Trump Attacks on the Press

For decades the White House press has served the American public as the source for news from the nation’s highest office.   But the emergence of powerful social media tools, such as Twitter and Facebook, allow the White House to bypass the established channels and go directly to the people.  Further, at the same time, unprecedented attacks of the press by President Donald Trump has eroded public trust in the press.  While the White House press has had to adapt to technological changes in the past, and it has endured criticism from many presidents, never before has it been this seriously threatened.   The convergence of these factors raises the question: “Is the White House press obsolete?”  

From America’s earliest days there has been a tension between the president and the press.  President George Washington, who was often angered by the bad press he received, complained of being "buffeted in the public prints by a set of infamous scribblers.” [1]    In his second term, President Thomas Jefferson instructed state attorneys general in New England to prosecute newspaper editors for sedition in response to harsh criticism he had received.  He later wrote a friend, “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.”[2]

But newspapers were the only source of news and information about the presidents for much of America’s history.  They were usually highly partisan and biased in their news coverage and editorial opinions.  In the 1800’s, perhaps no president was more effective in managing his communications with Americans than Abraham Lincoln.   He courted and charmed newspaper editors, and sometimes leaked information to newspapers.   Rather than make a speech or proclamation, or court reporters that waited outside his White House office, he sent private letters to newspapers knowing they would be published.  Lincoln understood the power of public opinion, especially during a brutal Civil War.  In 1858, during his debate with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln declared, “Public sentiment is everything.  With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed.”  He continued, “Consequently, he who molds public sentiment, goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions.”[3] 

In the late 1800’s, correspondents stood outside the White House seeking meetings with the president or interviews with his guests as they departed.  Toward the end of the century reporters were allowed to sit at a table inside the building.  Soon they would be allowed to wait in the front lobby where they would use public pay phones to call in their stories.  From this prime vantage point they could observe comings and goings, and button hole visitors. 

When it comes to covering the president nothing is more important that access.   President Theodore Roosevelt was the first to designate office space for the press, and he would often meet with the press, and he instituted daily briefings by his secretary.[4]   Such an arrangement was mostly beneficial to both parties.  The president wanted to get information to the public, and the press wanted the latest information. 

The development of radio offered President Franklin D. Roosevelt an opportunity to speak directly to a mass audience.  Roosevelt conducted 28 fireside chats, the term used to describe the broadcasts, during which he addressed the American people about his New Deal initiatives and World War II.

President Harry Truman became a media pioneer of sorts when he delivered the first televised presidential address in October 1947.  There were only 40,000 television sets in the country at the time, but 40 million Americans listened to the address on radio.  In 1948, Truman became the first presidential candidate to air a paid political ad on television.  Nonetheless, most of the White House coverage came from newspaper beat reporters housed just down the hall in the West Wing. 

By 1960 more than 50 million American households had a television.  This fact was not lost on Senator John Kennedy who would leverage the power of television, as well as his youth and good looks, to win the 1960 Presidential Election.   Kennedy had become the first television president, and the medium disrupted the status quo in the White House press area.  Television was a mass medium that provided a forum for presidents to address unfiltered millions of Americans.   

President Richard Nixon authorized the construction of a new larger pressroom in 1969, which would include space for press briefings, conferences and press offices.  The new press center was built over an indoor swimming pool located down the hall from the Oval Office.  This was prime West Wing real estate and would ensure that the press had close access to the administration’s staff.   This became essential during the Watergate crisis.

The new press center layout featured a podium on the far west end, nearest the communication staff offices that reporters could visit throughout the day.  Dozens of seats we placed in front facing the podium.  A platform for cameras was set up behind the seats.  Each major news organization had a small office in the rear of the press center, or one floor below.  These offices could each accommodate a couple of reporters, who filed their reports by phone or, for radio and television, by microphone. 

President Gerald Ford, who had taken over the presidency when Nixon resigned, found himself on the defensive much of the time, especially after he pardoned Nixon.  Ford considered reopening the pool and moving the press, but his plans stalled when he received the cost estimate.  President Jimmy Carter, who defeated Ford in 1976, seemed to be inconvenienced and annoyed by the press.   His one term in office included a diplomatic success, Egypt and Israel, and many setbacks, oil shortages, inflation and the Iranian hostage crisis. 

