White House Resistance

Published in Folha de São Paulo
(Brazil) on 8 September 2018
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Domitila Olivé. Edited by Barbara Finkemeyer.

 

 

Statements on how advisers strive to isolate Trump from important decisions go public

It is a known fact that, for a while now, there have been disagreements between President Donald Trump and members of his team. Now, statements have gone public on how those advisers operate internally to make it seem like they are doing their boss' bidding while actually striving to isolate him from important decisions.

The most eloquent statement that describes this strategy is an opinion article published on Wednesday, Sept. 5, by The New York Times. In an unusual and controversial move, the news outlet accepted the author’s request to remain anonymous; it was written by a top government official who is dissatisfied with the administration.

The editorial reports that some of Trump’s closest advisers work to “frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations,” since he “continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic” — overall, a sabotage justified by an attempt to reduce further damage.

The saboteurs’ approach to Russia provides an example. The text claims that Trump “shows a preference for autocrats and dictators” and expresses complaints about his national security team, which acts behind the scenes to maintain financial sanctions against Moscow — going against the docile treatment Trump has been offering Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The constant effort to work around the president also appears in the book “Fear: Trump in the White House,” written by famous journalist Bob Woodward, one of the people responsible for uncovering the Watergate scandal, who interviewed many government officials to understand how the White House actually works.

According to Woodward, in 2017, Secretary of Defense James Mattis received an order to assassinate Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, who was accused of a chemical attack against civilians. Mattis said he would do so, but instructed an aide to plan something “more measured.” Instead, the U.S. launched missiles against Syrian military bases.

In the face of such a decayed administration, it is no surprise that questions have arisen regarding Trump’s capability to make it to the end of his term.

Democrats have tried, in a daring way, to point out the president’s alleged insanity in order to justify impeachment. However, more concrete threats surround Trump, especially the investigation into the supposed collusion between the then-candidate’s campaign and Russian authorities.

In the event that the government actually falls, no fault can be placed on any “treacherous” White House element; if it does operate on a large scale, it would only end up helping the president extend his political survival.


Vêm a público depoimentos de como assessores buscam isolar Trump de decisões cruciais

Tornaram-se fato corriqueiro, há algum tempo, desavenças de Donald Trump com membros de sua equipe. Agora vêm a público depoimentos de como esses assessores atuam internamente para fazer crer que obedecem ao chefe enquanto, na verdade, buscam isolá-lo das decisões cruciais.

A descrição mais eloquente dessa estratégia encontra-se em um artigo de opinião publicado na quarta-feira (5) pelo jornal The New York Times. Em atitude inusual e controversa, o veículo aceitou o pedido de anonimato do autor, um funcionário de alto escalão descontente com a gestão do republicano.

Relata-se que alguns dos auxiliares próximos ao mandatário trabalham para “frustrar partes de sua agenda e suas piores inclinações”, uma vez que ele “continua a agir de maneira nociva à saúde da República” —em suma, uma sabotagem sob a justificativa de reduzir potenciais danos.

A abordagem em relação à Rússia é citada como exemplo. Trump “mostra preferência por autocratas e ditadores”, diz o texto, e se queixa dos conselheiros de segurança nos bastidores por manterem sanções financeiras contra Moscou —o que contraria o tratamento dócil dispensado por ele a Vladimir Putin.

O constante exercício de contornar o presidente também permeia o livro “Fear” (medo), do consagrado jornalista Bob Woodward —um dos responsáveis por revelar o escândalo de Watergate—, que entrevistou diversos integrantes do governo para entender o funcionamento da Casa Branca.

Segundo Woodward, o secretário de Defesa, James Mattis, recebeu em 2017 a ordem de assassinar o ditador da Síria, Bashar al-Assad, acusado de um ataque químico contra civis. Mattis disse que assim faria, mas orientou um assessor a planejar algo “mais comedido”. Por fim, os EUA lançaram mísseis contra bases militares sírias.

Diante de tamanha disfuncionalidade administrativa, não surpreende que pairem dúvidas acerca da capacidade de Trump de chegar até o fim de seu mandato.

Democratas já tentaram, de forma temerária, apontar uma alegada insanidade do presidente para embasar um pedido de impeachment. Há, porém, ameaças bem mais concretas a rondá-lo, em especial a investigação sobre o suposto conluio entre a campanha do então candidato republicano com autoridades russas.

Caso o governo venha mesmo a ruir, não poderá culpar alguma ala “traidora” da Casa Branca; se esta de fato opera em larga escala, acaba por ajudar o chefe a estender sua sobrevivência política.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Canada: Minnesota School Shooting Is Just More Proof That America Is Crazed

Israel: From the Cities of America to John Bolton: Trump’s Vendetta Campaign against Opponents Reaches New Heights

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Pakistan: Trump’s Gaza Blueprint Unfolds

Topics

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

Related Articles

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump