Searing in a Toxic Legacy

“More people may die if we don't coordinate… And so it's important that it be done — that there be coordination now. Now, or as rapidly as we can get that done.” 

Joe Biden on being denied transition access by Donald Trump

If Donald Trump truly did not believe he was about to leave office, he might not be rushing through major policy shifts, replacing key personnel in sensitive positions, wreaking revenge on those he believes to be disloyal, hobbling his opponent going forward and purging bureaucrats who in any material sense are contradicting his pronouncements. Trump has replaced the head of the GSA Transition funding team, is withdrawing troops from theaters of conflict over the strong objections of military leaders (and members of Congress, especially from his own party), firing the key experienced Department of Defense leaders to be replaced by inexperienced sycophant conspiracy theorists, and refusing to allow the Biden transition team access to information, funding, FBI clearance work for prospective nominees or even those necessary bureaucrats who know what’s going on and what the immediate crises are. 

While the federal government has allocated massive funding for the research and potential manufacture of the COVID vaccines, it has woefully underfunded and is critically underprepared to be able to deploy those vaccines widely when they are ready. State and local governments, to whom Trump has shifted his responsibility to direct and implement vaccine distribution, are running on fiscal fumes, devoid of tax revenues and slammed with mounting costs from the federal government’s inability to contain the virus or the economic damage done by the pandemic at remotely the level of any other major country. Without funds or staffing to distribute those vaccines, particularly in the poorest and reddest states, exactly how are people going to be inoculated? Twice for each currently viable vaccine. 

Our allies are aghast at Trump’s eleventh hour machinations, not just from his unwillingness to concede an unwinnable election, but by reason of his last minute massive changes that any other lame duck president would have relegated to the incoming administration in January. Indeed, some the President’s decisions are viewed as potentially dangerous to their own national security confidences and interests. To understand how threatening Trump’s actions are to our allies, I picked one of our continuing strongest allies, Boris Johnson and the UK. Here is how the BCC (November 17th) views these last-minute moves:

“While some outside that world have raised fears that [these moves are part] of an attempt by the president to hold on to power, many on the inside see it more as driven by a desire for personal revenge and the latest stage of a conflict that has done much to define Donald Trump's presidency… But there remain fears that the uncertainty of a divisive transition could hold real dangers.

“The sacking of a raft of top civilian leaders at the Pentagon, including the secretary of defence, was, many believe, just the start… In some cases, this could relate to a president wanting to pursue specific policy goals during his final days and removing those who have opposed them, such as getting troops out of Afghanistan. But in many ways this also looks to some observers to be the result of pent-up anger and the final act in a long battle.

“America's national security community has been in the firing line for President Trump, accusing it of being a ‘deep state’ of conspiring against him… He viewed the intelligence community assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 election in support of his candidacy, as a threat to the legitimacy of his victory and went on the offensive almost immediately. And he has never stopped… In recent months, he has been pushing hard to declassify information which he thinks will support his case that the assessment was wrong. The White House installed a political ally, Richard Grenell, as director of national intelligence who has supported that drive but has still met with resistance.

“CIA Director Gina Haspel has been talked of as currently in the firing line. She has walked a fine line since being appointed. Critics say she has been too close to the White House, citing among other things her appearance and applause for the president at his State of the Union speech… But her supporters say she has played a careful game in trying to stay sufficiently on the right side of the president to protect the agency from being politicised, fearing that if she was fired, then a more partisan figure would be chosen to replace her. And her apparent unwillingness to declassify some aspects of the intelligence surrounding Russian interference in the 2016 election recently has drawn fire from the president's supporters.

“An even more controversial sacking would be that of Chris Wray, director of the FBI… President Trump is believed to be angry at the failure of federal law enforcement to investigate Joe Biden's son Hunter Biden over his foreign business connections and wanted some kind of replay of 2016 when then-FBI Director James Comey's public pronouncements surrounding Hillary Clinton's emails caused her damage in the closing stretch of the campaign…

“There have also been concerns at appointments as well as departures… Political operatives have been given senior posts at the Pentagon and one, Michael Ellis, made general counsel to the National Security Agency (NSA), reportedly against the wishes of its head, General Paul Nakasone.

“That gave rise to concern that the Trump team may be trying to "burrow" individuals into the national security system where they can continue to play a role after 20 January, when Joe Biden is inaugurated as president. Another option is that it is simply a desire to reward loyalists and allow them to ‘pad their resumes’ with the expectation they will soon be gone and carry out more controversial policies in the meantime.”

It gets worse. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was created by Donald Trump in 2018 as a standalone agency under the supervision of Homeland Security. Trump appointed former Microsoft executive, Chris Krebs, as it first director. “The CISA campaign, led by Krebs, was originally intended to target foreign interference. However, as the president continued to repeat dangerously misleading information about the security of the election, the agency's focus turned to rebutting many of the rumors and baseless allegations of widespread voter fraud that Trump had promoted from the White House.” Associated Press, November 17th.  “[Under Krebs’ direction, the CISA had recently] released a statement calling the 2020 election ‘the most secure in American history.’…. It added, in boldface, ‘There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.” NPR November 17th.

Stubbornly clinging to the his claim that he had won the election, Trump fired Krebs on November 17th and tweeted: “The recent statement by Chris Krebs on the security of the 2020 Election was highly inaccurate, in that there were massive improprieties and fraud - including dead people voting, Poll Watchers not allowed into polling locations, “glitches” in the voting machines which changed......votes from Trump to Biden, late voting, and many more. Therefore, effective immediately, Chris Krebs has been terminated as Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.” This as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found no basis to challenge the state’s election results by reason of their disproven allegation of “insufficient access” by the GOP to poll counting. Biden won both the popular and electoral vote by wide margins.

While our Trump-led federal governmental lapses fall somewhere between a major purge and functional paralysis, the intelligence agencies within our greatest foes are taking full advantage. We’ve been here before. The BBC continues: “Difficult transitions can have real consequences for national security… The commission into the 11 September attacks found that the short handover from President Bill Clinton to President George W Bush, because of the disputed 2000 election, may have contributed to the failure to stop the devastating attacks on New York and Washington by making it harder to get a new team in place and up to speed in time.” Will Trump’s base ever acknowledge that Trump put personal ambition above national goals, truly lost the election and actually failed to take command to stem the spread of the coronavirus?

I’m Peter Dekom, and I find it odd that patriotism is no longer love of country for so many of us who prefer to believe in conspiracies and mythology instead… and love a rogue president more.