Jump to content
IGNORED

John Kelly -- Bringing Order to the West Wing?


GreyhoundFan

Recommended Posts

Since John Kelly seems to be taking no prisoners, I thought he deserved his own thread.

This is a good article from Jennifer Rubin in the WaPo: "Scaramucci’s firing means John Kelly is off to a good start"

Spoiler

White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci did not last a fortnight. Two recently ousted White House advisers, former chief of staff Reince Priebus and former press secretary Sean Spicer, may have been incompetent in their posts, but they knew enough to know Scaramucci would be a disaster. Grabbing the limelight away from the president is never a good idea, but dribbling profanity all over the New Yorker (as he acknowledged he was attempting to leak rather than go on the record) shows just how lacking in judgment, class and professionalism — even in this White House — he was.

His firing was immediately taken as a sign that new Chief of Staff John Kelly is on top of things. The Post reported:

The abrupt decision signals that Kelly is moving quickly to assert control over the West Wing, which has been characterized by interpersonal disputes and power struggles during Trump’s six months in office.

The retired Marine general, who was sworn in Monday morning, was brought into the White House in the hope that he will bring military-style disciple to Trump’s staff. He has been fully empowered by the president to make significant changes to the organization, White House officials and outside advisers said.

But let’s back up for a moment. Recall who pushed for Scaramucci — Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump. One wonders how many dumb ideas and mistakes (e.g., firing James B. Comey, meeting with a Russian banker, failing to disclose his Russian meetings, mucking around in Qatar policy) Kushner in particular can rack up before the chattering class stops fawning over the first son-in-law and Kelly suggests Kushner go back to his New York business (which remains a source of conflicts of interest) full-time.

But, of course, Kushner, like Scaramucci, is just a younger version of President Trump. Trump’s reliance on generals and billionaires, vengeful instincts, refusal to understand (or learn!) the skill set needed for government service, undisciplined outbursts and willful ignorance have resulted in one disaster after another. Perhaps the serial failures and humiliations will empower Kelly and diminish the influence of those such as Kushner who encourage rotten decision-making.

If Kelly wants to professionalize the White House staff and shed staffers’ image as a gang of grifters and sleazy salesmen peddling untruths, he’ll need to do more than boot out Scaramucci. He will need to rid the airwaves and the halls of the West Wing of reflexive liars such as Kellyanne “Alternative Facts” Conway and obnoxious, unqualified characters such as Sebastian “Couldn’t Even Get a Security Clearance” Gorka. He’ll need to silence the attacks from the president on his own attorney general and end talk about firing special counsel Robert S. Mueller. He’ll need to give the president an ultimatum — no unsupervised tweets or thuggish asides in speeches, or he (Kelly) goes. Right now, Trump needs Kelly a whole lot more than Kelly needs the job. That gives Kelly unusual leverage with the president. That influence may not last, but as Trump teeters on the brink of political self-immolation, Kelly might be able to convince Trump that this is his last chance to turn things around.

Firing Scaramucci is a good start for Kelly. Scaramucci’s hiring, however, should serve as a road map to root out dim advisers, poor decision-making and contempt for expertise.

CNN is also reporting that Kelly was angry about the Comey firing and offered to resign in solidarity with Comey. Wow.

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another good one from the WaPo: "John Kelly’s greatest challenge now is ‘without question’ Trump himself, expert says"

Spoiler

President Trump jolted the White House yet again Friday when he announced that he was ousting embattled chief of staff Reince Priebus, instead bringing into the role Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly. Immediately, Washington insiders contrasted Priebus with Kelly, a retired four-star general and reported disciplinarian who “won't suffer idiots and fools.”

Still, Kelly faces a daunting job if he wants to succeed: to restore order to a White House that has been in turmoil since almost the very beginning of Trump's presidency. And while Kelly has a long history of enforcing order at high levels, there's an even longer history of White House chiefs of staff who have failed at their jobs, often because of circumstances outside of their control or lessons not learned early enough.

Chris Whipple knows this. The author of “The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency,” Whipple spent five years interviewing 17 former White House chiefs of staff and researching the history of the position. He found that the job is critical to a “functioning White House” and, in turn, the success of the presidency. We spoke to Whipple about the challenges Kelly will face in his new role in the Trump administration — and the one thing that needs to happen for him to be able to turn the White House around.

(This interview has been edited for length and clarity.)

First of all, can you summarize the turmoil in the White House now as it relates to the chief of staff — and did you foresee any of this as your book was nearing publication?

While the timing of the book was obviously impossible to forecast, it didn’t take a genius to figure out that Donald Trump was headed for trouble. I wrote an epilogue in December, before Trump took office. I essentially predicted that if Trump tried to run the White House the way he ran his campaign — based on seat-of-the-pants decisions without an empowered White House chief of staff — that it would be disastrous. This could not work. And that’s what we’ve seen over the last six months.

This White House is broken, perhaps beyond repair. It can’t do anything right. It can’t issue executive orders that are enforceable. It can’t pass legislation. It can’t prioritize the president’s agenda. It can’t get anybody on the same page. In a normal White House, all of those things flow from an empowered White House chief of staff who can execute the president’s agenda and most importantly tell him what he does not want to hear. And none of that is happening.

What should Kelly do first to have hope of being successful?

The first thing he has to do is make sure that there are conditions. That would be the definition of insanity if John Kelly took this job with the same authority that Reince Priebus had. What he needs to do on Day One, if not well beforehand, is insist that he is first among equals in the White House and that everybody, with the exception of family, goes through him to get to the president.

Look, it’s possible that Stephen K. Bannon can have direct access to the Oval and he can pretend to be in charge of policy. I think everybody else has to report through Kelly. He has to be in charge of executing the president’s agenda. Somebody like [new White House communications director Anthony] Scaramucci, he shouldn’t be within 100 miles of a functioning White House. He cannot report directly to Trump or it will be a complete disaster. (Note: Shortly after this interview, news broke that Scaramucci had been ousted as White House communications director just 10 days after he was named to the job.)

There are reports that Scaramucci may in fact report directly to the president. [Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway refused to say Sunday whether he would.]

This White House cannot function then. The only way you fix this White House is by giving authority to an empowered White House chief of staff. History is littered with the bleached bones of presidencies that didn’t figure this out. … It took Bill Clinton a year and a half to figure out he needed an empowered chief.

What are the other conditions Kelly needs to present to Trump?

The other condition is control of the president’s Twitter account. “You can tweet all you like but you have to run them by me first.” If that fails, be prepared to quit. “I am prepared to resign the first time you send out a tweet with demonstrable falsehoods.”

How should Kelly navigate relationships with people like Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, who are uniquely close with the president?

He could take a page from Jim Baker. He was able, in a very fractious White House full of infighting, to be savvy and make the right alliances. He was the hated pragmatist. But Baker prevailed because he made allies of Nancy Reagan and Mike Deaver, the deputy chief who was like family to the Reagans. [Baker] could walk into the White House, close the door and tell Reagan what he didn’t want to hear. A really strong White House chief does it. You have to be prepared to quit. You have to be prepared to resign if the president won’t abide that.

Do you think Kelly, a retired Marine general, would be someone who would quit? Given the origins of the role under Dwight D. Eisenhower, would a military background make one any more likely to be a successful chief of staff?

I can’t speak for Kelly and he hasn’t spoken to me. I’ve spoken to a few former White House chiefs who have not heard from him, interestingly, which is not a good sign. Most White House chiefs incoming would be working the phones to their predecessors and it doesn’t sound like he’s doing that.

The last time we had a general as chief of staff, it didn’t end well. Al Haig [who served as chief of staff under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford] lasted little more than a month under Ford. The history here of generals as White House chiefs is not very encouraging.

What should Trump learn from that history?

Donald Trump needs to learn what all of his predecessors found out — sometimes the hard way — which is you cannot govern effectively without empowering your chief. There’s no evidence that Donald Trump has learned that lesson or learned anything in his first six months as far as I can tell. That’s the central lesson that he has failed to grasp. Until he figures it out, this White House can’t function. One former White House chief said it's a little bit like alcoholism. Presidents have to hit rock bottom to make such a fundamental change.

