The Main Stream Media has persisted in asking why Trump acts as a wrecking ball against the interests of the U.S. and western democracies. Many people answer this question by citing Trump’s personal characteristics and are willing to believe that he has horrific characteristics such as dementia or drug addiction. Nonetheless, few in the political world were willing to consider the possibility that Trump was either a willing or unwilling Russian agent. Trump’s behavior with the NATO members in Brussels and at the Helsinki summit with Vladimir Putin has definitively answered this question.
First, due entirely to his decision to hold an unnecessary summit, Trump was demeaned from the beginning. Acceding to Putin, the summit was held on Putin’s home court, Helsinki, 250 miles from Russia. In addition to that, Putin kept Trump waiting for 45 minutes to start the meeting.
First, due entirely to his decision to hold an unnecessary summit, Trump was demeaned from the beginning. Acceding to Putin, the summit was held on Putin’s home court, Helsinki, 250 miles from Russia. In addition to that, Putin kept Trump waiting for 45 minutes to start the meeting.
Second, once Putin arrived and in the public preliminaries before the private meeting started, Trump sat, leaning forward, his head turned toward Putin, with his hands thrust forward and held as if in prayer. Putin on the other hand sat leaning back, with his legs spread akimbo and not looking at Trump. One commentator described Putin as if he were a talk show host, waiting to interview a rather uninteresting author. To me, the pair looked like a manager waiting to hear the excuses he has heard before from an underperforming subordinate.
Third, after the private meeting concluded Trump and Putin held a joint news conference. Following a question about U.S. and Russian working together in Syria, Trump and Putin agreed to coordinate humanitarian aid. Then Putin, reminding Trump that Russia had hosted the World Cup Tournament the previous weekend, handed Trump a commemorative soccer ball and said that the ball was now in Trump’s court. The remark sounded ominously like Trump was being given his last chance to complete a task Putin had assigned.
Finally, when Trump was asked if he believed his intelligence agencies were correct to blame Russia in interfering in the 2016 election or Putin’s denial, he deflected by raising questions about Hillary’s supposedly emails (they were permissively deleted because they were personal) and the whereabouts of Hillary’s server (the FBI digitally copied the contents of them and retained the information). He admitted that he did not know why Putin would have interfered and claimed Putin had strongly denied Russia’s involvement. He concluded by recounting what he called Putin’s “incredible” offer to allow U.S. investigators to interview in Moscow the military officers who hacked the Democratic National Committee computers and distributed the information. Putin then added, apropos of nothing that Trump had said, that he had been an intelligence office and knew how dossiers are made. (Was Putin reminding Trump that he had compiled a dossier on him to spur better performance?) Putin continued by affirming that Russia would be willing to grant U.S. investigators access to the indicted military officers, if the U.S. were to grant Russian authorities access to former U.S. government diplomats, officials, and private citizens.
Trump’s acquiescence to Putin’s choice of a meeting in Helsinki, his readiness to meet in private with only interpreters present, his enthusiasm for a cockamamie scheme to allow Russians to interrogate former U.S. diplomats and officials, and most of all, his body language, signaled his subservience to Putin. Helsinki affirmatively answered the question of whether Trump was a willing or unwilling agent of Putin.
Trump and his apologists tried to counter Trump’s subservient behavior with the claim that he had been tougher on Putin and Russia than President Obama. To justify this claim, they list several acts such as having imposed tough economic sanctions on Russia. The sanctions that wreaked the greatest economic damage on Russia, however, were first imposed under President Obama and the United Nations following Russia’s invasion of Crimea. Additional sanctions were imposed by the Congress, over Trump’s objections, as punishment for Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
Trump’s apologists also argue that Trump expelled over 60 Russian diplomats, more than other countries following an attempted assassination attempt in the United Kingdom. This number of Russian diplomats expelled was apparently due to a misunderstanding of the number diplomats being expelled by other countries. Trump was reportedly distressed because so many diplomats were expelled after having been told erroneously that other countries were expelling 60 or more diplomats.
The Trump administration did permit the sale of weapons to Ukraine reversing the policy of the Obama administration. Following the sale, the Ukraine stopped cooperating with the investigation of Trump’s collusion with the Russians in the 2016 election. Some cynics believe the sale was a quid pro quo for stopping the investigative cooperation.
And Trump claims to have strengthened NATO wringing greater military spending out of the U.S.’s NATO allies. The meeting in Brussels in which Trump supposedly obtained this commitment was preceded by Trump’s verbal tirade against NATO members and questioning the continued usefulness of U.S. membership. These verbal attacks were clearly not needed because President Obama had obtained the commitment of each member country to increase its military spending to 2 percent of its GDP in 2014. Of course many NATO members have become more willing to increase their contribution because of they have begun to doubt, under Trump, the U.S.’s willingness to keep its pledge to come to the aide of any member being attacked. Trump has effectively undermined and weakened the NATO alliance.
