President Trump thought it would be a cakewalk. Far from capitulating, his nemesis seems to be on the comeback trail.
Gabbard acknowledged that there was no compelling evidence that Iran was seeking to reconstitute its nuclear program
Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell thus announced on Wednesday that unless a successor is confirmed by the Senate, he has “no intention of leaving.”
The bad news keeps mounting for Trump. Inflation is ticking up, King Charles’ upcoming visit is starting to look rather iffy, the President’s gilded ballroom project looks as though it will be smacked down by a federal judge, and energy prices are rising precipitously. Indeed, a new sticker plastered on petrol stations shows Trump pointing his finger into the sky and is captioned: “Iran your gas prices up.”
Poor Trump. This year is looking like his personal annus horribilis. As an obstreperous Iran refuses to surrender and lobs missiles at Israel and various Gulf states, Trump has become embroiled in what he once denounced: a forever war. His disciples are confounded. Trump’s counterterrorism chief, Joe Kent, resigned on Tuesday, contending that Trump had been snookered into the conflict by nefarious forces in Israel. This line of argument seeks to exculpate Trump for the debacle, portraying his foray into Iran as a momentary lapse in judgment. Trump was having none of it. He referred to Kent as “weak,” one of his favorite epithets.
Trump’s own advisers offered a different story as they were interrogated on Capitol Hill about the case for war. Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence and queen of the self-styled foreign policy restrainers, performed something akin to a duck-and-cover. In her official statement, she acknowledged that there was no compelling evidence that Iran was seeking to reconstitute its nuclear program, which Trump had asseverated this past summer was “obliterated” by Operation Midnight Hammer. But Gabbard, in responding to Senator Jon Ossoff, argued that it was not her duty to reach any conclusions about Iran’s intentions. Gabbard’s mandate is not to decipher threats but to function as a cipher herself. “The only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president,” Gabbard said. “It is not the intelligence community’s duty to determine what is and is not an imminent threat.” Others on the hawkish right continue to view Gabbard as a threat. The Wall Street Journal editorial page, for example, complained on Wednesday that Gabbard’s agency remains a “resistance shop” to the deployment of military power abroad.
Where Trump stands on these doctrinal disputes over the true MAGA faith remains a mystery. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated, “Rest assured, there is a plan.” Is there?
Comments