You interviewed 17 former chiefs of staff for your book, including those who served in tumultuous times. Aside from Trump, what challenges does Kelly have ahead of him that are unique to this administration?

Well, far and away the biggest challenge is Donald Trump. That's without question. This is a guy who has shown over six months he has no idea how to govern. It’s really Kelly’s responsibility to show him the way. Almost everything in Trump’s nature, you know, it fights against that. It’s a really tough, tough assignment and you have to wonder why somebody like John Kelly would take this job in the first place, unless he knows something we don’t know. Did he make conditions and did Trump accept them?

All the other challenges are pretty obvious. You’ve got the Republican Party starting to turn against [Trump]. … Donald Trump is a blank slate. He’s a guy with no discernible agenda except his own ego, his own gratifications. All of the other challenges are there. But the first challenge is getting the White House to be functional again.

We're only six months into the Trump presidency. That strikes me as relatively early compared to some of the other examples you've given. Can you think of chaotic past White Houses that still managed to turn things around?

At the height of the Iran-contra scandal, Reagan was in trouble. There was a serious possibility of impeachment. Reagan brought in Howard Baker Jr., and his deputy, Ken Duberstein. The first thing they did was they sat down and made a pact between them — Baker and Duberstein. They decided they were going to sit Reagan down, figure out what he knew about Iran-contra and, if he was lying to them, they would resign.

I think that Kelly needs to take a page from them. He needs to sit Trump down and say, "Look, here’s the red line. If you cross it, I will resign." One of those red lines would be tweeting demonstrable lies. There are others. That would be the first one. I would want control of that Twitter account.

Do White House leaks matter to the chief of staff? If so, to what extent could Kelly shut down leaks coming out of the White House?

Leaks are inevitable. They’re only paralyzing when you’ve got something really serious to hide. They’re only really a problem when you’re fundamentally corrupt. The way you minimize leaks is by telling the truth and running a competent White House staff with inspired loyalty and not fear. That's the way you minimize leaks.

Were there specific instances where Reince Priebus failed or should have carried out his role in a different way?

There’s nothing he could have done because on Day One, Donald Trump failed to empower him. So that’s on Donald Trump and not on Priebus. Priebus failed, in my opinion, to hold Trump accountable. He failed to tell Donald Trump hard truths. He was a sycophant. It’s a West Wing populated by enablers. So no, there’s nothing Priebus could have done in the end.

Much has been made of the differences between Priebus and Kelly. Do you think Trump would be more likely to listen to Kelly?

I can’t read his mind and so we’re just going to have to see. It’s just hard to see.

The article was updated to include the fact that "Mooch" was ousted, but lots of interesting information about the chief of staff position.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he certainly rolled a Molotov cocktail down the hall. We know Trump doesn't come up with these people, otherwise Ivanka, Jared, stupid Junior and needy Eric would have all of the jobs. Who snuck this guy in?

 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Podesta wrote an opinion piece for the WaPo: "The best advice I could have given to John Kelly: Don’t do it!"

Spoiler

As a former White House chief of staff, the best advice I could have given Gen. John F. Kelly has been overtaken by events: Don’t take the job.

Kelly, who has rendered extraordinary service and sacrifice to the nation, just signed up for what may truly be an impossible mission: bringing discipline, order and strategic focus to the chaos that is the Trump White House.

To have any chance of succeeding, he will have to accomplish three extraordinary tasks, all at odds with President Trump’s instincts.

First, discipline. There’s no doubt the decision to replace Reince Priebus with Kelly was based on the hope that a former four-star Marine general could get this menagerie in line. You don’t have to compare the Trump White House to no-drama Obama or the buttoned-down Bush operations to know there is simply no precedent in modern history for the current White House culture of factionalism, infighting and lack of respect among senior staff members. Of course, most of Trump’s team are simply modeling their behavior on that of the boss. His demeaning treatment of Priebus and Attorney General Jeff Sessions signals that there are no boundaries in Trumpland, leading to the unprofessional actions of now-former communications director Anthony Scaramucci. Indeed, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders informed the public that the president “encourages” such behavior.

Kelly is walking into a White House that looks more like a cock fight than an episode of “The West Wing.” (See Mooch, you can use that word without being profane.) The White House culture will have to be shaken to its core. Kelly must be able to fire anyone at will, including to enforce a no-tolerance policy for behavior unbecoming a senior government official. Scaramucci’s departure Monday is a good start, but Kelly will have to keep a tight rein on a White House staff that is used to few boundaries. And if there is going to be an exception for Trump’s relatives, Kelly should get an explicit commitment that even Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump report through him — no end arounds.

The most difficult discipline problem for Kelly, though, will not be the staff but Trump himself. Early signs are not auspicious. The day after appointing Kelly, Trump ranted on Twitter against Senate Republicans for failure to pass their horrific health-care bill, which would have denied care to millions of Americans and raised costs for millions more. I have no doubt that Kelly, unlike Priebus, can say no to power, but whether power will listen is another matter.

Kelly’s second task will be to restore strategic direction to Trump’s haphazard policy-making process.

In domestic affairs, that will mean reestablishing relationships with congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle. Trump’s current strategy of partisan bullying has been disastrous, producing almost no significant legislation in what has generally been the most productive part of a new president’s time in office. Other than rolling back some Obama regulations on behalf of special interests, the only bill of significance that has passed is the Russia sanctions bill that the White House opposed.

Kelly cannot outsource the job of establishing a working relationship with congressional leaders to Vice President Pence or his congressional liaison. The new chief of staff is known as a man of his word, and he has to use that reputation to establish a rapport and find common ground with Republicans and Democrats on issues such as infrastructure, tax reform and, yes, even a bipartisan approach to improving the Affordable Care Act.

In international affairs, he has to help national security adviser H.R. McMaster and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis focus on the clear priorities of Russia, the Middle East and North Korea. With respect to the last, he might start by asking why the White House has not even nominated an ambassador to South Korea or filled any of the senior regional posts for Asia at State or Defense.

Kelly’s third task might be the hardest.

He has to protect the integrity and independence of the Justice Department and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation from constant interference by the president and the White House. He has to be resolute in defending our constitutional norms and the rule of law. While it may not endear him to the president, Kelly will actually be helping Trump stay out of even more trouble.

I began by noting that Kelly may have embarked on mission impossible, but the good news is that he does have a strong hand to play. The truth is that the president needs Kelly more than Kelly needs him. Trump simply cannot afford to have Kelly walk without disastrous consequences. The new chief of staff should use that power to restore discipline and dignity to a White House sorely in need of both.

I agree that the TT needs Kelly more than Kelly needs him.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least he's trying.  Because he is, I don't figure he'll be around long.  Either Trump will kick him to the curb for his lack of loyalty or he'll throw his hands in the air and resign in frustration and disgust.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Another good one from the WaPo: "John Kelly’s greatest challenge now is ‘without question’ Trump himself, expert says"

  Hide contents

President Trump jolted the White House yet again Friday when he announced that he was ousting embattled chief of staff Reince Priebus, instead bringing into the role Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly. Immediately, Washington insiders contrasted Priebus with Kelly, a retired four-star general and reported disciplinarian who “won't suffer idiots and fools.”

Still, Kelly faces a daunting job if he wants to succeed: to restore order to a White House that has been in turmoil since almost the very beginning of Trump's presidency. And while Kelly has a long history of enforcing order at high levels, there's an even longer history of White House chiefs of staff who have failed at their jobs, often because of circumstances outside of their control or lessons not learned early enough.

Chris Whipple knows this. The author of “The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency,” Whipple spent five years interviewing 17 former White House chiefs of staff and researching the history of the position. He found that the job is critical to a “functioning White House” and, in turn, the success of the presidency. We spoke to Whipple about the challenges Kelly will face in his new role in the Trump administration — and the one thing that needs to happen for him to be able to turn the White House around.

(This interview has been edited for length and clarity.)

First of all, can you summarize the turmoil in the White House now as it relates to the chief of staff — and did you foresee any of this as your book was nearing publication?

