[@Will]Trump Chose Putin Over America

From one of our very own. A sobering look at the big picture. The Slate cover story...

Trump chose Putin over America right in front of us.
William Saletan
Cover Story

Investigation or no, the evidence has always been right in front of us. Here it is.
On Tuesday, President Trump brushed aside questions about the conviction of his former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, and a guilty plea by Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen. The two cases didn’t matter, said Trump, because they didn’t prove the central charge against him. “This has nothing to do with Russian collusion,” Trump told reporters as he arrived in West Virginia. Later, at a campaign rally, he taunted the press for failing to prove that he had collaborated with Russia. “They’re still looking for collusion,” he jeered. “Where is the collusion?”

I’ll tell you where the collusion is. It’s right in front of us.

To escape the Cohen and Manafort stories, Trump is retreating into the Russia mystery. He can’t be impeached, the theory goes, because he hasn’t been caught betraying his country. But he has. Trump has bent over backward to defend Vladimir Putin at America’s expense, and the question is why. Journalists have explored the worst possibilities: Trump is a Russian agent, Trump conspired with Putin to tip the 2016 election, Putin is blackmailing Trump with a raunchy sex tape.

In this article, I’m going to take the opposite approach. I’ll assume none of that speculation is true. I’ll stick to the public record. I’ll set aside the question of collusion as most people understand it—a conspiracy during the election—and I won’t postulate any hidden motives. I’ll present the minimum we know about Trump and Russia. The minimum is enough to merit impeachment: Trump is working with Putin to protect Russia and cripple the United States.

This conclusion doesn’t require any wild theories about kompromat or dual loyalty. Everything Trump has done can be explained by traits and motives he displays every day: narcissism, insecurity, ruthlessness, and spite. He enjoys the celebrity of meeting with well-armed dictators. He’s obtuse to moral distinctions between regimes or systems of government. He sees no difference between the national interest and his personal interests, or between getting campaign help from Americans and getting it from a foreign power. And he’s obsessed with domestic enemies. He’s far more interested in using Putin to pummel Democrats than in working with Democrats to confront Putin.

These ingredients have been sufficient to turn Trump, in effect, against his own country. Putin didn’t need to collude with him. All Putin had to do was praise Trump, signal his support for Trump in the election, offer him a prestigious geopolitical relationship, and come to his defense when U.S. intelligence agencies accused Russia of helping Trump win. That put the intelligence agencies on the wrong side of Trump, and it put Putin on the right side. And that’s how we ended up where we are today: with a president who defends Putin’s crimes and persecutes former U.S. officials who exposed those crimes.

Maybe you’re skeptical that Trump’s behavior can be explained without kompromat. Or maybe, in the absence of proof of collusion, you think it’s unfair to accuse him of betraying his country. But come along, and I’ll show you how both can be true.

continued...

 

continued...

1. The Courtship
Trump and Putin didn’t begin as friends. To Putin, Trump was just another businessman. To Trump, Putin was just a prop. In the years leading up to his presidential campaign, Trump sometimes tried to look important by pretending to know Putin. Other times, Trump tried to look tough by describing Putin as a menace. In Trump’s mind, Putin was a character who could be used in the fight Trump really cared about: the competition for status at home. So when Trump spoke of Putin as an adversary, he meant that Putin was a standard by which to measure other politicians—chiefly, President Barack Obama—as weak.

Anyone watching from the Kremlin could see that Trump was exploitable.

When Putin invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014, Trump said the takeover exposed Obama’s “failed leadership.” Republican hawks said the same thing, but they spoke of underlying concerns: sovereignty, freedom, human rights. To Trump, those concerns meant nothing. Trump was more interested in Putin’s poll numbers. “Putin has become a big hero in Russia with an all time high popularity,” Trump tweeted as Russia seized Ukrainian bases and vessels in Crimea. “Obama, on the other hand, has fallen to his lowest ever numbers. SAD.”

Trump’s presidential candidacy and his rise in the polls caught Putin’s eye. On Dec. 17, 2015, in Putin’s annual year-end press conference, the Russian president called Trump “very bright and talented.” Trump loved it. The next day, on MSNBC, Trump beamed: “When people call you brilliant, it’s always good, especially when the person heads up Russia.”

Now that Putin was praising him, Trump adjusted his angle. He could still use Putin as a standard for judging American politicians. But now that standard included “chemistry.” “A lot of good things can happen with Russia if we get along well,” Trump argued in the MSNBC interview. “Putin does not respect our president,” he warned, and “our president does not like Putin. … I watch those two sitting in two chairs looking at each other … and I say, ‘Wow, that’s really bad chemistry.’ ”

The interviewer, Joe Scarborough, pointed out that Putin “kills journalists, political opponents, and invades countries.” Trump brushed aside these quibbles. “Our country does plenty of killing also,” said Trump. “At least he’s a leader, you know, unlike we have in this country.” Again, Trump marveled at Putin’s approval ratings, noting that they were “in the 80s” while “Obama’s in the 30s and low 40s.”