President Ronald Reagan won the 1980 election in a landslide.  He was a former television star and California governor who surrounded himself with a sophisticated communications team.  James Baker, White House Chief of Staff, and his deputy, Michael Deaver, were masters at managing the press and the message.  Each day the White House communications team tried to get the press to cover its planned agenda, in order to drive the news coverage.  They paid close attention to the president’s television image, which they knew provided the most powerful connection with Americans.

In 1984, The CBS Evening News aired a segment critical of President Reagan’s budget reported by correspondent Lesley Stahl.  The video she used showed Reagan being presidential.  Shortly after the story aired Stahl called a senior Reagan official.  Expecting he would be angry, she was shocked when he responded favorably.  She asked why.  The official responded, "You guys in Televisionland haven't figured it out, have you? When the pictures are powerful and emotional, they override if not completely drown out the sound. I mean it, Lesley. Nobody heard you."[5] (I was the CBS Evening News senior Washington producer at the time.)

President Bill Clinton’s press secretary Mike McCurry began the custom of televising daily press briefings, which were broadcast live on CNN, the only cable news channel at the time, and by the networks when there was a major story.  The idea was to get the White House’s spin directly to the people.  McCurry would later regret his decision, declaring in 1998,  “It’s performance art and theater of the absurd.”   This was the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which nearly cost Clinton his presidency.

In 2000, President Clinton named the White House press center the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room.  Brady was Reagan’s press secretary when he was severely injured during the attempted assassination of President Reagan in 1981.   In 2006-7 the press center was remodeled and modernized. 

As the national press became more powerful, administrations worked harder to control the message and the president’s image.  The expansion of cable news channels, and the growing frustration of presidents wanting to get their story directly to the people, led to an increase in presidential interviews with local news outlets.  This would allow administrations to bypass national news channels. 

The advent of social media provided presidents with a new channel with which to directly reach Americans.  President Barack Obama was tagged the “first social media president.”  While President Obama used Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat and Instagram, these services were still relatively new, especially in the early stages of his presidency.

President Donald Trump, who used Twitter effectively during his campaign, communicates often several times a day with his 47 million Twitter followers.    Trump has generally used Twitter to attack his opponents, including the mainstream media, which he regularly calls “fake news.”   Even his supporters have criticized his heavy use of Twitter.  But Trump defends his use of Twitter, for instance, telling the Fox Business Channel in October 2017, “I doubt I would be here if it weren’t for social media, to be honest with you.” 

Trump’s first press secretary, Sean Spicer, declared that the president’s tweets were official.  “The President is the President of the United States, so they're considered official statements by the President of the United States," he told reporters at his daily briefing in June 2017.  He noted that the president has 110 million followers on social media, adding, “The president is the most effective messenger of his agenda.”

The president’s extensive use of social media has redefined how White House reporters cover the White House.  The president’s habit of tweeting early in the morning frequently drives news coverage for the day.  White House staff often scrambles to explain to reporters what the president may have meant by his latest tweet.  But Trump knows Twitter gives him an unfiltered conduit to his followers.

Meanwhile, the daily White House briefing has become a show targeted at one person, the president.   The president watches the daily briefing carefully and critiques his press secretary.  Many times his spokesperson has attacked reporters, or offered misleading and false answers to the press.   Press secretary Sarah Sanders once had to admit she was flying without a safety net.  She explained, “I hadn’t had a chance to have a conversation with the president…I went off the information that I had.”

Media critic and New York University professor Jay Rosen responded to the deterioration of the daily briefings with the suggestion that news organizations should send their interns instead of star reporters.  In a post on his site, pressthink.org, he explained, “When I say #sendintheinterns I mean it literally: take a bold decision to put your most junior people in the briefing room.  Recognize that the real story is elsewhere, and most likely hidden.”  He concluded, “That’s why the experienced news reporters need to be taken out of the White House, and put on other assignments.”