While the timing of the book was obviously impossible to forecast, it didn’t take a genius to figure out that Donald Trump was headed for trouble. I wrote an epilogue in December, before Trump took office. I essentially predicted that if Trump tried to run the White House the way he ran his campaign — based on seat-of-the-pants decisions without an empowered White House chief of staff — that it would be disastrous. This could not work. And that’s what we’ve seen over the last six months.

This White House is broken, perhaps beyond repair. It can’t do anything right. It can’t issue executive orders that are enforceable. It can’t pass legislation. It can’t prioritize the president’s agenda. It can’t get anybody on the same page. In a normal White House, all of those things flow from an empowered White House chief of staff who can execute the president’s agenda and most importantly tell him what he does not want to hear. And none of that is happening.

What should Kelly do first to have hope of being successful?

The first thing he has to do is make sure that there are conditions. That would be the definition of insanity if John Kelly took this job with the same authority that Reince Priebus had. What he needs to do on Day One, if not well beforehand, is insist that he is first among equals in the White House and that everybody, with the exception of family, goes through him to get to the president.

Look, it’s possible that Stephen K. Bannon can have direct access to the Oval and he can pretend to be in charge of policy. I think everybody else has to report through Kelly. He has to be in charge of executing the president’s agenda. Somebody like [new White House communications director Anthony] Scaramucci, he shouldn’t be within 100 miles of a functioning White House. He cannot report directly to Trump or it will be a complete disaster. (Note: Shortly after this interview, news broke that Scaramucci had been ousted as White House communications director just 10 days after he was named to the job.)

There are reports that Scaramucci may in fact report directly to the president. [Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway refused to say Sunday whether he would.]

This White House cannot function then. The only way you fix this White House is by giving authority to an empowered White House chief of staff. History is littered with the bleached bones of presidencies that didn’t figure this out. … It took Bill Clinton a year and a half to figure out he needed an empowered chief.

What are the other conditions Kelly needs to present to Trump?

The other condition is control of the president’s Twitter account. “You can tweet all you like but you have to run them by me first.” If that fails, be prepared to quit. “I am prepared to resign the first time you send out a tweet with demonstrable falsehoods.”

How should Kelly navigate relationships with people like Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, who are uniquely close with the president?

He could take a page from Jim Baker. He was able, in a very fractious White House full of infighting, to be savvy and make the right alliances. He was the hated pragmatist. But Baker prevailed because he made allies of Nancy Reagan and Mike Deaver, the deputy chief who was like family to the Reagans. [Baker] could walk into the White House, close the door and tell Reagan what he didn’t want to hear. A really strong White House chief does it. You have to be prepared to quit. You have to be prepared to resign if the president won’t abide that.

Do you think Kelly, a retired Marine general, would be someone who would quit? Given the origins of the role under Dwight D. Eisenhower, would a military background make one any more likely to be a successful chief of staff?

I can’t speak for Kelly and he hasn’t spoken to me. I’ve spoken to a few former White House chiefs who have not heard from him, interestingly, which is not a good sign. Most White House chiefs incoming would be working the phones to their predecessors and it doesn’t sound like he’s doing that.

The last time we had a general as chief of staff, it didn’t end well. Al Haig [who served as chief of staff under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford] lasted little more than a month under Ford. The history here of generals as White House chiefs is not very encouraging.

What should Trump learn from that history?

Donald Trump needs to learn what all of his predecessors found out — sometimes the hard way — which is you cannot govern effectively without empowering your chief. There’s no evidence that Donald Trump has learned that lesson or learned anything in his first six months as far as I can tell. That’s the central lesson that he has failed to grasp. Until he figures it out, this White House can’t function. One former White House chief said it's a little bit like alcoholism. Presidents have to hit rock bottom to make such a fundamental change.

You interviewed 17 former chiefs of staff for your book, including those who served in tumultuous times. Aside from Trump, what challenges does Kelly have ahead of him that are unique to this administration?

Well, far and away the biggest challenge is Donald Trump. That's without question. This is a guy who has shown over six months he has no idea how to govern. It’s really Kelly’s responsibility to show him the way. Almost everything in Trump’s nature, you know, it fights against that. It’s a really tough, tough assignment and you have to wonder why somebody like John Kelly would take this job in the first place, unless he knows something we don’t know. Did he make conditions and did Trump accept them?

All the other challenges are pretty obvious. You’ve got the Republican Party starting to turn against [Trump]. … Donald Trump is a blank slate. He’s a guy with no discernible agenda except his own ego, his own gratifications. All of the other challenges are there. But the first challenge is getting the White House to be functional again.

We're only six months into the Trump presidency. That strikes me as relatively early compared to some of the other examples you've given. Can you think of chaotic past White Houses that still managed to turn things around?

At the height of the Iran-contra scandal, Reagan was in trouble. There was a serious possibility of impeachment. Reagan brought in Howard Baker Jr., and his deputy, Ken Duberstein. The first thing they did was they sat down and made a pact between them — Baker and Duberstein. They decided they were going to sit Reagan down, figure out what he knew about Iran-contra and, if he was lying to them, they would resign.

I think that Kelly needs to take a page from them. He needs to sit Trump down and say, "Look, here’s the red line. If you cross it, I will resign." One of those red lines would be tweeting demonstrable lies. There are others. That would be the first one. I would want control of that Twitter account.

Do White House leaks matter to the chief of staff? If so, to what extent could Kelly shut down leaks coming out of the White House?

Leaks are inevitable. They’re only paralyzing when you’ve got something really serious to hide. They’re only really a problem when you’re fundamentally corrupt. The way you minimize leaks is by telling the truth and running a competent White House staff with inspired loyalty and not fear. That's the way you minimize leaks.

Were there specific instances where Reince Priebus failed or should have carried out his role in a different way?

There’s nothing he could have done because on Day One, Donald Trump failed to empower him. So that’s on Donald Trump and not on Priebus. Priebus failed, in my opinion, to hold Trump accountable. He failed to tell Donald Trump hard truths. He was a sycophant. It’s a West Wing populated by enablers. So no, there’s nothing Priebus could have done in the end.

Much has been made of the differences between Priebus and Kelly. Do you think Trump would be more likely to listen to Kelly?

I can’t read his mind and so we’re just going to have to see. It’s just hard to see.

The article was updated to include the fact that "Mooch" was ousted, but lots of interesting information about the chief of staff position.

Ok, now I've read this and a little part of my mind is wondering if Kelly is there for the transition. Has Trump been told if he fires Kelly, Sessions or Mueller he is out? Is this TPTB(congress) telling Trump he's in trouble? I do think Trump is slowly starting to realize he is not everyone's boss.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, candygirl200413 said:

Someone tweeted how Nixon also did this, making a general his chief of staff....

Yes, Alexander "I am in control here" Haig.

 

"The Daily 202: John Kelly proves he can manage up on his first day as chief of staff"

Spoiler

THE BIG IDEA: John F. Kelly’s first move as White House chief of staff — firing communications director Anthony Scaramucci — validated President Trump’s decision to elevate him. The 67-year-old retired Marine general showed that he’s no nonsense, and the alpha male in the Oval Office surely appreciated the early show of strength.

“Trump’s willingness to dismiss Scaramucci — whom he hired just 10 days ago — was viewed by many in the West Wing as an indication that he is eager to impose order and is giving Kelly the tools to do so,” Abby Phillip, John Wagner and Damian Paletta report. “Removing him from the communications post is part of an effort to change the culture of the White House.”

It makes sense that Kelly axing someone as colorful as The Mooch would get the lion’s share of attention, but three other stories that came out in the past 24 hours also foreshadow what kind of chief he’ll be:

1. “A hint of Kelly’s potential influence on Trump emerged two weeks ago, in Aspen, Colorado, when Kelly made a startling revelation,” writes the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza, the reporter who found himself on the receiving end of one of Scaramucci’s profanity-laced tirades last week: “According to several sources who attended a private briefing that included some of the nation’s most senior current and former national-security officials, Kelly sought to ease their minds about one of the most controversial and famous Trump proposals: the border wall with Mexico. Kelly explained that he had spent a great deal of time talking through the issue with Trump, and he believed he had convinced the President that he didn’t actually need to build a physical wall … To the officials in the room, it was a fascinating admission. Kelly seemed to be suggesting that he was one of the few people who might be able to tame Trump and get him to back off some of his most cartoonish policy ideas, even the ones that were core campaign promises.”

