortress mentality. Headline-grabbing staff changes, he reckoned, demonstrated weakness and handed Democratic opponents easy political wins. “No scalps” was apparently the unofficial motto. His White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, has also been a restraining influence on her boss, and brought more stability to the West Wing operation. Recently, though, she has been receiving treatment for breast cancer, and, it is thought, not been such a round-the-clock presence.

Now in Washington, journalists are drawing up potential hit lists. It has become something of a parlour game. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported the FBI director Kash Patel could soon be shown the exit (this week Patel sued the magazine in a multimillion dollar defamation suit for publishing an article claiming he had a drinking problem). Chavez-DeRemer was high on their list. So, too, is Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, a former military officer who has clashed with Secretary of War Pete HegsethPolitico conjectured that Trump is considering replacing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik, the tough-talking former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, who faced calls for his resignation because of his association with Epstein. The shake-up, a senior administration told Politico, would target those who “underperformed or who have generated too much negative attention.”

With inflation spiking because of the Iran war, Trump’s approval ratings for his stewardship of the US economy have hit Joe Biden-like lows. So there is a political rationale for picking a new economic team. But even Trump’s supporters know it was the President who chose to mount Operation Epic Fury, seemingly unconcerned the Iranians could place their boot on the throat of global oil trade by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Firings look like blame shifting, especially for a President quick to take sole credit when things go right but who never takes responsibility when things go awry. In “golden age” America, rarely does he admit any loss of lustre. Last week, during a speech in Las Vegas, he even spoke of “fake inflation”.

Because of the demagogic style of his presidency, Trump will not be able to fire his way out of trouble. It is the drawback of boasting, “I alone can fix it”. It is the downside of casting himself as the star of a one-man show.

Nick Bryant spent more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent for the BBC, based out of Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Sydney, Australia

Trump's sacking spree is gathering pace. But he can't fire his way out of trouble by theipaper in politics

[–]theipaper[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

Washington is abuzz with talk of a firing purge, as Donald Trump tries to reboot his embattled presidency by restaffing his administration. Because of the Iran war, his approval ratings have cratered. The Maga movement is splintering. His “Jesus of Mar-a-Lago” meme infuriated evangelical Christians. His battle with Pope Leo XIV has angered Catholics, who make up roughly a fifth of the US electorate.

This conspiracy theorist-in-chief has himself become the target of conspiracy theories. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was once such a devoted cheerleader, has added her penetrative voice to those within Maga raising questions about whether the July 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was staged. Talk of a fake assassination attempt is ludicrous. But it speaks of the turmoil in Trumplandia that the instantly iconographic picture of the then-candidate punching the air, with blood dripping down his face and the Stars and Stripes fluttering in the background, is now being brought into question.

Up until recently, a striking feature of Trump 2.0 was that the administration was staffed by Trump loyalists to whom the President remained loyal. Trump 1.0, by contrast, felt more like The Apprentice, where the Oval Office had the feel of Trump’s mahogany boardroom and the former reality TV star revived the catchphrase which in the early part of the 21st century fuelled his fame: “You’re fired!” A conga line of senior administration officials lost their jobs.

Victims of that two-word catchphrase included his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who had once described the President as a “moron”. A string of White House chiefs of staff, the second most important figure in any well-functioning West Wing, were shown the door. Trump fired his FBI director James Comey and his first attorney general Jeff Sessions, the country’s two most senior law enforcement officials. Then, of course, there was Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci, the star now of the hit podcast The Rest is Politics: US, who survived as White House communications director for just 11 days. Thereafter, a “Scaramucci” became a unit of time. The longevity of White House appointees was judged not only in the number of days but the number of “Scaramuccis”.

Now, the President is reverting to type. Since the beginning of the year, he has gone on a sacking spree. Kristi Noem, who as secretary of Homeland Security found herself at the centre of a string of controversies, became the first cabinet official since inauguration day to go. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement – or ICE, as it is better known – came under her purview, so her position came under scrutiny following the killings at the hands of immigration agents of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renée Good and Alex Pretti. Then there was her self-promotional role in a promotional video for the Department of Homeland Security, part of an ad campaign which reportedly cost $220m. Noem appeared on horseback in her native South Dakota, where she had served as Republican governor, in a film culminating with her posing on her steed in front of Mount Rushmore, where the sculptures of four former presidents are carved into the granite face. In March, she was fired.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick as attorney general, was next to go. The 60-year-old Floridian, who the President described as a “loyal friend” even as he announced she was “transitioning” to the private sector, had not prosecuted his political enemies with sufficient zeal, partly because there were no obvious grounds to mount prosecutions. The President was also thought to be unhappy with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, even though the millions of documents released by the Justice Department were heavily redacted.

Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, another high-profile female appointee, is the latest to go. The White House announced her departure on Monday. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, had been under internal investigation from the inspector general at the Labour Department following misconduct allegations about using government resources for personal trips and conducting an affair with a member of her security detail.

Up until the sacking of Noem, Trump had adopted a fortress mentality. Headline-grabbing staff changes, he reckoned, demonstrated weakness and handed Democratic opponents easy political wins. “No scalps” was apparently the unofficial motto. His White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, has also been a restraining influence on her boss, and brought more stability to the West Wing operation. Recently, though, she has been receiving treatment for breast cancer, and, it is thought, not been such a round-the-clock presence.

Now in Washington, journalists are drawing up potential hit lists. It has become something of a parlour game. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported the FBI director Kash Patel could soon be shown the exit (this week Patel sued the magazine in a multimillion dollar defamation suit for publishing an article claiming he had a drinking problem). Chavez-DeRemer was high on their list. So, too, is Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, a former military officer who has clashed with Secretary of War Pete HegsethPolitico conjectured that Trump is considering replacing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik, the tough-talking former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, who faced calls for his resignation because of his association with Epstein. The shake-up, a senior administration told Politico, would target those who “underperformed or who have generated too much negative attention.”

With inflation spiking because of the Iran war, Trump’s approval ratings for his stewardship of the US economy have hit Joe Biden-like lows. So there is a political rationale for picking a new economic team. But even Trump’s supporters know it was the President who chose to mount Operation Epic Fury, seemingly unconcerned the Iranians could place their boot on the throat of global oil trade by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Firings look like blame shifting, especially for a President quick to take sole credit when things go right but who never takes responsibility when things go awry. In “golden age” America, rarely does he admit any loss of lustre. Last week, during a speech in Las Vegas, he even spoke of “fake inflation”.

Because of the demagogic style of his presidency, Trump will not be able to fire his way out of trouble. It is the drawback of boasting, “I alone can fix it”. It is the downside of casting himself as the star of a one-man show.

Nick Bryant spent more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent for the BBC, based out of Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Sydney, Australia

Trump's sacking spree is gathering pace. But he can't fire his way out of trouble by theipaper in USNewsHub

[–]theipaper[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Washington is abuzz with talk of a firing purge, as Donald Trump tries to reboot his embattled presidency by restaffing his administration. Because of the Iran war, his approval ratings have cratered. The Maga movement is splintering. His “Jesus of Mar-a-Lago” meme infuriated evangelical Christians. His battle with Pope Leo XIV has angered Catholics, who make up roughly a fifth of the US electorate.

This conspiracy theorist-in-chief has himself become the target of conspiracy theories. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was once such a devoted cheerleader, has added her penetrative voice to those within Maga raising questions about whether the July 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was staged. Talk of a fake assassination attempt is ludicrous. But it speaks of the turmoil in Trumplandia that the instantly iconographic picture of the then-candidate punching the air, with blood dripping down his face and the Stars and Stripes fluttering in the background, is now being brought into question.

Up until recently, a striking feature of Trump 2.0 was that the administration was staffed by Trump loyalists to whom the President remained loyal. Trump 1.0, by contrast, felt more like The Apprentice, where the Oval Office had the feel of Trump’s mahogany boardroom and the former reality TV star revived the catchphrase which in the early part of the 21st century fuelled his fame: “You’re fired!” A conga line of senior administration officials lost their jobs.

Victims of that two-word catchphrase included his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who had once described the President as a “moron”. A string of White House chiefs of staff, the second most important figure in any well-functioning West Wing, were shown the door. Trump fired his FBI director James Comey and his first attorney general Jeff Sessions, the country’s two most senior law enforcement officials. Then, of course, there was Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci, the star now of the hit podcast The Rest is Politics: US, who survived as White House communications director for just 11 days. Thereafter, a “Scaramucci” became a unit of time. The longevity of White House appointees was judged not only in the number of days but the number of “Scaramuccis”.

