Trump travels

Donald Trump is on the move, his first foreign trip since becoming president. His delegation going with him must be having kittens. What will he say, how will he say it, will he know what the key issues are? Now this may sound terribly patronising, but, actually after his disastrous last `10 days, there is good reason to wonder how he will perform in such different places as Saudi Arabia, Israel and Belgium. Those who know Trump and those foreign leaders who have met him, such as Theresa May and Angela Merkel, apparently think he is charming, listens well, and has a good manner. Except of course when Merkel offered to shake his hand for the cameras while they were sitting in chairs next to each other, and he showed total indifference. Well, it looked like total indifference, but it may be that he either didn't spot her outstretched hand or he couldn't be bothered to do anything to please the gathered photographers. In Saudi Arabia he'll have to be careful to observe the respect rituals. The Saudis are easily miffed. But Trump will have been grilled, and provided he offers a huge arms deal, which apparently Jared, his son-in-law, has already fixed, things should go swimmingly. Israel will be tricky because Netanyahu is a prickly chap who won't like to be talked down to, as Obama did, or as BB thought Obama did. Obama got cross with him over the settlements issue on the West Bank and he didn't like that. Trump is a different breed of human being, not cool and intellectual, but a businessman who likes chandeliers and bling and has his own golf courses, and is so sick of the Russia collusion thing that just to be out of Washington in the fresh air will put him in a good mood. He will be ready to talk deals. He loves that. But in Israel there's all sorts of pitfalls to avoid. First up will be Trump's enthusiasm for having the US Embassy move to Jerusalem. That won't happen of course because there would be riots across the Arab world. King Abdullah of Jordan has already warned him about that, and he won't want to piss off King Abdullah because he's a frightfully good chap and Jordan is key key key to what's going on in neighbouring Syria. King Abdullah is a good egg and if he says no to the US embassy in Jerusalem I doubt Trump will do the opposite. But of course that will piss off Netanyahu. You can't win. Well, Trump can't win. He'll probably fudge that one and start talking straight about those settlements and the two-state solution and please be nice to the Palestinians. And don't mention Hamas. Just hand over yet another arms package and off you go to the next capital. So I doubt Trump will solve the riddle that's been around for 70 years, how to make peace, proper peace, between Israel and Palestine, however charming he is. Netanyahu can also be very charming but with a steely inside that won't give in to entreaties about doing anything that might even hint at making the tiny country of Israel more vulnerable - in his view and the view of the dodgy coalition he has breathing down his neck every day. But I expect Trump to breeze his way through all the pitfalls and obstacles and make nice with all the leaders he meets. He needs friends right now, any friends, anywhere.

Full-scale war in Washington

There's no getting away from it. There's bedlam in Washington, total chaos, a war of big personalities, and it's dangerous for all of us. How Theresa May must now be regretting holding Trump's hand in London. That hand is getting dirtier and dirtier (Trump's that is). The appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel (NOT special prosecutor as some people are still saying; there's a difference) is a smart move. But of course it wasn't Trump who appointed him, it was the new hero of the hour, Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general. Now he's a political appointment but oh my goodness has he taken an independent track in dealing with the Grump (sorry, Trump)administration. First he objected like hell when Trump told the world he had sacked James Comey as director of the FBI on Rosenstein's recommendation. He did no such thing. Trump just asked Rosenstein to write down reasons for criticising Comey, then used the deputy attorney general's honest, up-front memo to screw Comey and say it was the Justice Department who demanded his termination. We all knew, and especially Rosenstein knew, that was a lie. So the poor dedicated lawyer who has never had to sink into such a political swamp before in his distinguished career, rang the White House and basically said: "Put the record straight or else..." Then he decided off his own bat to appoint Mueller as special counsel to oversee the Russia/Trump investigation BEFORE informing the White House that that was what he intended to do. Good for him, and, by the way, quite within his right as a government lawyer so to do. So Rosenstein is a man of integrity and, I suspect, a stickler for rules and fair play. I wonder if he informed Jeff Sessions, his boss, before making the announcement. Somehow I doubt it, because Sessions is too close to Trump and might have tipped him off. Trump. judging by his latest tweet, is furious and thinks he is the hardest done by president in history. I don't think so! Richard Nixon became enemy number one over Watergate and was constantly being accused in the papers of criminal activities. But slowly, bit by bit, leak by leak, revelation by revelation, Trump is edging towards a Nixon-style downfall. Personally, I don't believe, or cannot believe, that Trump actually colluded with Moscow (Putin) to make sure he beat Hillary Clinton to the White House. But if Mueller finds anything that confirms this, Trump is yesterday, he's finished, he's on the road to impeachment. It won't need a Deep Throat investigation by the Washington Post. Rosenstein, Comey and Mueller (that well-known firm of lawyers hahaha) will be the ones to raise the axe, and Congress, Republican-dominated, will have to move into line. Mike Pence, prepare yourself for the presidency!