2. Kelly was so upset with how Trump handled the firing of FBI Director James Comey that he called Comey to say he was considering resigning, CNN reports: “Comey, who took Kelly's call while traveling back from Los Angeles to Washington, responded to Kelly by telling him not to resign … (Two) sources said Comey and Kelly are not close friends but that they had a professional relationship and a deep mutual respect for each other. … ‘John was angry and hurt by what he saw and the way (Comey) was treated,’ one of the sources said.”

3. Kelly is already making overtures to Democrats, per the Daily Beast: “Even before he formally started the job, Kelly was reaching out to top Capitol Hill Democrats in hopes of regaining political capital ahead of what is expected to be a bruising fight over tax reform and other administration priorities. ‘Tax reform is gonna be a heavy lift,’ a senior White House official [said]. ‘No reason to write off/alienate [Democrats] any more than we already have.’ A spokeswoman for … Nancy Pelosi [said] that Kelly reached out her over the weekend with the two holding a phone conversation on Sunday. A spokesman for … Chuck Schumer … confirmed that Kelly reached out to him as well.”

UNDERSTANDING KELLY’S WORLD VIEW:

-- The new chief of staff gave a fascinating 90-minute interview last July to Foreign Policy’s Molly O’Toole, in which he decried “the cesspool of domestic politics.” At a moment when Michael Flynn was being mentioned as a possible running mate for Trump, the recently retired general warned former brass to avoid wading into the 2016 campaign. “To join in the political fray, I don’t think it convinces anyone,” he said. “It just becomes a talking point on CNN.”

“He said Clinton and Trump ‘are not serious yet about the issues’ and speak only in generalities when it comes to complex topics ranging from combating the Islamic State to handling the Syrian refugee crisis. The campaigns ‘don’t reflect reality.’ Kelly said he’d be willing to serve in either a Trump or Clinton White House but didn’t endorse either. Whomever wins, he added, ‘will be in desperate need — and I mean desperate need — of military and foreign policy advice, because the world out there is just getting crazier and crazier.’ …

“The retired general said the anti-Islamic State fight will continue long after Obama — and probably his successor — leaves office, a grim reality that neither Clinton nor Trump seems eager to openly discuss. ‘You’re not going to win this thing by dropping bombs on these people,’ he said, adding that neither presidential candidate was willing to acknowledge that the sustained ‘victory’ they promise would likely require a large number of U.S. and coalition troops deployed to Iraq for decades to come.”

SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER:

-- Republican consultant Blain Rethmeier recalls a quote from Kelly during his confirmation hearing to run DHS: “I have never had a problem speaking truth to power, and I firmly believe that those in power deserve full candor and my honest assessment and recommendations.”

“One reason the general's success can be expected to be repeated at the White House is his understanding of Sun Tzu's observation that ‘a leader leads by example — not by force,’” Rethmeier, who helped prepare Kelly for his hearing as a so-called sherpa, writes in an op-ed for the Washington Examiner. “He didn't mince words at his confirmation hearings in questioning the viability of the border wall or the wisdom of a complete Muslim ban, or in stressing the important role good relationships with Muslim clerics played in Iraq. I am convinced that Kelly will patiently explain to the president that he cannot go on undermining his own most loyal supporters in tweets (a la Attorney General Jeff Sessions), leaving the heavy lifting to others in achieving policy goals (Obamacare repeal), or allow open feuding among members of his leadership team. And he will insist on the power to ensure appropriate procedures are put in place to rein in the madness.”

-- “As a former White House chief of staff, the best advice I could have given [Kelly] has been overtaken by events: Don’t take the job,” quips John Podesta, who held top positions in the Bill Clinton and Barack Obama administrations, in an op-ed for today’s paper. “Kelly, who has rendered extraordinary service and sacrifice to the nation, just signed up for what may truly be an impossible mission … To have any chance of succeeding, he will have to accomplish three extraordinary tasks, all at odds with President Trump’s instincts. First, discipline. … Kelly’s second task will be to restore strategic direction to Trump’s haphazard policy-making process. … Kelly’s third task might be the hardest. He has to protect the integrity and independence of the Justice Department and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation from constant interference by the president and the White House …

“The truth is that the president needs Kelly more than Kelly needs him,” argues Podesta, who was chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. “Trump simply cannot afford to have Kelly walk without disastrous consequences. The new chief of staff should use that power to restore discipline and dignity to a White House sorely in need of both.”

-- “In his 40 years in the military, Kelly developed a reputation for bluntness that won him the respect of his fellow Marines and sometimes grated on senior officials in the Obama administration,” Greg Jaffe and Andrew deGrandpre wrote in a profile over the weekend. “He is best known in Washington as an experienced battlefield commander who led U.S. troops in Iraq and lost a son in Afghanistan in 2010 to a Taliban bomb. But the most relevant experience he will bring to the chief of staff job is a tour as senior military adviser to Defense Secretaries Robert M. Gates and Leon E. Panetta in the Pentagon. The job demanded Kelly act as a disciplinarian, pressing to make sure the military service chiefs and the sprawling Pentagon bureaucracy were executing the defense secretary’s agenda …

“As a four-star general, Kelly was frequently at odds with the Obama White House. He spoke out forcefully on issues including Obama’s plan to shutter the prison complex in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the perceived vulnerability of America’s borders. At a time when the Obama administration was trying to wind down America’s wars and calm fears of a terrorist attack, Kelly often spoke of the threat posed by groups like the Taliban in dire terms. … In charge of U.S. Southern Command, Kelly oversaw the military detention center at (Gitmo). His weekly updates on the prison, which were blasted out to dozens of White House and Pentagon officials, became well known for their candor. ‘His vernacular wasn’t the typical government prose,’ said one former White House official. ‘He would call out some of the military commission judges, saying that they had no idea what they were doing.’”

-- At DHS, Kelly has demonstrated that he can be combative with lawmakers: Speaking in April at George Washington University, he said that congressional critics of the Department of Homeland Security should “shut up’’ and assume the agency is acting appropriately and following the law. “If lawmakers do not like the laws they’ve passed and we are charged to enforce, then they should have the courage and skill to change the laws,” Kelly said. “Otherwise they should shut up and support the men and women on the front lines.” Watch:

...

HOW LONG WILL KELLY’S HONEYMOON LAST?

-- “General Kelly has the full authority to operate within the White House, and all staff will report to him,” said White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

-- It seems inevitable, though, that palace intrigue will continue, and that Trump’s kids will balk sooner than later at going through an intermediary to get to their dad. From Abby Phillip, John Wagner and Damian Paletta: “In one of the strongest indications that Kelly will have greater authority than his predecessor, Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner — both of whom advocated for Kelly to be hired — have expressed their willingness to support any structural changes Kelly might make … Sanders confirmed that they, too, will report to Kelly, as will all other officials. But Kelly is planning to bring at least one senior adviser from the Department of Homeland Security with him to the White House. There are signs that these new hires may be met with a chilly reception, two people familiar with the matter said, raising questions about who will hold influence in a White House overloaded with aides competing for influence. … Ivanka Trump and Kushner were instrumental in bringing Scaramucci into the White House in large part to oust (Reince) Priebus, who led the establishment wing. After Scaramucci’s explosive interview with the New Yorker … they soured on him and were supportive of Kelly’s efforts to oust him.”

-- “The president gave Mr. Priebus many of the same assurances of control, and then proceeded to undercut and ignore him — to the point where Mr. Priebus often positioned himself at the door of the Oval Office to find out whom the president was talking to,” Michael Shear, Glenn Thrush and Maggie Haberman note on the front page of today’s New York Times. “Mr. Scaramucci’s fall and Mr. Kelly’s rise highlighted the diminished but still important role in shaping the West Wing played by (Ivanka and Jared) … Ms. Trump and Mr. Kushner had hoped to persuade Mr. Trump to appoint Dina Powell, the deputy national security adviser, as chief of staff. Mr. Trump, who likes Ms. Powell, considered doing so …

“For the time being, the White House may leave the communications director post open … though Mr. Kelly has the latitude from Mr. Trump to fill the post with someone from the Department of Homeland Security. Two perennial candidates to fill the post are Kellyanne Conway, a White House senior adviser and the president’s former campaign manager, and Jason Miller, who held the communications post during the campaign. Mr. Trump has long wanted to bring Mr. Miller, who serves as an informal adviser, into the administration.”

-- Given the origins of the role under Dwight D. Eisenhower, does a military background make one more likely to be a successful chief of staff? Chris Whipple spent five years interviewing 17 former White House chiefs of staff for his book about the history of the position (“The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency”): “I’ve spoken to a few former White House chiefs who have not heard from him, interestingly, which is not a good sign,” he told Amy B Wang. “Most incoming White House chiefs would be working the phones to their predecessors and it doesn’t sound like he’s doing that. The last time we had a general as chief of staff, it didn’t end well. Al Haig [who served as chief of staff under presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford] lasted little more than a month under Ford. The history here of generals as White House chiefs is not very encouraging.” (Read an extended Q&A with Whipple here.)

 

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

CNN is also reporting that Kelly was angry about the Comey firing and offered to resign in solidarity with Comey. Wow.

I read about this in another article.   That Kelly was willing to resign once before indicates to me that he may just do it again when things get too bad.  Or the Trumpster, once he becomes disillusioned or angry with Kelly (something that I think is inevitable because it's Trump) will point to this as evidence of disloyalty.

Personally, I think Kelly shouldn't have touched this post with a ten foot pole.  Trump is poison.   To everyone.  The Moocher was his biggest fanboy and look what it did to him.

 

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nokidsmom said:

I read about this in another article.   That Kelly was willing to resign once before indicates to me that he may just do it again when things get too bad.  Or the Trumpster, once he becomes disillusioned or angry with Kelly (something that I think is inevitable because it's Trump) will point to this as evidence of disloyalty.

Personally, I think Kelly shouldn't have touched this post with a ten foot pole.  Trump is poison.   To everyone.  The Moocher was his biggest fanboy and look what it did to him.

 

See, this is why I think something's afoot. Kelly's no idiot and he's already been in the administration so he knows Trump. It's an end run. I can't believe he would go in, having already chastised Trump publicly about Comey and believe it was even worth it to unpack his beautifully framed medals, unless he knows somebody with serious clout has his back.

And @nokidsmom, weren't you the one who posted in one of these threads, oh twelve hours or so ago about childhood religious experiences? Ditto for me with my dad, very similar. I can't go into a church service without having an anxiety attack.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GrumpyGran said:

See, this is why I think something's afoot. Kelly's no idiot and he's already been in the administration so he knows Trump. It's an end run. I can't believe he would go in, having already chastised Trump publicly about Comey and believe it was even worth it to unpack his beautifully framed medals, unless he knows somebody with serious clout has his back.

And @nokidsmom, weren't you the one who posted in one of these threads, oh twelve hours or so ago about childhood religious experiences? Ditto for me with my dad, very similar. I can't go into a church service without having an anxiety attack.

Not to get OT, but yes, I was the one to post about childhood religious experiences especially in reference to my Dad.  FTR, I was "maxed out" on church in general after all that which is why when I left church I though I was merely taking a break but after a time, I realized I didn't want to go back to it.

Back to Kelly, it's entirely possible that there's something else going on here that would explain his signing on for this impossible job.  If so, it's something that we can't know, at least at this point in time. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Yes, Alexander "I am in control here" Haig.

I remember that clearly. Who would ever think the bad old days of Nixon and Reagan are looking pretty good right now.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, nokidsmom said:

Not to get OT, but yes, I was the one to post about childhood religious experiences especially in reference to my Dad.  FTR, I was "maxed out" on church in general after all that which is why when I left church I though I was merely taking a break but after a time, I realized I didn't want to go back to it.

Back to Kelly, it's entirely possible that there's something else going on here that would explain his signing on for this impossible job.  If so, it's something that we can't know, at least at this point in time. 

It's obvious from comments coming from Congressional members that they are getting fed up with Trump.  When they were in trouble with the ACA repeal, he did nothing to help and many times has actually hindered them.  Not to mention the threats when they don't bow down to him and his back stabbing move on Sessions.  So I wonder if Kelly wasn't told that impeachment was on the horizon and if he hung on, he'd get Pence as his boss.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Childless said:

So I wonder if Kelly wasn't told that impeachment was on the horizon and if he hung on, he'd get Pence as his boss.

My thinking exactly. I go even further to wonder if Kelly would get the #2 job and wait a while until Pence also goes down in flames. After a carefully orchestrated period of time Kelly gets what he really wants; A nice desk in the Oval Office.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting theories on what Kelly might know is coming down the pike and that may be the reason(s) behind his taking the job.   All seem possible, since there has to be a lot brewing behind the scenes between Russia investigation, disaffected Congressional members and the treatment of Sessions to name a few.    

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Politico: "Kelly cracks down on West Wing back channels to Trump"

Spoiler

When new White House chief of staff John Kelly huddled with senior staff on his first day at work, he outlined a key problem in President Donald Trump’s White House that he planned to fix: Bad information getting into the president’s hands.

Kelly told the staff that information needed to flow through him — whether on paper or in briefings — because the president would make better decisions if given good information.

Kelly, a retired Marine general, faces an uphill path when it comes to his stated goal of instilling order in the White House, from aides who have directly reported to the president and don’t want to see their power curbed to Trump’s own itchy Twitter finger. In talks with congressional leaders, friends and longtime associates, he has bluntly described how serious the problems he faces in the West Wing are, according to more than a half-dozen people familiar with the conversations.

“John Kelly knows the challenges he is facing,” said Leon Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton who spoke to Kelly after he took the job. “He’s not going to just stand to the side and watch the White House fall apart piece by piece.”

But several people who have spoken with him say Kelly believes that making sure Trump is getting good information is among the biggest challenges he faces as he takes over from Reince Priebus, the former Republican National Committee chairman who was dismissed by the president last week.

Since starting this week, Kelly has told aides that anyone briefing the president needs to show him the information first. The Trump West Wing tradition of aides dropping off articles on the president’s desk — then waiting for him to react, with a screaming phone call or a hastily scheduled staff meeting, must stop. He will not accept aides walking into the Oval Office and telling the president information without permission — or without the information being vetted.

“He basically said, 'The president has to get good briefings, he has to get good intelligence,'” one senior White House official said. “We have to be putting him in a position to make good decisions.”

In the West Wing, many of the president’s most controversial decisions have been attributed to bad information, partially because the president is easily swayed by the last person he has talked to — or the last thing he has read.

For example, he accused President Barack Obama of tapping his phone line in Trump Tower after seeing comments from a conservative talk show host and a Breitbart News article. He has often posted some of his most controversial tweets while watching Fox News and stewing. He has sometimes seemed to view television accounts of the news as fact more than information from people armed with classified information. He has made decisions about legal matters or major policy decisions while consulting with some aides — only to reverse them after talking to family members or friends, who he dials late at night.

He has been given information of dubious quality, from stories by GotNews.com, a blog written by a right-wing provocateur named Chuck Johnson to segments of debunked documentaries. He has, at times, listened to real estate friends about legislative strategy while ignoring Speaker Paul Ryan or Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

By limiting information, and making it go through proper channels, Kelly is “ensuring Trump doesn’t make his decisions based on some bullshit he watched at midnight or on Breitbart,” said Chris Whipple, who recently wrote a book on the chief-of-staff role.

A White House spokeswoman didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Kelly and senior West Wing officials don’t believe Trump will fully change. He is not going to stop tweeting, for example, and they expect him to keep dialing old friends in New York after hours — and that he will likely huddle with aides when Kelly is not around. Senior officials are likely to still give him articles to read without Kelly knowing. “He’s not under the impression he can tell Donald Trump, 'Oh, you’re going to do it my way,” one Kelly associate said. “He’s not delusional about it.”

But so far, Kelly has received some buy-in to creating more discipline. Aides were startled earlier this week to see Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter, at a senior staff meeting, two White House officials said. Both Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, have agreed to the new order, people close to them say. Steve Bannon, the president’s strategist, has told others he thinks having a military-like chain-of-command will help the West Wing.

Aides have begun raising more issues with Kelly, several West Wing aides said, whereas they previously would avoid Priebus and go straight to the president. And Trump’s friends say he has expressed an optimistic tone on the phone, thinking the mood was improving.

“What we’ve seen in the past six months is a new president who has never governed and trying to adjust, and he is finding the right people for the right jobs,” said Chris Ruddy, a longtime friend. “Reince was not a manager. I think he had the president’s interests at heart, and he wanted him to succeed, but you can’t learn to be a manager of a complex organization, how to hire and fire people and develop strategy, in a matter of months.”

Panetta, who served as director of the CIA and secretary of defense under President Barack Obama, said he faced many similar issues when he became Clinton’s chief of staff in 1994. Warring aides and advisers were giving the president different messages. He would stay up late and talk with friends on the phone from Arkansas. “Too many people who didn’t have a portfolio were walking in and out of the Oval,” he said.

Panetta said he created a process by which the president would tell him about his conversations, and he would ask every person briefing the president to outline the options — and that he installed a more chain-of-command system where people knew who they were reporting to and what their responsibilities were. But there were still hiccups.

“While you’re trying to develop a policy process, and you’re trying to work with people who are knowledgeable, and the president is talking to whoever he likes and decides he’s going to tweet out something, that is a recipe for chaos,” Panetta said. “The success or failure of this administration is going to depend on whether the president actually gives John Kelly the power to do what he needs to do.”

Those close to Trump say time will tell whether Kelly can succeed. Trump sometimes sours on aides after several months, and the 71-year-old billionaire has enjoyed the freewheeling style that has proven problematic in the West Wing. “In private business, Donald Trump would often defer to his managers if they are capable and competent,” Ruddy said. “He had a team who was with him for decades. There wasn’t a lot of turnover.”

I hope Kelly can succeed, but I still think he's rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds to me like they know Trump is a demented disaster waiting to happen and are trying to act as his babysitters.  Kelly needs to hover  there to make sure Trump has his pants on when he gets a visitor and restrict calls so fewer people have access to Trump's madness that they can leak. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/08/03/can-donald-trump-grow-up-in-office/?hpid=hp_regional-hp-cards_rhp-posteverything%3Ahomepage%2Fcard&utm_term=.e39985b493da

Can Donald Trump grow up in office?

Can Trump act like a big boy as president?

By Daniel W. Drezner August 3 at 8:15 AM 

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a regular contributor to PostEverything.

 

Spoiler

 

Readers of Spoiler Alerts might be aware that, on the side, I have been curating a Twitter thread about the myriad ways that President Trump’s own staff appears to treat him or talk about him like a toddler. It starts here:

View image on Twitter

 Follow

Daniel W. Drezner ✔@dandrezner

I'll believe that Trump is growing into the presidency when his staff stops talking about him like a toddler. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/everyone-tunes-in-inside-trumps-obsession-with-cable-tv/2017/04/23/3c52bd6c-25e3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.011de0fdd8af …

 

Some commentators have pushed back on the toddler analogy. In 2015, however, Trump himself told a biographer that he feels that his emotional temperament has been unchanged since he was 6 years old. I’ve found enough examples of Trump’s toddler-like behavior in the thread for FiveThirtyEight to do a big data analysis of it if it chooses to do so. So maybe the toddler analogy has some analytic bite.

One of the more recent additions to my thread came from this intriguing detail in an Associated Press report about new White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly:

[Secretary of Defense James] Mattis and Kelly also agreed in the earliest weeks of Trump’s presidency that one of them should remain in the United States at all times to keep tabs on the orders rapidly emerging from the White House, according to a person familiar with the discussions. The official insisted on anonymity in order to discuss the administration’s internal dynamics.

Clearly Kelly and Mattis seem to feel that the president of the United States needs adult supervision. This raises an interesting question: Can Kelly structure the White House to make Donald Trump grow up a little bit? In the words of “Bull Durham,” can Kelly “mature” the kid?

The initial reports have been encouraging. Consider this from Axios’s Mike Allen and Jonathan Swan:

Gen. John Kelly, the new White House chief of staff, has taken control in dramatic fashion, and is already imposing unmistakable signs of order after just a few days on the job.

Even POTUS appears to be trying to impress his four-star handler, picking up his game by acting sharper in meetings and even rattling off stats….

The most consequential workplace in America has been one of the most dysfunctional. General Kelly took an instantly assertive tack, and some of the overt shenanigans stopped overnight.

Kelly has also made sure that people who bring out the worst in Trump have exited the building. To use the language of child care, Kelly got rid of some bullies. He fired Trump mini-me Anthony Scaramucci on his first day. National security adviser H.R. McMaster has taken advantage of Kelly’s appointment to finally clean house within the NSC staff.

Kelly has also helped ensure that Trump is not exposed to scary ghost stories, as Politico’s Josh Dawsey reports:

Since starting this week, Kelly has told aides that anyone briefing the president needs to show him the information first. The Trump West Wing tradition of aides dropping off articles on the president’s desk — then waiting for him to react, with a screaming phone call or a hastily scheduled staff meeting, must stop. He will not accept aides walking into the Oval Office and telling the president information without permission — or without the information being vetted.

“He basically said, ‘The president has to get good briefings, he has to get good intelligence,’ ” one senior White House official said. “We have to be putting him in a position to make good decisions.”

In the West Wing, many of the president’s most controversial decisions have been attributed to bad information, partially because the president is easily swayed by the last person he has talked to — or the last thing he has read.

These are all good steps!! Having a new daddy authority figure like Kelly emerge might make Trump more disciplined and more eager to act like a big boy. Kelly has already managed to eliminate some bad seeds and bad information helping to make Trump act worse than he otherwise would.

So, is this the beginning of a new, more disciplined Trump? Nah, not likely.

First, even as all these positive stories emerged about Kelly’s influence today, consider Trump’s statement as he signed a Russia sanctions bill he did not want to sign but had no choice due to its overwhelming popularity in Congress. Here are the super-petulant parts:

The bill remains seriously flawed — particularly because it encroaches on the executive branch’s authority to negotiate. Congress could not even negotiate a health-care bill after seven years of talking. By limiting the Executive’s flexibility, this bill makes it harder for the United States to strike good deals for the American people, and will drive China, Russia, and North Korea much closer together. The Framers of our Constitution put foreign affairs in the hands of the President. This bill will prove the wisdom of that choice …

I built a truly great company worth many billions of dollars. That is a big part of the reason I was elected. As President, I can make far better deals with foreign countries than Congress.

This is the Toddler Trump that I have come to expect! It’s also unfortunately consistent with how he has behaved in other venues that require grown-up behavior, like speeches in front of Boy Scouts or national security meetings.

Even Kelly knows that there are limits to his ability to force Trump to grow up. According to Dawsey:

Kelly and senior West Wing officials don’t believe Trump will fully change. He is not going to stop tweeting, for example, and they expect him to keep dialing old friends in New York after hours — and that he will likely huddle with aides when Kelly is not around. Senior officials are likely to still give him articles to read without Kelly knowing. “He’s not under the impression he can tell Donald Trump, ‘Oh, you’re going to do it my way,’ ” one Kelly associate said. “He’s not delusional about it.”

As I noted a few months ago, “Trump is a mercurial guy.” His desire to impress Kelly is likely to fade. This will be particularly true the first time something bad happens and Trump blames Kelly for it.

One thing that could work to Kelly’s advantage, paradoxically, is how poorly Trump is polling right now. He’s polling really badly, according to Gallup, RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight. This will not put him into a good mood, but if this is a local nadir and he experiences a dead cat bounce, Kelly will be the beneficiary. Kelly might be able to advise Trump on how to think strategically and how to exercise powermore effectively. That ain’t beanbag.

Still, toddlers are gonna toddler. Trump’s attempt to impress Kelly and behave like a big boy will fade after the first Twitter tantrum. It is just a question of when.

 

 

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

It sounds to me like they know Trump is a demented disaster waiting to happen and are trying to act as his babysitters.  Kelly needs to hover  there to make sure Trump has his pants on when he gets a visitor and restrict calls so fewer people have access to Trump's madness that they can leak. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/08/03/can-donald-trump-grow-up-in-office/?hpid=hp_regional-hp-cards_rhp-posteverything%3Ahomepage%2Fcard&utm_term=.e39985b493da

Can Donald Trump grow up in office?

Can Trump act like a big boy as president?

By Daniel W. Drezner August 3 at 8:15 AM 

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a regular contributor to PostEverything.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Readers of Spoiler Alerts might be aware that, on the side, I have been curating a Twitter thread about the myriad ways that President Trump’s own staff appears to treat him or talk about him like a toddler. It starts here:

View image on Twitter

 Follow

Daniel W. Drezner ✔@dandrezner

I'll believe that Trump is growing into the presidency when his staff stops talking about him like a toddler. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/everyone-tunes-in-inside-trumps-obsession-with-cable-tv/2017/04/23/3c52bd6c-25e3-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.011de0fdd8af …

 

Some commentators have pushed back on the toddler analogy. In 2015, however, Trump himself told a biographer that he feels that his emotional temperament has been unchanged since he was 6 years old. I’ve found enough examples of Trump’s toddler-like behavior in the thread for FiveThirtyEight to do a big data analysis of it if it chooses to do so. So maybe the toddler analogy has some analytic bite.

One of the more recent additions to my thread came from this intriguing detail in an Associated Press report about new White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly:

[Secretary of Defense James] Mattis and Kelly also agreed in the earliest weeks of Trump’s presidency that one of them should remain in the United States at all times to keep tabs on the orders rapidly emerging from the White House, according to a person familiar with the discussions. The official insisted on anonymity in order to discuss the administration’s internal dynamics.

Clearly Kelly and Mattis seem to feel that the president of the United States needs adult supervision. This raises an interesting question: Can Kelly structure the White House to make Donald Trump grow up a little bit? In the words of “Bull Durham,” can Kelly “mature” the kid?

The initial reports have been encouraging. Consider this from Axios’s Mike Allen and Jonathan Swan:

Gen. John Kelly, the new White House chief of staff, has taken control in dramatic fashion, and is already imposing unmistakable signs of order after just a few days on the job.

Even POTUS appears to be trying to impress his four-star handler, picking up his game by acting sharper in meetings and even rattling off stats….

The most consequential workplace in America has been one of the most dysfunctional. General Kelly took an instantly assertive tack, and some of the overt shenanigans stopped overnight.

Kelly has also made sure that people who bring out the worst in Trump have exited the building. To use the language of child care, Kelly got rid of some bullies. He fired Trump mini-me Anthony Scaramucci on his first day. National security adviser H.R. McMaster has taken advantage of Kelly’s appointment to finally clean house within the NSC staff.

Kelly has also helped ensure that Trump is not exposed to scary ghost stories, as Politico’s Josh Dawsey reports:

Since starting this week, Kelly has told aides that anyone briefing the president needs to show him the information first. The Trump West Wing tradition of aides dropping off articles on the president’s desk — then waiting for him to react, with a screaming phone call or a hastily scheduled staff meeting, must stop. He will not accept aides walking into the Oval Office and telling the president information without permission — or without the information being vetted.

“He basically said, ‘The president has to get good briefings, he has to get good intelligence,’ ” one senior White House official said. “We have to be putting him in a position to make good decisions.”

In the West Wing, many of the president’s most controversial decisions have been attributed to bad information, partially because the president is easily swayed by the last person he has talked to — or the last thing he has read.

These are all good steps!! Having a new daddy authority figure like Kelly emerge might make Trump more disciplined and more eager to act like a big boy. Kelly has already managed to eliminate some bad seeds and bad information helping to make Trump act worse than he otherwise would.

So, is this the beginning of a new, more disciplined Trump? Nah, not likely.

First, even as all these positive stories emerged about Kelly’s influence today, consider Trump’s statement as he signed a Russia sanctions bill he did not want to sign but had no choice due to its overwhelming popularity in Congress. Here are the super-petulant parts:

The bill remains seriously flawed — particularly because it encroaches on the executive branch’s authority to negotiate. Congress could not even negotiate a health-care bill after seven years of talking. By limiting the Executive’s flexibility, this bill makes it harder for the United States to strike good deals for the American people, and will drive China, Russia, and North Korea much closer together. The Framers of our Constitution put foreign affairs in the hands of the President. This bill will prove the wisdom of that choice …

I built a truly great company worth many billions of dollars. That is a big part of the reason I was elected. As President, I can make far better deals with foreign countries than Congress.

This is the Toddler Trump that I have come to expect! It’s also unfortunately consistent with how he has behaved in other venues that require grown-up behavior, like speeches in front of Boy Scouts or national security meetings.

Even Kelly knows that there are limits to his ability to force Trump to grow up. According to Dawsey:

Kelly and senior West Wing officials don’t believe Trump will fully change. He is not going to stop tweeting, for example, and they expect him to keep dialing old friends in New York after hours — and that he will likely huddle with aides when Kelly is not around. Senior officials are likely to still give him articles to read without Kelly knowing. “He’s not under the impression he can tell Donald Trump, ‘Oh, you’re going to do it my way,’ ” one Kelly associate said. “He’s not delusional about it.”

As I noted a few months ago, “Trump is a mercurial guy.” His desire to impress Kelly is likely to fade. This will be particularly true the first time something bad happens and Trump blames Kelly for it.

One thing that could work to Kelly’s advantage, paradoxically, is how poorly Trump is polling right now. He’s polling really badly, according to Gallup, RealClearPolitics and FiveThirtyEight. This will not put him into a good mood, but if this is a local nadir and he experiences a dead cat bounce, Kelly will be the beneficiary. Kelly might be able to advise Trump on how to think strategically and how to exercise powermore effectively. That ain’t beanbag.

Still, toddlers are gonna toddler. Trump’s attempt to impress Kelly and behave like a big boy will fade after the first Twitter tantrum. It is just a question of when.

 

 

Seeing as how Trump is easily manipulated and tends to agree with the last person who talked to him, I can't say Kelly's plan of action is a bad one.  At least this way, someone else is privy to what is being discussed and can inject some sanity into any response.  And perhaps this will eliminate Trump's desire to reveal highly classified intel to sleazy Russians in private meetings.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how long Kelly is going to want to be Trump's babysitter.  Especially when the toddler er, president decides to act out against him.

I can't imagine for all his military experiences, that anything prepared him for this: babysitting his Commander in Chief.

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nokidsmom said:

I wonder how long Kelly is going to want to be Trump's babysitter.  Especially when the toddler er, president decides to act out against him.

I can't imagine for all his military experiences, that anything prepared him for this: babysitting his Commander in Chief.

Perhaps Pence has promised to make him the VP? 

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AmazonGrace said:

Perhaps Pence has promised to make him the VP? 

I wouldn't be surprised at all if inside rumblings are that Trump will not finish out his term and they are prepping for that possibility with succession planning.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

From Politico: "Kelly cracks down on West Wing back channels to Trump"

  Reveal hidden contents

When new White House chief of staff John Kelly huddled with senior staff on his first day at work, he outlined a key problem in President Donald Trump’s White House that he planned to fix: Bad information getting into the president’s hands.

Kelly told the staff that information needed to flow through him — whether on paper or in briefings — because the president would make better decisions if given good information.

Kelly, a retired Marine general, faces an uphill path when it comes to his stated goal of instilling order in the White House, from aides who have directly reported to the president and don’t want to see their power curbed to Trump’s own itchy Twitter finger. In talks with congressional leaders, friends and longtime associates, he has bluntly described how serious the problems he faces in the West Wing are, according to more than a half-dozen people familiar with the conversations.