Many publications, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, have done some of their best reporting on the Trump White House from what Rosen calls “outside in.”  They have assigned reporters to cover and investigate stories and issues surrounding the presidency with a great deal of success.   Marty Baron, The Washington Post’s executive editor, speaking at Columbia University in October, said the attacks are having a “corrosive effect on democracy,” and then observed, “The whole purpose of these attacks is to destroy our credibility with the American people, but it’s also to intimidate us.”   

But the shear weight of attacks from the president and his supporters on the press and on Twitter is eroding American’s confidence in the media according to numerous polls.  Facts are being weaponized, news is being spun, and partisan agendas are being advanced at an alarming rate.  Social media is flooding the political ecosystem with alternate realities, Russian bots and disinformation.   President Trump has fueled this disturbing trend, and he has redefined White House press coverage in an unprecedented manner.  The old way old way of covering the president has become obsolete.   

Marty Baron observed, “Trust in the press and trust in the presidency is starting to intersect.  So in a strange way, Trump has brought us together.”   Baron and many other journalists are doubling down on the basics of journalism and original reporting believing it will be validated over the long run.  The American press has journeyed a torturous road throughout this nation’s history.  But this president and these times may be its most difficult challenge.  Hopefully it will again endure. Thomas Jefferson said, “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

---

[1] Randall, William Sterne, “George Washington: A Life,” Henry Holt and Company, New York, New York, 1997, 491

[2] Jefferson, Thomas, “Jefferson: Political Writings,” Cambridge University Press, New York, New York, 1999, 275

[3] Holzer, Harold, “Lincoln and the Power of the Press: The War for Public Opinion,” Simon and Schuster, New York, New York, 2015, XXIX

[4] Jacobs, James, “The President the Press, and Proximity,” The White House Historical Association

[5] Stahl, Lesley, “Reporting Live,” Touchtone, New York, NY, 1999, 236. 

Dr. King's Words Live On

As America celebrated Martin Luther King Jr. Day, many reflected on the words of this great civil rights leader.  In 1964, Dr. King received the Nobel Peace Prize for his work combating racial injustice through acts of nonviolence and civil disobedience.  He was assassinated on April 4, 1968, while standing on the second-floor balcony of the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee.  

Now, 50 years later, Dr. King's words still inspire and animate the spirit of equality for all, no matter one's race, creed, color or place of birth.  "I have a dream," Dr. King said at the Lincoln Memorial during the 1963 March on Washington, "that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."   

Yet today we have a president who uses race to divide the country in order to pander to many of his supporters.  Today we have an inarticulate president who bullies and blusters anyone who threatens or challenges him.   We have a president who does not appeal to our better angels, rather who demonically fans the flames of hatred and fear.   Dr. King once warned, "We must build dikes of courage to hold back the flood of fear."

Since its founding, America has stood as a beacon of hope and freedom for those who live outside its borders.  That beacon has been tarnished by President Donald Trump.  Last week, in a private meeting with congressmen about immigration, he asked, "Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?"  Dr. King once said,  "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

President Trump has often made conscientiously stupid comments.  "When Mexico sends its people," he said in announcing his candidacy for president, "they're not sending their best...they're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems with us.  They're bringing drugs.  They're bringing crime. They're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people."   As a candidate for president, following a terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California, he declared, "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representative can figure out what in the hell is going on."  King once observed, "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.  Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." 

More than a dozen women have made sexual misconduct allegations against Trump.  Throughout his career he has demeaned women.  "If I were running 'The View', I'd fire Rosie O'Donnell," he said in 2006, "I mean look at her right in that fat, ugly face of hers, I'd say 'Rosie, you're fired."  As the host of The Apprentice he observed, ""All of the women on The Apprentice flirted with me--consciously or unconsciously, that's to be expected."  And he was recorded on an Access Hollywood tape saying, "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful (women).  I just start kissing them.  It's like a magnet.  Just kiss.  I don't even wait.  And when you're a star they let you do it.  You can do anything.  Grab them by the pussy.  You can do anything."  Dr. King once said, "Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness."  

Last August white supremacists, white nationalists, Klansmen, neo-Confederates, and neo-Nazis demonstrated in Charlottesville, Virginia, chanting racist and anti-semitic slogans, while carrying semi-automatic weapons, swastikas, anti-Muslim banners and Trump/Pence signs.  A man linked to white-supremacists rammed his car into a group of counter-protestors, killing one person and injuring 19.  Incredulously, President Trump did not denounce racists.  Instead, he blamed everyone, "We condemn in the strongest terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides."  King would have observed, "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." 

Amid all his controversial statements and inappropriate actions, those who support President Trump, whether they are staff or members of Congress, have defended the president with lies and misleading statements.  Although many are shocked by what the president says, they remain silent for partisan reasons.  As he insults world leaders, as he undermines the American Democracy, as he exaggerates his IQ and wealth, they play along.  "My IQ is one of the highest--and you all know it!  Please don't feel so stupid or insecure; it's not your fault," Trump has said.  These loyalists, these sinecures, these family members know that all that is required is their loyalty and silence.   To them, Dr. King would say, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."  

In his 1963 speech at the Lincoln Memorial, Dr. King said, "Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable...Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals."  He added, "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of humanity."  

Dr. King's inspirational words and deeds, which will endure through the ages, powerfully symbolize how great America can be.  "The time is always right to do what is right."  

Journalism Fights for its Life

In his important year-end post for his site PressThink, New York University journalism professor and critic Jay Rosen warned, "the world has changed and journalists are in the fight of their lives."   Rosen's point is that the way for journalism to earn trust has changed because users now have more choices and more control.  He then provides a thoughtful list of ways is which journalists can win trust through transparency. 

But how does one win the trust of everyone in the era of Trump, who now is a bully with the White House pulpit?  The president proudly claimed in an interview with the Fox Business Channel last October that he "started this whole fake news thing."  Of course, that is not true.  In fact, according to the Washington Post, "President Trump has made 1,950 false or misleading claims over 347 days."  

That the president frequently lies is not fake news, and it is not new news.  A Morning Consult/Political poll last December found that only 36% of those sampled thought the president is honest.  In fact, 51% of those polled believe he is dishonest, while 60% think he is reckless.   Yet his almost daily attacks against the press, mostly false or misleading, have staggered many members of the press.  

The First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees freedom of the press.  Freedom House reports that freedom of the press is in decline around the world, including here in the United States.  A record number of journalists have been imprisoned worldwide, including twenty-one on "fake news" charges.  Senator John McCain issued this warning to President Trump in December on Twitter, "@POTUS must understand his harmful rhetoric only empowers repressive regimes to jail reporters and silence the truth."  

Soon after his return to the White House, following a holiday break in Florida, the president launched another fusillade on Twitter against one of his favorite targets, The New York Times.  "The failing New York Times has a new publisher, A.G. Sulzberger.  Congratulations!  Here is a last chance for the Times to fulfill the vision of its Founder, Adolph Ochs, "to give the news impartially, without fear of FAVOR, regardless of party, sect, or interests involved," his first tweet read.  It continued on a second, "Get impartial journalists of a much higher standard, lose all your phony and non-existent "sources," and treat the President FAIRLY, so that the next time I (and the people) win, you won't have to write and apology to your readers for a job poorly done!"  

Clearly the president's claims of fake news and his attacks on news organizations are all a tactic.  If he was innocent of sin, if his White House was free of scandal, if his agenda was popular with the masses, he wouldn't have to protest too much.  But he doth protest an awful lot!  He loves to spin his own alternate reality and lash out at the press.  His communications' staff, assorted acolytes and members of Congress echo his attacks because it is in their own personal interest, and the mainstream media is an easy target.  Washington Post Executive Editor Marty Baron stoically observed last year, "We are not at war with the administration, we are at work."  

But for more news channels, more news sites online, and the growing amount of users who get their news from social media, opinion is now the currency of the realm.  An enormous amount of Americans get their information from sources they feel agree with their views, i.e., one's that are consistent with their core beliefs.  And some news outlets carefully craft their content to appeal to their likely viewers, and to advance a political agenda.  This has left America so politically divided it is hard for people from different regions or ideologies to agree on basic facts, let alone have an rational and calm discussion.  