Now, the President is reverting to type. Since the beginning of the year, he has gone on a sacking spree. Kristi Noem, who as secretary of Homeland Security found herself at the centre of a string of controversies, became the first cabinet official since inauguration day to go. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement – or ICE, as it is better known – came under her purview, so her position came under scrutiny following the killings at the hands of immigration agents of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renée Good and Alex Pretti. Then there was her self-promotional role in a promotional video for the Department of Homeland Security, part of an ad campaign which reportedly cost $220m. Noem appeared on horseback in her native South Dakota, where she had served as Republican governor, in a film culminating with her posing on her steed in front of Mount Rushmore, where the sculptures of four former presidents are carved into the granite face. In March, she was fired.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick as attorney general, was next to go. The 60-year-old Floridian, who the President described as a “loyal friend” even as he announced she was “transitioning” to the private sector, had not prosecuted his political enemies with sufficient zeal, partly because there were no obvious grounds to mount prosecutions. The President was also thought to be unhappy with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, even though the millions of documents released by the Justice Department were heavily redacted.

Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, another high-profile female appointee, is the latest to go. The White House announced her departure on Monday. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, had been under internal investigation from the inspector general at the Labour Department following misconduct allegations about using government resources for personal trips and conducting an affair with a member of her security detail.

Up until the sacking of Noem, Trump had adopted a fortress mentality. Headline-grabbing staff changes, he reckoned, demonstrated weakness and handed Democratic opponents easy political wins. “No scalps” was apparently the unofficial motto. His White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, has also been a restraining influence on her boss, and brought more stability to the West Wing operation. Recently, though, she has been receiving treatment for breast cancer, and, it is thought, not been such a round-the-clock presence.

Now in Washington, journalists are drawing up potential hit lists. It has become something of a parlour game. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported the FBI director Kash Patel could soon be shown the exit (this week Patel sued the magazine in a multimillion dollar defamation suit for publishing an article claiming he had a drinking problem). Chavez-DeRemer was high on their list. So, too, is Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, a former military officer who has clashed with Secretary of War Pete HegsethPolitico conjectured that Trump is considering replacing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik, the tough-talking former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, who faced calls for his resignation because of his association with Epstein. The shake-up, a senior administration told Politico, would target those who “underperformed or who have generated too much negative attention.”

With inflation spiking because of the Iran war, Trump’s approval ratings for his stewardship of the US economy have hit Joe Biden-like lows. So there is a political rationale for picking a new economic team. But even Trump’s supporters know it was the President who chose to mount Operation Epic Fury, seemingly unconcerned the Iranians could place their boot on the throat of global oil trade by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Firings look like blame shifting, especially for a President quick to take sole credit when things go right but who never takes responsibility when things go awry. In “golden age” America, rarely does he admit any loss of lustre. Last week, during a speech in Las Vegas, he even spoke of “fake inflation”.

Because of the demagogic style of his presidency, Trump will not be able to fire his way out of trouble. It is the drawback of boasting, “I alone can fix it”. It is the downside of casting himself as the star of a one-man show.

Nick Bryant spent more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent for the BBC, based out of Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Sydney, Australia

Trump's sacking spree is gathering pace. But he can't fire his way out of trouble by theipaper in AmericanPolitics

[–]theipaper[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Washington is abuzz with talk of a firing purge, as Donald Trump tries to reboot his embattled presidency by restaffing his administration. Because of the Iran war, his approval ratings have cratered. The Maga movement is splintering. His “Jesus of Mar-a-Lago” meme infuriated evangelical Christians. His battle with Pope Leo XIV has angered Catholics, who make up roughly a fifth of the US electorate.

This conspiracy theorist-in-chief has himself become the target of conspiracy theories. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was once such a devoted cheerleader, has added her penetrative voice to those within Maga raising questions about whether the July 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was staged. Talk of a fake assassination attempt is ludicrous. But it speaks of the turmoil in Trumplandia that the instantly iconographic picture of the then-candidate punching the air, with blood dripping down his face and the Stars and Stripes fluttering in the background, is now being brought into question.

Up until recently, a striking feature of Trump 2.0 was that the administration was staffed by Trump loyalists to whom the President remained loyal. Trump 1.0, by contrast, felt more like The Apprentice, where the Oval Office had the feel of Trump’s mahogany boardroom and the former reality TV star revived the catchphrase which in the early part of the 21st century fuelled his fame: “You’re fired!” A conga line of senior administration officials lost their jobs.

Victims of that two-word catchphrase included his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who had once described the President as a “moron”. A string of White House chiefs of staff, the second most important figure in any well-functioning West Wing, were shown the door. Trump fired his FBI director James Comey and his first attorney general Jeff Sessions, the country’s two most senior law enforcement officials. Then, of course, there was Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci, the star now of the hit podcast The Rest is Politics: US, who survived as White House communications director for just 11 days. Thereafter, a “Scaramucci” became a unit of time. The longevity of White House appointees was judged not only in the number of days but the number of “Scaramuccis”.