“John Kelly knows the challenges he is facing,” said Leon Panetta, a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton who spoke to Kelly after he took the job. “He’s not going to just stand to the side and watch the White House fall apart piece by piece.”

But several people who have spoken with him say Kelly believes that making sure Trump is getting good information is among the biggest challenges he faces as he takes over from Reince Priebus, the former Republican National Committee chairman who was dismissed by the president last week.

Since starting this week, Kelly has told aides that anyone briefing the president needs to show him the information first. The Trump West Wing tradition of aides dropping off articles on the president’s desk — then waiting for him to react, with a screaming phone call or a hastily scheduled staff meeting, must stop. He will not accept aides walking into the Oval Office and telling the president information without permission — or without the information being vetted.

“He basically said, 'The president has to get good briefings, he has to get good intelligence,'” one senior White House official said. “We have to be putting him in a position to make good decisions.”

In the West Wing, many of the president’s most controversial decisions have been attributed to bad information, partially because the president is easily swayed by the last person he has talked to — or the last thing he has read.

For example, he accused President Barack Obama of tapping his phone line in Trump Tower after seeing comments from a conservative talk show host and a Breitbart News article. He has often posted some of his most controversial tweets while watching Fox News and stewing. He has sometimes seemed to view television accounts of the news as fact more than information from people armed with classified information. He has made decisions about legal matters or major policy decisions while consulting with some aides — only to reverse them after talking to family members or friends, who he dials late at night.

He has been given information of dubious quality, from stories by GotNews.com, a blog written by a right-wing provocateur named Chuck Johnson to segments of debunked documentaries. He has, at times, listened to real estate friends about legislative strategy while ignoring Speaker Paul Ryan or Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

By limiting information, and making it go through proper channels, Kelly is “ensuring Trump doesn’t make his decisions based on some bullshit he watched at midnight or on Breitbart,” said Chris Whipple, who recently wrote a book on the chief-of-staff role.

A White House spokeswoman didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Kelly and senior West Wing officials don’t believe Trump will fully change. He is not going to stop tweeting, for example, and they expect him to keep dialing old friends in New York after hours — and that he will likely huddle with aides when Kelly is not around. Senior officials are likely to still give him articles to read without Kelly knowing. “He’s not under the impression he can tell Donald Trump, 'Oh, you’re going to do it my way,” one Kelly associate said. “He’s not delusional about it.”

But so far, Kelly has received some buy-in to creating more discipline. Aides were startled earlier this week to see Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter, at a senior staff meeting, two White House officials said. Both Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, have agreed to the new order, people close to them say. Steve Bannon, the president’s strategist, has told others he thinks having a military-like chain-of-command will help the West Wing.

Aides have begun raising more issues with Kelly, several West Wing aides said, whereas they previously would avoid Priebus and go straight to the president. And Trump’s friends say he has expressed an optimistic tone on the phone, thinking the mood was improving.

“What we’ve seen in the past six months is a new president who has never governed and trying to adjust, and he is finding the right people for the right jobs,” said Chris Ruddy, a longtime friend. “Reince was not a manager. I think he had the president’s interests at heart, and he wanted him to succeed, but you can’t learn to be a manager of a complex organization, how to hire and fire people and develop strategy, in a matter of months.”

Panetta, who served as director of the CIA and secretary of defense under President Barack Obama, said he faced many similar issues when he became Clinton’s chief of staff in 1994. Warring aides and advisers were giving the president different messages. He would stay up late and talk with friends on the phone from Arkansas. “Too many people who didn’t have a portfolio were walking in and out of the Oval,” he said.

Panetta said he created a process by which the president would tell him about his conversations, and he would ask every person briefing the president to outline the options — and that he installed a more chain-of-command system where people knew who they were reporting to and what their responsibilities were. But there were still hiccups.

“While you’re trying to develop a policy process, and you’re trying to work with people who are knowledgeable, and the president is talking to whoever he likes and decides he’s going to tweet out something, that is a recipe for chaos,” Panetta said. “The success or failure of this administration is going to depend on whether the president actually gives John Kelly the power to do what he needs to do.”

Those close to Trump say time will tell whether Kelly can succeed. Trump sometimes sours on aides after several months, and the 71-year-old billionaire has enjoyed the freewheeling style that has proven problematic in the West Wing. “In private business, Donald Trump would often defer to his managers if they are capable and competent,” Ruddy said. “He had a team who was with him for decades. There wasn’t a lot of turnover.”

I hope Kelly can succeed, but I still think he's rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Iceberg? I don't see an iceberg. And if I did it would just be "fake news" 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Iceberg? I don't see an iceberg. And if I did it would just be "fake news" 

Maybe Celine Dion will come and sing to him...

  • Upvote 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, good luck with that: "Trump’s new chief of staff plans to restrict the president’s media diet. Others have tried and failed."

Spoiler

Maybe John F. Kelly can actually do it. If so, he will be the first.

Politico reports that the new White House chief of staff plans to restrict the flow of information to President Trump — including news media reports — in the hope of keeping the boss on a more even keel. Here's a bit from reporter Josh Dawsey:

When new White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly huddled with senior staff on his first day at work, he outlined a key problem in President Donald Trump’s White House that he planned to fix: bad information getting into the president’s hands.

Kelly told the staff that information needed to flow through him — whether on paper or in briefings — because the president would make better decisions if given good information.

Kelly's diagnosis makes perfect sense, but others have tried and failed to tame Trump by monitoring his media diet.

“If candidate Trump was upset about unfair coverage, it was productive to show him that he was getting fair coverage from outlets that were persuadable,” Sam Nunberg, a former campaign adviser, told Politico in February.

Politico's Tara Palmeri wrote at the time that “the key to keeping Trump’s Twitter habit under control, according to six former campaign officials, is to ensure that his personal media consumption includes a steady stream of praise.”

Okay. But the idea that Trump's Twitter habit has ever been “under control” is laughable. Maybe these campaign officials know something the rest of us don't — that Trump's tweets would have been even more inflammatory if not for their interventions.

We'll probably never know about tweets that Trump didn't send. If his staffers managed to him out of trouble even a few times, then their efforts were worthwhile. But no one has been able to consistently prevent Trump from stirring up controversy.

Part of the problem is that in a White House composed of competing factions, people invariably try to advance their agendas by presenting Trump with material — which may or may not be reliable — that promotes their worldviews.

Politico — all over this story — reported in May on advisers' penchants for strategically feeding dubious information to the president. This was one example, described by reporter Shane Goldmacher:

Current and former Trump officials say Trump can react volcanically to negative press clips, especially those with damaging leaks, becoming engrossed in finding out where they originated.

That is what happened in late February when someone mischievously gave the president a printed copy of an article from GotNews.com, the website of Internet provocateur Charles C. Johnson, which accused deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh of being “the source behind a bunch of leaks” in the White House.

No matter that Johnson had been permanently banned from Twitter for harassment or that he offered no concrete evidence or that he had lobbed false accusations in the past and recanted them. Trump read the article and began asking staff about Walsh.

Goldmacher added that then-chief of staff Reince Priebus and White House staff secretary Rob Porter “have tried to implement a system to manage and document the paperwork Trump receives.” How'd that work out?

Kelly is trying to do the same thing, three months later. Perhaps he will prove a more effective manager than Priebus, but Trump is still his impulsive self, and his aides are still vying for influence. Those immutable factors will make Kelly's mission very difficult.

“...the key to keeping Trump’s Twitter habit under control, according to six former campaign officials, is to ensure that his personal media consumption includes a steady stream of praise.” Good grief, he sounds worse than my dog, who I have to call a 'good boy' to get him to respond. At least my dog actually listens...

  • Upvote 7
  • WTF 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2017 at 9:08 AM, GreyhoundFan said:

Yes, Alexander "I am in control here" Haig.

Heh, that's a weird trip down memory lane.  Haig was one scary dude, in a totally creepy way. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.