More transparency is important, absolutely, but do Sean Hannity's 3.2 million viewers care if he is transparent?   Few of his viewers check around with different sources to get the other side of the argument.  And they don't care that Hannity regularly consults with President Trump, who is a big fan of his program.   Sure, Hannity is not a journalist, but he is on the Fox News Channel.  

The big question is at what point will Americans say enough is enough with the attacks on the press.  At what point will Americans be motivated enough to devote time to study all sides of the issues.  At what point will Americans take the time to be well informed before making decisions about elected officials, as our Founding Fathers had intended when they wrote the First Amendment.  The Fathers wanted to assure that America would not be ruled by a despot, rather that it would always be ruled by the people.  

The press is not perfect, but most major news organizations have a process to assure that all of the facts are fully vetted before they are published, and to assure fairness, impartiality, independence and accountability.  On the other hand, the administration, the Congress, and government agencies are not always transparent and accountable to the people.  That will only happen with a strong and vibrant press.  

Journalists may be in a fight for their lives, due to evolving business models and rapid changes in technology, but their survival is essential for the maintenance of this great democracy.  

It's Good to be King

The King and his retinue have departed the nation's capital and arrived at their royal vacation retreat, Castle Mar-a-Lago.  There the royal family will gather to celebrate the holiday season with wealthy dukes and duchesses who will loyally and unabashedly express their overwhelming adulation for their divine leader and his unsurpassed brilliance.

Fawning over their great leader seems especially appropriate this holiday season.  The King from Queens had just signed a tax bill that will give millions of dollars in tax breaks to His Royal Highness and members of the royal family, as well as to the nation's lords and ladies.  Of course, the vast majority of the citizens will receive crumbs, which will become apparent to them in the coming years.  All of this will be funded by huge deficits that will be passed on to their children.  

Shortly following the passage of the tax bill, His Royal Highness was besieged with the praise from Republican members of Congress and from his cabinet.   "You have spurred an optimism in this country that is setting records," said the vice president.   The King must receive devotion and fealty from those who serve him.  

But that optimism is limited to only a few.  The King is not popular among his country's masses.  He has continuously resorted to bullying and bluster to rule his subjects. He has demeaned opponents with schoolyard epithets, and he has humiliated others in order to get want he wants.  His daily rants and raves have unsettled even those closest to him.  

All of this has been to the delight of the Tsar of Russia, who up until recently was considered an enemy.   Now the King and the Tsar have formed a close bond. And the Tsar is pleased with how the King has disrupted democracy in his own country and around the world.   This is why he extended the King his help in winning the throne.  These men are so much alike.  And the King trusts the Tsar more than the servants in his own nation's justice and intelligence departments.

Many thoughtful observers are saddened by how the King has lowered the standards of his office.  They point to his self-dealing and manifest crudeness.  They cite the many scandals that have plagued his reign, his outrageous actions towards women and minorities, and the constant dishonesty and deception that the King has practiced.  His intemperate, impulsive and reckless behavior has taken global allies aback, and it has unnecessarily stirred the drums of war.  The King exploits fear naturally.  His instinct is always to divide in order to conquer.

For the nearly year since the King ascended to his throne the nation has continuously been on edge.  Most citizens have been shaken by the constant tumult, and have tired of the contemptuous antics. Meanwhile, under his rule meaningful government programs dealing with the environment, healthcare, consumer and basic human rights have been slashed or eliminated.   Corporations and the wealthy donors have been richly rewarded.  None more generously than members of the royal family and friends.

Many of his most ardent supporters will gather in Castle Mar-a-Lago this weekend to celebrate the holiday by kissing the ring of their great benefactor.   The dark clouds that have formed over His Royal Highness and his reign will be ignored.  Instead, it will be a scene reminiscent of the Romanov's.   And the King will thrive in this exclusive and alternate reality he has created as he soaks up the praise that will be lavished on him by his obsequious followers.