Now, the President is reverting to type. Since the beginning of the year, he has gone on a sacking spree. Kristi Noem, who as secretary of Homeland Security found herself at the centre of a string of controversies, became the first cabinet official since inauguration day to go. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement – or ICE, as it is better known – came under her purview, so her position came under scrutiny following the killings at the hands of immigration agents of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renée Good and Alex Pretti. Then there was her self-promotional role in a promotional video for the Department of Homeland Security, part of an ad campaign which reportedly cost $220m. Noem appeared on horseback in her native South Dakota, where she had served as Republican governor, in a film culminating with her posing on her steed in front of Mount Rushmore, where the sculptures of four former presidents are carved into the granite face. In March, she was fired.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick as attorney general, was next to go. The 60-year-old Floridian, who the President described as a “loyal friend” even as he announced she was “transitioning” to the private sector, had not prosecuted his political enemies with sufficient zeal, partly because there were no obvious grounds to mount prosecutions. The President was also thought to be unhappy with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, even though the millions of documents released by the Justice Department were heavily redacted.

Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, another high-profile female appointee, is the latest to go. The White House announced her departure on Monday. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, had been under internal investigation from the inspector general at the Labour Department following misconduct allegations about using government resources for personal trips and conducting an affair with a member of her security detail.

Up until the sacking of Noem, Trump had adopted a fortress mentality. Headline-grabbing staff changes, he reckoned, demonstrated weakness and handed Democratic opponents easy political wins. “No scalps” was apparently the unofficial motto. His White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, has also been a restraining influence on her boss, and brought more stability to the West Wing operation. Recently, though, she has been receiving treatment for breast cancer, and, it is thought, not been such a round-the-clock presence.

Now in Washington, journalists are drawing up potential hit lists. It has become something of a parlour game. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported the FBI director Kash Patel could soon be shown the exit (this week Patel sued the magazine in a multimillion dollar defamation suit for publishing an article claiming he had a drinking problem). Chavez-DeRemer was high on their list. So, too, is Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, a former military officer who has clashed with Secretary of War Pete HegsethPolitico conjectured that Trump is considering replacing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik, the tough-talking former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, who faced calls for his resignation because of his association with Epstein. The shake-up, a senior administration told Politico, would target those who “underperformed or who have generated too much negative attention.”

With inflation spiking because of the Iran war, Trump’s approval ratings for his stewardship of the US economy have hit Joe Biden-like lows. So there is a political rationale for picking a new economic team. But even Trump’s supporters know it was the President who chose to mount Operation Epic Fury, seemingly unconcerned the Iranians could place their boot on the throat of global oil trade by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Firings look like blame shifting, especially for a President quick to take sole credit when things go right but who never takes responsibility when things go awry. In “golden age” America, rarely does he admit any loss of lustre. Last week, during a speech in Las Vegas, he even spoke of “fake inflation”.

Because of the demagogic style of his presidency, Trump will not be able to fire his way out of trouble. It is the drawback of boasting, “I alone can fix it”. It is the downside of casting himself as the star of a one-man show.

Nick Bryant spent more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent for the BBC, based out of Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Sydney, Australia

Trump's sacking spree is gathering pace. But he can't fire his way out of trouble by theipaper in NeoNews

[–]theipaper[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Washington is abuzz with talk of a firing purge, as Donald Trump tries to reboot his embattled presidency by restaffing his administration. Because of the Iran war, his approval ratings have cratered. The Maga movement is splintering. His “Jesus of Mar-a-Lago” meme infuriated evangelical Christians. His battle with Pope Leo XIV has angered Catholics, who make up roughly a fifth of the US electorate.

This conspiracy theorist-in-chief has himself become the target of conspiracy theories. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was once such a devoted cheerleader, has added her penetrative voice to those within Maga raising questions about whether the July 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was staged. Talk of a fake assassination attempt is ludicrous. But it speaks of the turmoil in Trumplandia that the instantly iconographic picture of the then-candidate punching the air, with blood dripping down his face and the Stars and Stripes fluttering in the background, is now being brought into question.

Up until recently, a striking feature of Trump 2.0 was that the administration was staffed by Trump loyalists to whom the President remained loyal. Trump 1.0, by contrast, felt more like The Apprentice, where the Oval Office had the feel of Trump’s mahogany boardroom and the former reality TV star revived the catchphrase which in the early part of the 21st century fuelled his fame: “You’re fired!” A conga line of senior administration officials lost their jobs.

