Fasten seatbelts for Trumpy ride
AS horrible as it is, the Houston deluge eventually will fade from the headlines and the media’s attention will return full-time to the rising waters around Donald Trump’s presidency. The first stop will be a deeper dive into the curious cases of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson (far right) and top economic adviser Gary Cohn (near right).
Both felt the need to let it be known publicly they didn’t like Trump’s remarks after the Charlottesville violence. Cohn’s “friends” told The New York Times he drafted a resignation letter before deciding not to quit, and the former Goldman Sachs banker himself told an interviewer that the administration “can and must do better” about condemning hate groups.
Tillerson chimed in with his shocking television comment that “the president speaks for himself ” on questions of values.
Taken in isolation, each remark could show an accomplished individual deciding to protect his professional reputation and save face with friends and family.
Taken together, however, the comments from such top officials raise a red flag that, despite the recent shuffling of the White House deck, something is still seriously off-kilter in the administration. We could be witnessing the start of a fresh crisis between Trump and members of his team, and the possibility of major resignations or firings can’t be ignored.
Public criticisms of a president by aides are highly unusual, to say the least. Normally, Cabinet secretaries and others who don’t agree with a president on a matter of substance either keep quiet or wait until they leave to voice dissent.
For example, President Barack Obama had four secretaries of defense, three of whom — Leon Panetta, Robert Gates and Chuck Hagel — criticized him publicly only after they left office.
Similarly, Obama had almost no friction with congressional Democrats, nearly all of them slavish in their devotion to whatever policy or legislation he wanted. Exceptions, such as Sen. Chuck Schumer’s opposition to the Iran nuclear deal, stand out because they were so rare.
But Trump’s relationships with congressional Republicans are turning increasingly frosty. At last count, he was feuding with at least five GOP senators, out of 52, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. His relationship with House Speaker Paul Ryan remains fickle, with Ryan criticizing Trump’s pardon of former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
The situation raises the obvious question about how all this ends, but the potential answers are anything but obvious. For one thing, Trump’s approval rating of about 38 percent is historically low at this point for a president, but still far higher than that of either McConnell or Ryan or any top Democrat.
Congress as a whole has an approval rating of just 10 percent, meaning Republicans who break with Trump might gain little support in the 2018 midterms. Some could lose their jobs, and the party could lose its majorities if they don’t pass the president’s economic and jobs agenda.
Then again, Dems may be in no position to take advantage of GOP fratricide. The Bernie Sanders/ Elizabeth Warren wing is ascendant, antifa thugs are spreading left-wing violence, and there is still an establishment wing of relative moderates.
If that weren’t messy enough, along comes Hillary Clinton. She is again re-emerging, this time to peddle a book about the election.
She’s already leaking excerpts and has scheduled September stops in Wisconsin and Michigan, two blue states that Trump flipped last year, quelling any doubt that she is still in campaign mode. She’ll repeat her claims that she would be president except for various miscreants, ranging from Trump to the Russians to former FBI chief James Comey to misogynists and deplorables everywhere.
It’s clear to me that Clinton is keeping her options open to run again in 2020. When I mentioned this recently to a group of New York Democrats, all of whom voted for her and one of whom was a substantial Clinton donor for many years, they were unanimous in hoping I was wrong, that she would retire and let the party get on with finding new leaders.
“I wouldn’t give her money again,” the former donor declared, voicing disgust with her for losing.
He’s hardly alone, but there is no reason why she shouldn’t keep the door open at least until someone emerges who can beat her in a presidential primary.
Look at it the way she does: She would almost surely defeat Gov. Cuomo in a head-to-head matchup in New York, which would eliminate his chances of getting the nomination. Expand that test to other key blue states, and it’s hard to see at this point who in the party could beat her.
All of which raises the possibility that Clinton could reprise her 2016 role of saving Trump from himself. He attracted large, fervent crowds, but overall was the worst possible candidate — except for her.
Of course, it is a long way to 2020, and if we learned anything last year, it’s that little is certain. All we can be sure of is that America faces a new normal of endless turbulence.