Trump blaming everyone but himself

So we're in for some sackings, a night of the long knives as they say in politics. Trump is pretty well furious with everyone, even his beloved son-in-law. He is blaming everyone else for the series of disasters he has suffered this week, not for a moment thinking that perhaps he is the one to blame. Trump is even beginning to turn against HR McMaster. Not that long ago he thought he was the greatest. Now apparently he views him as a pain in the whatsit because he has the temerity to interrupt him almost as soon as he starts pontificating. Well I guess that's his job, to stop his commander-in-chief from saying something stupid, false or downright embarrassing. But interrupting a man like Trump is dangerous. He doesn't like anyone to speak louder than him. So watch your step General McMaster. You could go the way of Sean Spicer who looks like he is for the chop. He'll be moved to some unimportant flunky role where he has to ensure Trump has enough toothpaste and to be around when his shoes need buffing up. Trump should get himself in front of a mirror and say 20 times, "I am going to be a good president and I will always speak the truth and I will be nice to the nice people and tough to the horrid, oh and I will tell all my advisers and staff what I'm thinking so there are no surprises." Right now the White House is full of people who spend every day panicking, because they haven't a clue what the president is going to say or do next. This is why McMaster keeps on interrupting him because when a certain line of argument or a specific policy is agreed, and then Trump goes all topsy turvy and says something else, McMaster has little choice but to remind him what was agreed just a few hours earlier. Anyone working in the White House needs a medal.

Trump's intel blunder

Assuming the Washington Post and New York Times stories are true, Trump has committed the gravest of sins. He got so excited about the top secret intelligence he had been briefed on about an Isis plot that he revealed it to.........Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. Now you might argue, so what? Russia is as anti-Isis as the US and the rest of us, so it's not like Moscow is going to tip off the Islamic militants about a likely spy in their ranks. But that's not the point. The point is that Trump, impetuous as ever, decided to tell Lavrov that they had a brilliant source - or actually even more damaging, an ally had a brilliant source - inside Isis who was revealing all the latest plottings. The intelligence agency that passed such an amazing titbit about a laptop plot to the US was most likely one of the so-called Five Eyes group of countries. That's the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada who share pretty well everything with the US. It could be the Saudis but I think unlikely. So if it's the UK or one of the other prime intelligence allies, it could not be more damaging. You simply do not reveal anything about Five Eyes intel to anyone else unless specific permission is given. Why? Because of the need to protect sources. HR McMaster and Rex Tillerson came out and spoke to reporters as soon as the story broke and said it was false. But read their lips!! They said Trump did not reveal any sources or methods or operations. They know that because they were in the room at the time Trump blurted out his scoop to Lavrov. This is probably strictly true but it's the truth surrounded by a blatant omission. If Trump said: "Hey, Sergei, we got this great source who has told us that Isis in Syria (ie Raqqa) is plotting to detonate a laptop bomb on an airliner." Lavrov doesn't need to know who the source is or which country passed this on to the US. He now knows, in fact the whole world knows, including Isis - thanks to the huge coverage given by every newspaper - that there's a spy working against Isis and providing key intel. But here's the really damaging bit of this new scandal in the Trump administration. The slip by Trump could have been contained within the White House - and the Kremlin - if the "official" and "former official" had not rushed off to warn the CIA and others about it and then informed the Washington Post and New York Times. Suddenly it's world news. I think that is unbelievably irresponsible. Trump was an idiot for telling Lavrov what he told him - never mind McMaster's dodgy denial - but the leak of the blunder then compounded the error by revealing it to the world. Now Isis has been tipped off, there'll be a hunt for the spy!! I don't want to think about the consequences of this latest ghastly example of Trump impetuosity and the irresponsibility of the leakers in Washington.

Is Trump too impetuous to be president?