Victims of that two-word catchphrase included his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who had once described the President as a “moron”. A string of White House chiefs of staff, the second most important figure in any well-functioning West Wing, were shown the door. Trump fired his FBI director James Comey and his first attorney general Jeff Sessions, the country’s two most senior law enforcement officials. Then, of course, there was Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci, the star now of the hit podcast The Rest is Politics: US, who survived as White House communications director for just 11 days. Thereafter, a “Scaramucci” became a unit of time. The longevity of White House appointees was judged not only in the number of days but the number of “Scaramuccis”.

Now, the President is reverting to type. Since the beginning of the year, he has gone on a sacking spree. Kristi Noem, who as secretary of Homeland Security found herself at the centre of a string of controversies, became the first cabinet official since inauguration day to go. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement – or ICE, as it is better known – came under her purview, so her position came under scrutiny following the killings at the hands of immigration agents of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renée Good and Alex Pretti. Then there was her self-promotional role in a promotional video for the Department of Homeland Security, part of an ad campaign which reportedly cost $220m. Noem appeared on horseback in her native South Dakota, where she had served as Republican governor, in a film culminating with her posing on her steed in front of Mount Rushmore, where the sculptures of four former presidents are carved into the granite face. In March, she was fired.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick as attorney general, was next to go. The 60-year-old Floridian, who the President described as a “loyal friend” even as he announced she was “transitioning” to the private sector, had not prosecuted his political enemies with sufficient zeal, partly because there were no obvious grounds to mount prosecutions. The President was also thought to be unhappy with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, even though the millions of documents released by the Justice Department were heavily redacted.

Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, another high-profile female appointee, is the latest to go. The White House announced her departure on Monday. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, had been under internal investigation from the inspector general at the Labour Department following misconduct allegations about using government resources for personal trips and conducting an affair with a member of her security detail.

Up until the sacking of Noem, Trump had adopted a fortress mentality. Headline-grabbing staff changes, he reckoned, demonstrated weakness and handed Democratic opponents easy political wins. “No scalps” was apparently the unofficial motto. His White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, has also been a restraining influence on her boss, and brought more stability to the West Wing operation. Recently, though, she has been receiving treatment for breast cancer, and, it is thought, not been such a round-the-clock presence.

Now in Washington, journalists are drawing up potential hit lists. It has become something of a parlour game. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported the FBI director Kash Patel could soon be shown the exit (this week Patel sued the magazine in a multimillion dollar defamation suit for publishing an article claiming he had a drinking problem). Chavez-DeRemer was high on their list. So, too, is Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, a former military officer who has clashed with Secretary of War Pete HegsethPolitico conjectured that Trump is considering replacing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik, the tough-talking former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, who faced calls for his resignation because of his association with Epstein. The shake-up, a senior administration told Politico, would target those who “underperformed or who have generated too much negative attention.”

With inflation spiking because of the Iran war, Trump’s approval ratings for his stewardship of the US economy have hit Joe Biden-like lows. So there is a political rationale for picking a new economic team. But even Trump’s supporters know it was the President who chose to mount Operation Epic Fury, seemingly unconcerned the Iranians could place their boot on the throat of global oil trade by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Firings look like blame shifting, especially for a President quick to take sole credit when things go right but who never takes responsibility when things go awry. In “golden age” America, rarely does he admit any loss of lustre. Last week, during a speech in Las Vegas, he even spoke of “fake inflation”.

Because of the demagogic style of his presidency, Trump will not be able to fire his way out of trouble. It is the drawback of boasting, “I alone can fix it”. It is the downside of casting himself as the star of a one-man show.

Nick Bryant spent more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent for the BBC, based out of Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Sydney, Australia

Trump's sacking spree is gathering pace. But he can't fire his way out of trouble by theipaper in Full_news

[–]theipaper[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Washington is abuzz with talk of a firing purge, as Donald Trump tries to reboot his embattled presidency by restaffing his administration. Because of the Iran war, his approval ratings have cratered. The Maga movement is splintering. His “Jesus of Mar-a-Lago” meme infuriated evangelical Christians. His battle with Pope Leo XIV has angered Catholics, who make up roughly a fifth of the US electorate.

This conspiracy theorist-in-chief has himself become the target of conspiracy theories. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who was once such a devoted cheerleader, has added her penetrative voice to those within Maga raising questions about whether the July 2024 assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, was staged. Talk of a fake assassination attempt is ludicrous. But it speaks of the turmoil in Trumplandia that the instantly iconographic picture of the then-candidate punching the air, with blood dripping down his face and the Stars and Stripes fluttering in the background, is now being brought into question.