In the words of the late Tom Petty, an American icon, "It's good to be King and have your own way."  

The GOP Targets Entitlement Programs

Republicans have long coveted deep cuts in federal entitlement programs.   Up to now Democrats have thwarted their attempts to slash America's social safety net.  But that may change in the coming year.

House Speaker Paul Ryan is openly making the case, and he has robust support from the Republican controlled Congress.  On Wednesday, Ryan said, "We have a welfare system that's trapping people in poverty and effectively paying people not to work.  We've got to work on that."   Ryan added, in an interview on Ross Kaminsky's radio show, "We're going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and deficit." 

Ironically, Ryan's bold pronouncement comes as Republicans in Congress work to reconcile their so-called tax reform legislation.  The hastily crafted bill, when enacted, will disproportionately benefit high-income earners and large corporations while adding up to $1.5 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.   Their justification is that the measure will increase economic activity, which will add jobs and grow wages.   But few economists agree with this misguided premise.  In fact, this tax bill is merely a sop to wealthy Republican donors who threatened to cut off their donations to the party unless taxes are cut.     

With even larger deficit spending as a result of the tax cuts, Republicans can turn their attention to reducing federal expenditures.  The largest drivers of federal spending are Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, military spending and interest on the debt.  Defense and interest payments will not be cut.  That pretty much leaves the entitlement programs.  

"Starving the beast" is a political strategy conservatives developed decades ago for reducing government spending.  In 1978, economist and future Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan told a congressional committee, "Let us remember that the basic purpose of any tax cut program in today's environment is to reduce the momentum of expenditure growth by restraining the amount of revenue available and trust that there is a political limit to deficit spending."  Liberal economist Paul Krugman later observed, "Rather than proposing unpopular spending cuts, Republicans would push through popular tax cuts, with the deliberate intention of worsening the government's fiscal position.  Spending cuts could be sold as a necessity rather than a choice."   Speaker Ryan and Republicans are doing just that.  

Once the Republican tax proposal is passed and signed by President Donald Trump, there will be no going back.  Most Republicans in Congress have signed on to the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.  The pledge, authored by political activist Grover Norquist, states that the signatories will never vote to raise taxes under any circumstances or they will be challenged in their next Republican primary election.    

A possible hurdle to entitlement cuts could be President Trump, who as a candidate tweeted in 2015, "I was the first & only potential GOP candidate to state there will be no cuts to Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid."  But the president, who is obsessed with winning political victories, will likely endorse any GOP initiative, proclaiming that proposed changes to entitlements are meant to save the programs. 

The federal government and the states currently jointly fund Medicaid.  Medicaid provides health coverage to millions of Americans, including the elderly, low-income adults, children and people with disabilities.  Speaker Ryan favors converting Medicaid into a block grant program for states and then capping the grants.  But historical data on grants indicates that over time this will result in a decline in Medicaid funding.  And the nation's neediest citizens will feel the impact.    

Nonetheless, there is broad support among congressional Republicans and their wealthy donors for reducing the cost of entitlements.  Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, who is the Republican Senate Finance Committee Chair, summarized the sentiment of his colleagues last week in a speech on the Senate floor.  "I have a rough time wanting to spend billions and billions and trillions of dollars to help people who won't help themselves, won't lift a finger, and expect the federal government to do everything."  

Sadly, the Republican dream of undoing entitlement programs established by President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal and President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society may finally be within their reach.     

The GOP Plan: Cut Taxes and then Entitlements

The Republicans proposed a tax reform package Thursday that would, if signed into law, radically alter current tax laws and provide a huge windfall for corporations and millionaires.  It would also add $1.5 trillion to the national debt over 10 years, so Republicans are already eyeing huge cuts in social programs to make up the difference.  It will be a transfer of wealth from the needy to the greedy.  

President Donald Trump stands to be a big winner if the proposed bill passes.  The bill calls for the elimination of the estate tax by 2024.  Trump's estate is worth a little over $3 billion, so this would mean Trump's children stand to inherit well over $1 billion more than they will under current law.  The bill also eliminates the alternative minimum tax, which some individuals are subject to today.  Trump would have paid $30 million less in federal taxes had the AMT been eliminated in time for the 2005 returns.   No wonder the president is pushing Congress so hard to pass this bill.