What worries me is that Trump gets so angry about things - Comey, the media, Comey, the media, the intelligence services, Comey, disloyalty, the media - how can he get his emotions assembled in the right frame to make massive decisions, like what to do about Kim Jong-un who just will not go away. Trump's sacking of Comey was building up over many weeks, or so we are told by Trump and his loyal press spokespeople. But to the rest of us mortals it looked pretty damned impetuous. He was sick to the teeth of Comey going on about the Russia investigation and just like that said to himself, Comey you're dead meat. Enough. Get me the attorney general and his deputy whatever his name is and we'll cook up a good reason for terminating this 6ft 8ins pain in the butt. Voila, Comey was gone! Now what happens when someone rushes in with the latest CIA intelligence which states that Kim Jong-un is at that very moment rolling out a mighty ballistic missile and it looks like it might have a nuclear warhead at the top and there are people in white coats fanning out all over the place. This, Mr President, could be it. Kim is going to do it. The impetuous Trump might say, this guy has got to go, put our nukes on high alert, get that THAAD machine revved up, let's splat him before it's too late. Well, ok, no president wants to be the one who failed to take action when North Korea was about to launch a nuclear ICBM at Hawaii, but that's the sort of decision-making that needs a deep-thinking president capable in a few minutes to assess all the angles and to pick up the phone to Beijing and Moscow and then make the best decision. Impetuosity is not what is needed. But most people in the White House seem to be afraid of Trump, certainly afraid of his temper. It will be times like this when HR McMaster, supremely cool national security adviser, and James Mattis, hard-nosed veteran combat commander and defence secretary could just save the world.

Trump's week

It has been a helluva week for Trump. Not many pluses for him, apart from the new trade deal with China under which the Chinese banks are allowed to march into the US investment market and Chinese chicken farmers are allowed to sell chickens in the US in return for a lifting of the ban on American beef imports. But all the focus has been, of course, on Comey. Not just his sacking and all the rumpus that caused but what may or may not have been exchanged between Comey and Trump at a private dinner in the White House some time ago. All very intriguing. Did Trump demand Comey's personal loyalty (read allegiance) to the Great Man in return for keeping his job, did Comey say, "no way buddie but I promise always to be honest," (unlike you Mr President - Comey's thought bubble). And did either Comey or Trump record the conversation? Easy for both men. Trump just had to get his super security ex-police detective bodyguard to set him up with a bug under the table or under his lapel, and Comey could have gone to his wiretap blokes and said: "Fix me up with a wire." Comey, according to friends close to him (ie Comey) said the ex-FBI director was more than happy if Trump had a recording of The Conversation, implying he had a record of exactly what had been said over dinner Which must be why Trump issued the thinly veiled (actually not veiled at all) threat to Comey via Twitter not to even think of releasing a transcript of the chat to the media. Sean Spicer said it wasn't a threat, just a statement of the facts. A bit like when Don Corleone might have said to an underling: "You let anyone know what we have just talked about and I'll invite you to my house and you can sleep with my fishes. Capeesh?" Comey certainly got the message because he decided to turn down the invitation to speak to the Senate intelligence committee next Tuesday. He knew that the first question would have been: "So Mr former director, what DID the president say to you at that dinner?" One day, sometime soon, not too much in the distant future, that conversation will be published. But who will leak it, and if it is leaked, will it be the true conversation? I'm not generally a conspiracy theorists but this is all wonderful stuff. And we're only 113 days into the Trump presidency. There is a whole lot more to come. Next week I expect Trump will rearrange his press spokesmen/women. Spicer might be for the chop. Probably deserved but actually while all the fun was going on this week, he was whisked away to serve time in the Navy Reserve. So for most of the week he was playing sailorboy, leaving his female deputy to shoulder the burden of explaining away wildly changing explanations for Comey's sacking. She sounded almost as unconvincing and unconvinced as Spicer.

A little bit of advice goes a long way

The important thing about making decisions if you are president of the USA, or president of most nations - there are obvious exceptions, Russia, North Korea, Iran, possibly China - is that you have to think of the likely political consequences. So, you sack the FBI director, but before you do, you sit down with all your closest mates for a brainstorm. "So, guys and girls, what are the 100 questions that will be asked once I have announced that James Comey has been terminated?" I can think of 100 questions without any trouble at all. The first one would have been: why terminated and not sacked?! Advisers with proper political brains would have warned Trump right away, if you do this Mr President, you will be accused of trying to interfere with the FBI investigation into the Russia collusion affair. Er, Mr President, no one, I mean no one is going to believe the Hillary Clinton email line. Mr President, I think you should wait a bit. Haven't we got Sergei Lavrov turning up in a few hours? Mr President, better the devil you know than the devil you don't know. If, as we all know, there is nothing behind the "collusion" allegation, then let Comey stay on in the job and he will confirm this in due course. Sorry, Mr President, you say he refused to be loyal to you. Well, I'm sorry, he's the director of the FBI, not your personal security guard. He's supposed to do his job according to the criteria laid down when the FBI was founded and it doesn't state anywhere that the director is supposed to do what he is told by the encumbent president. Comey promised to be honest. Well I should hope so. But loyalty is not part of the deal. Whatever you do, Mr President, come out with an explanation and then stick with it. The worst thing to do is to change the explanation every two minutes because that will make you look like a total idiot. No disrespect, Mr President. So, to sum up, don't do it, don't even think of doing, or if you're determined to do it, don't do it now.