Anyone watching from the Kremlin could see that Trump was exploitable. He valued strength and popularity, not human rights or policing aggression. He admired Putin and was willing to praise him in public. And he was willing to make chemistry and good relations—in short, Putin’s satisfaction—the measure of American success.

2. Tests of Loyalty
As Trump stormed through the primaries, Russia collected material on his opponents. In March and April 2016, Russian hackers penetrated the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. In June, an intermediary for a Russian oligarch sent Donald Trump Jr. an email offering “sensitive information” on Clinton as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” Trump Jr. set up a meeting in Trump Tower to get the dirt, but the Russians didn’t deliver. Not until July 22, three days after the GOP nominated Trump, did WikiLeaks release documents from the DNC hack.

Putin was pitting his credibility against the U.S. government’s credibility. Trump had to choose.

These moves tested Trump’s allegiance. If he had been unwilling to conspire with Moscow, the email to his son might have led to nothing. At worst, Trump’s campaign might have notified the FBI. Instead, Trump Jr. replied, “If it’s what you say I love it.” Manafort, Trump’s then-campaign chairman, and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, also showed up to hear the offer. No FBI action seemed to follow. Apparently, Trump’s campaign was open to cooperation.

In the quest to prove collusion between Trump and Russia, the Trump Tower meeting has become an obsession. But sometimes things said in public are more significant than things said in private. For that reason, Trump’s comments in late July are worth revisiting. When WikiLeaks released its first trove of stolen emails, it provoked a public clash between the Kremlin and U.S. intelligence agencies. The agencies said Russia was behind the hack. Russia denied it. Putin was pitting his credibility against the U.S. government’s credibility. Trump had to choose.

Trump chose Putin. On July 27, at a press conference in Florida, he paraphrased Putin’s denial and rejected the judgment of the intelligence agencies. But if Russia was behind the hack, Trump mused, then it ought to get Clinton’s emails, too. Facing the cameras, Trump declared: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”

Reporters were dismayed. One asked Trump: “Do you have any pause about asking a foreign government—Russia, China, anybody—to interfere, to hack into the system of anybody in this country. … Does that not give you pause?” “No, it gives me no pause,” said Trump. “If Russia or China or any other country has those emails, I mean, to be honest with you, I’d love to see them.”

The press conference told Putin everything he needed to know: that Trump felt no bond with Clinton or the Democrats, that he put opportunism before patriotism, and that he was happy to seek Russia’s help in the campaign, including through espionage. But it also told Putin that Trump was willing to trust him over the U.S. intelligence community—and that Trump was willing to say all of this in public.

That night, Russian hackers targeted Clinton’s personal office and her campaign.

3. The War at Home
In the months that followed, WikiLeaks released more hacked documents, and Trump touted them on the campaign trail. Clinton tried to make Putin’s support of Trump an issue, but it didn’t work. Trump won the election.

Democratic leaders were horrified. They asked the public to unite behind Trump, but Trump didn’t reciprocate. He was untransformed by victory. For weeks, he held rallies around the country, ridiculing Americans who had opposed him. He couldn’t let go of the idea that Clinton and the Democrats, not foreign dictators, were his enemies.

This was a fatal character defect, and Putin exploited it. On Dec. 23, in his year-end press conference, the Russian president again reached out to Trump. A reporter asked Putin about American complaints of Russian interference in the election. Putin replied that Democrats were “losing on all fronts and looking elsewhere for things to blame.”

Trump pounced on Putin’s remark. He tweeted, “Vladimir Putin said today about Hillary and Dems: ‘In my opinion, it is humiliating. One must be able to lose with dignity.’ So true!” This, too, sent a signal: Trump wasn’t finished with his war at home. And he welcomed Putin’s help in waging it.

continued...

 

4. The Turn Against Intelligence
Two weeks before Trump took office, U.S. intelligence agencies tried to turn him away from Putin. They failed.

On Jan. 6, 2017, the intelligence chiefs briefed Trump on their assessment of Russia’s role in the election. Their report concluded that Putin had “ordered an influence campaign” to “undermine public faith in the US democratic process,” to hurt Clinton, and to “help President-elect Trump’s election chances.” The agencies also released their report to the public. That made it difficult for Trump to dismiss the report’s conclusions. At a Jan. 11 press conference, Trump wavered between acknowledging Putin’s guilt (“He shouldn’t have done it”) and disputing it (“It could have been others also”).