Because Trump’s list of tough actions against Putin and Russia is, at best, mixed and his attacks on NATO so blatant, his apologists have also floated the notion that Trump’s conciliation and servility toward Putin is no more than a reflection of Trump’s admiration for authoritarian and not indicative of a “special” relationship. That explanation falls flat, however, when one reviews the video of Trump meeting with Putin in Helsinki. Trump played a servile and supine subordinate to a strong and superordinate Putin. And, the video of their meeting shows it. Now, the U.S. intelligence services, administration, the Congress, and the public must wait in the dark to see what Agent Trump has given away. Will we learn more when and if Putin visits in the Fall, or will we all continue to be held captive by the madman “leader?”
Third, after the private meeting concluded Trump and Putin held a joint news conference. Following a question about U.S. and Russian working together in Syria, Trump and Putin agreed to coordinate humanitarian aid. Then Putin, reminding Trump that Russia had hosted the World Cup Tournament the previous weekend, handed Trump a commemorative soccer ball and said that the ball was now in Trump’s court. The remark sounded ominously like Trump was being given his last chance to complete a task Putin had assigned.
Finally, when Trump was asked if he believed his intelligence agencies were correct to blame Russia in interfering in the 2016 election or Putin’s denial, he deflected by raising questions about Hillary’s supposedly emails (they were permissively deleted because they were personal) and the whereabouts of Hillary’s server (the FBI digitally copied the contents of them and retained the information). He admitted that he did not know why Putin would have interfered and claimed Putin had strongly denied Russia’s involvement. He concluded by recounting what he called Putin’s “incredible” offer to allow U.S. investigators to interview in Moscow the military officers who hacked the Democratic National Committee computers and distributed the information. Putin then added, apropos of nothing that Trump had said, that he had been an intelligence office and knew how dossiers are made. (Was Putin reminding Trump that he had compiled a dossier on him to spur better performance?) Putin continued by affirming that Russia would be willing to grant U.S. investigators access to the indicted military officers, if the U.S. were to grant Russian authorities access to former U.S. government diplomats, officials, and private citizens.
Trump’s acquiescence to Putin’s choice of a meeting in Helsinki, his readiness to meet in private with only interpreters present, his enthusiasm for a cockamamie scheme to allow Russians to interrogate former U.S. diplomats and officials, and most of all, his body language, signaled his subservience to Putin. Helsinki affirmatively answered the question of whether Trump was a willing or unwilling agent of Putin.
Trump and his apologists tried to counter Trump’s subservient behavior with the claim that he had been tougher on Putin and Russia than President Obama. To justify this claim, they list several acts such as having imposed tough economic sanctions on Russia. The sanctions that wreaked the greatest economic damage on Russia, however, were first imposed under President Obama and the United Nations following Russia’s invasion of Crimea. Additional sanctions were imposed by the Congress, over Trump’s objections, as punishment for Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. election.
Trump’s apologists also argue that Trump expelled over 60 Russian diplomats, more than other countries following an attempted assassination attempt in the United Kingdom. This number of Russian diplomats expelled was apparently due to a misunderstanding of the number diplomats being expelled by other countries. Trump was reportedly distressed because so many diplomats were expelled after having been told erroneously that other countries were expelling 60 or more diplomats.
The Trump administration did permit the sale of weapons to Ukraine reversing the policy of the Obama administration. Following the sale, the Ukraine stopped cooperating with the investigation of Trump’s collusion with the Russians in the 2016 election. Some cynics believe the sale was a quid pro quo for stopping the investigative cooperation.
And Trump claims to have strengthened NATO wringing greater military spending out of the U.S.’s NATO allies. The meeting in Brussels in which Trump supposedly obtained this commitment was preceded by Trump’s verbal tirade against NATO members and questioning the continued usefulness of U.S. membership. These verbal attacks were clearly not needed because President Obama had obtained the commitment of each member country to increase its military spending to 2 percent of its GDP in 2014. Of course many NATO members have become more willing to increase their contribution because of they have begun to doubt, under Trump, the U.S.’s willingness to keep its pledge to come to the aide of any member being attacked. Trump has effectively undermined and weakened the NATO alliance.
Because Trump’s list of tough actions against Putin and Russia is, at best, mixed and his attacks on NATO so blatant, his apologists have also floated the notion that Trump’s conciliation and servility toward Putin is no more than a reflection of Trump’s admiration for authoritarian and not indicative of a “special” relationship. That explanation falls flat, however, when one reviews the video of Trump meeting with Putin in Helsinki. Trump played a servile and supine subordinate to a strong and superordinate Putin. And, the video of their meeting shows it. Now, the U.S. intelligence services, administration, the Congress, and the public must wait in the dark to see what Agent Trump has given away. Will we learn more when and if Putin visits in the Fall, or will we all continue to be held captive by the madman “leader?”