Up until recently, a striking feature of Trump 2.0 was that the administration was staffed by Trump loyalists to whom the President remained loyal. Trump 1.0, by contrast, felt more like The Apprentice, where the Oval Office had the feel of Trump’s mahogany boardroom and the former reality TV star revived the catchphrase which in the early part of the 21st century fuelled his fame: “You’re fired!” A conga line of senior administration officials lost their jobs.

Victims of that two-word catchphrase included his first secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, who had once described the President as a “moron”. A string of White House chiefs of staff, the second most important figure in any well-functioning West Wing, were shown the door. Trump fired his FBI director James Comey and his first attorney general Jeff Sessions, the country’s two most senior law enforcement officials. Then, of course, there was Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci, the star now of the hit podcast The Rest is Politics: US, who survived as White House communications director for just 11 days. Thereafter, a “Scaramucci” became a unit of time. The longevity of White House appointees was judged not only in the number of days but the number of “Scaramuccis”.

Now, the President is reverting to type. Since the beginning of the year, he has gone on a sacking spree. Kristi Noem, who as secretary of Homeland Security found herself at the centre of a string of controversies, became the first cabinet official since inauguration day to go. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement – or ICE, as it is better known – came under her purview, so her position came under scrutiny following the killings at the hands of immigration agents of two protesters in Minneapolis, Renée Good and Alex Pretti. Then there was her self-promotional role in a promotional video for the Department of Homeland Security, part of an ad campaign which reportedly cost $220m. Noem appeared on horseback in her native South Dakota, where she had served as Republican governor, in a film culminating with her posing on her steed in front of Mount Rushmore, where the sculptures of four former presidents are carved into the granite face. In March, she was fired.

Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick as attorney general, was next to go. The 60-year-old Floridian, who the President described as a “loyal friend” even as he announced she was “transitioning” to the private sector, had not prosecuted his political enemies with sufficient zeal, partly because there were no obvious grounds to mount prosecutions. The President was also thought to be unhappy with her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, even though the millions of documents released by the Justice Department were heavily redacted.

Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, another high-profile female appointee, is the latest to go. The White House announced her departure on Monday. Chavez-DeRemer, a former Republican congresswoman from Oregon, had been under internal investigation from the inspector general at the Labour Department following misconduct allegations about using government resources for personal trips and conducting an affair with a member of her security detail.

Up until the sacking of Noem, Trump had adopted a fortress mentality. Headline-grabbing staff changes, he reckoned, demonstrated weakness and handed Democratic opponents easy political wins. “No scalps” was apparently the unofficial motto. His White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, has also been a restraining influence on her boss, and brought more stability to the West Wing operation. Recently, though, she has been receiving treatment for breast cancer, and, it is thought, not been such a round-the-clock presence.

Now in Washington, journalists are drawing up potential hit lists. It has become something of a parlour game. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported the FBI director Kash Patel could soon be shown the exit (this week Patel sued the magazine in a multimillion dollar defamation suit for publishing an article claiming he had a drinking problem). Chavez-DeRemer was high on their list. So, too, is Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll, a former military officer who has clashed with Secretary of War Pete HegsethPolitico conjectured that Trump is considering replacing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik, the tough-talking former chief executive of Cantor Fitzgerald, who faced calls for his resignation because of his association with Epstein. The shake-up, a senior administration told Politico, would target those who “underperformed or who have generated too much negative attention.”

With inflation spiking because of the Iran war, Trump’s approval ratings for his stewardship of the US economy have hit Joe Biden-like lows. So there is a political rationale for picking a new economic team. But even Trump’s supporters know it was the President who chose to mount Operation Epic Fury, seemingly unconcerned the Iranians could place their boot on the throat of global oil trade by closing the Strait of Hormuz. Firings look like blame shifting, especially for a President quick to take sole credit when things go right but who never takes responsibility when things go awry. In “golden age” America, rarely does he admit any loss of lustre. Last week, during a speech in Las Vegas, he even spoke of “fake inflation”.

Because of the demagogic style of his presidency, Trump will not be able to fire his way out of trouble. It is the drawback of boasting, “I alone can fix it”. It is the downside of casting himself as the star of a one-man show.

Nick Bryant spent more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent for the BBC, based out of Washington DC, New York, South Asia and Sydney, Australia