The briefing affected Trump. He seemed to have gotten the message that he should oppose foreign interference in American elections. But that message couldn’t overcome his ego or his spite. At the press conference, he blamed Democrats for letting themselves be hacked. He insisted that the damning things they had written in their emails were more important than who had done the hacking. And he argued that intervention on his behalf by a foreign power, in any form, was good. “If Putin likes Donald Trump, I consider that an asset, not a liability,” he said.

Trump’s drift toward the Kremlin, and away from his own government, was now self-perpetuating.

Trump’s fixation on personal loyalty gave Putin a huge advantage over the intelligence agencies. The agencies were obliged to report the truth and serve the country, even if it made the president-elect uncomfortable. This created constant friction with Trump. At the briefing, FBI Director James Comey warned Trump about a dossier of Trump-Russia allegations, including a story that the Kremlin had a tape of Trump watching prostitutes urinate on a bed in Moscow. The point of the warning was to alert Trump to the dossier, which was already in the media’s hands, and to defuse any blackmail threat from Russia. Instead, Trump took the warning as a threat from the intelligence agencies. Days later, when the dossier showed up in the press, Trump felt vindicated in his suspicion.

Trump’s drift toward the Kremlin, and away from his own government, was now self-perpetuating. The more the intelligence agencies looked into Russia’s relationship with Trump, the more Trump turned against them. Putin could accelerate the split just by defending Trump and opposing the agencies’ work. So when Trump, in the wake of the Jan. 6 report, called the focus on Russian interference a “witch hunt,” Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, parroted him. Peskov dismissed the dossier as a “complete fabrication” and part of a “witch hunt.”

Trump, in turn, echoed Peskov. “Russia just said the unverified report paid for by political opponents is ‘A COMPLETE AND TOTAL FABRICATION,’ ” he tweeted. Two days later, Trump added: “Russia says nothing exists. Probably released by ‘Intelligence’ even knowing there is no proof, and never will be.” At his press conference, Trump thanked Putin for denouncing the dossier. In their joint defense against the intelligence agencies, Trump and Putin were beginning to coordinate a message.

5. Attacking the Investigation
On Jan. 20, Trump was sworn in as president. In a Fox News interview, he brushed aside Putin’s bloody history, asking, “What, you think our country’s so innocent?” Now that Trump had power, intelligence officials who threatened Trump’s relationship with Putin wouldn’t just face angry tweets. They could lose their jobs.

Six days after Trump’s inauguration, U.S. intelligence officials sent an emissary to the White House to warn Trump that his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, had misled the FBI and Vice President Mike Pence about secret conversations with Russia. The conversations, which had taken place after the election, addressed the possibility of easing U.S. sanctions on Russia. The warning was meant to protect Pence. But Trump didn’t turn against Flynn or Russia. He turned against the FBI.

Trump kept Flynn on board until Feb. 13, when the Washington Post disclosed the warning. Under pressure, Trump accepted Flynn’s resignation. The next day, Trump cleared the Oval Office so he could speak to Comey alone. According to Comey’s notes, Trump told the FBI director, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go.”

That night, the New York Times published another unwelcome story. It reported that “American law enforcement and intelligence agencies” had evidence of repeated contacts between Russia and Trump associates before the election. Trump raged at the leakers. “Information is being illegally given to the failing @nytimes & @washingtonpost by the intelligence community (NSA and FBI?),” he tweeted.

On Feb. 16, Trump held a long press conference to attack the Russia story. “The whole Russian thing,” he insisted, was a “ruse,” a “fabricated deal to try and make up for the loss of the Democrats.” Worse, said Trump, it was blocking a harmonious U.S.-Russia relationship. Several times, Trump speculated aloud that Putin was watching him, and he lamented that “pressure” from the Russia story was making it “impossible” for the two presidents to work together.

The pressure grew. On March 20, Comey confirmed that the FBI was investigating whether Trump’s campaign had colluded with Russia. Trump began to argue that the real scandal was the investigation itself. On Twitter, the president demanded that the media “start talking about the Obama SURVEILLANCE SCANDAL and stop with the Fake Trump/Russia story.” Privately, Trump pressed Comey to “lift the cloud” of the investigation.

Comey failed to comply, and on May 9, Trump fired him. The next day, Trump met behind closed doors with Russia’s foreign minister and its U.S. ambassador—the same ambassador whose secret talks with Flynn had prompted Flynn to mislead the FBI. “I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Trump told the Russians, according to White House notes of the conversation. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” At the meeting, Trump alarmed his aides by sharing highly sensitive intelligence with the Russians. He seemed to think that the real interference—the meddling of U.S. intelligence agencies in his relationship with Putin—was finally out of the way.

Read the rest at the link...give Slate the views.

 

Agreed, though there is enough verified information for any reasonable citizen to conclude that the man is unfit for office and a threat to the very fabric of our government. We should all pressure our congressmen to hold this administration to the rule of law.