Corporations are the big winners under the legislation.  They will see their federal tax rate reduced from 35 percent to 20 percent.  Republicans claim that the corporate tax rate is currently the highest in the world.  House Speaker Paul Ryan said Thursday, "With this plan, we are making pro-growth reforms, so that yes, America can compete with the rest of the world."   It should be noted that few U.S. corporations currently have to pay the full rate.  Meanwhile most small businesses, the main driver of jobs in the economy, will not benefit under the GOP proposal.   One special interest group spokesperson described the measure as a "war" on small businesses.

The proposal calls for only three tax brackets in an effort to "simplify" returns.  The top individual bracket, for those with the highest income, is reduced to 35 percent.   The lowest tax bracket goes from 10 percent to 12 percent, with individuals making up to $24 thousand annually paying no taxes.  Nonetheless, the benefits for individual taxpayers will depend on their income, where they live and the type of tax breaks they claim.  For instance, the measure caps the amount of state and local taxes that can be deducted from one's gross income.  The bill also ends the electric car tax credit while increasing taxes on wind and solar energy.

Congressional Republicans and the president are desperate for a win after having accomplished nothing legislatively this year, even though they control both houses of Congress and the White House.  So they must succeed with the tax cuts they promised last election or Republicans will be more vulnerable in the 2018-midterm elections.  An ABC/Washington Post poll released Thursday shows that half of all Americans oppose the GOP plan, while 75 percent of Republicans favor it.  Sixty percent of all Americans polled believe the plan favors the wealthy.  Another concern for congressional Republicans is the thin majority they have in the Senate.  To compound matters, Trump's harsh attacks against GOP Senators John McCain, Jeff Flake and John Corker has put the measure in further jeopardy. 

It is estimated that only $300 billion of the $1.5 trillion proposed tax cuts would go to individuals.   Corporations would get $1 trillion in cuts, and heirs to estates would get the remainder, about $200 billion (including the Trumps).  Nonetheless, enactment of the tax cuts will mean Republicans can move on to one of their favorite targets: entitlements.  They will use the exploding debt as a justification for deep cuts in Medicaid and Medicare; only they will call it "reform."  They will propose block grants and caps on the rate of growth.  It will amount to billions of dollars in reductions.  And people in need, especially seniors and the poor, will feel the impact.  

This is the GOP long game, it is consistent with their core philosophy of smaller government, and a win on taxes will give them a head of steam to rein in entitlements.   But to follow the Republican playbook will lead to an even larger disparity between rich and poor Americans.  And the immense income disparity in this country today, the richest nation in the world, is already an inexcusable tragedy!  

Trump's Moment of Truth Is Coming

President Donald Trump leaves this week for an important 12-day trip to Asia where he will visit Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam and the Philippines.  But most of the president's attention is focused on the special counsel investigation into Russia's role in the 2016 Presidential Election following the indictments of two key Trump campaign officials and the guilty plea of a former campaign adviser.

U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in a report this past January that Russia interfered in the election at the direction of Russian President Vladimir Putin in an effort to help Trump win. Ultimately, Putin felt that Trump, if elected, would ease crippling U.S. sanctions on Russia that were initially imposed because of Russia's annexation of Crimea.  President Barack Obama imposed additional sanctions last January because of Russia's meddling in the election. 

Trump avoided criticizing Putin throughout his campaign, and, in fact, frequently praised him.  In August, Congress overwhelmingly passed additional sanctions against Russia for its election interference, which Trump signed even though he said he was opposed to the measure.  Of course, he had no choice because Congress would have overridden a Trump veto.

Questions arose throughout the campaign as to whether members of the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russians.  Suspicions heightened when several key members of the Trump campaign failed to report meetings with Russian officials.   Attorney General Jeff Sessions, former national security adviser General Michael Flynn and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner all had to subsequently amend their disclosure forms. 

President Trump has frenetically tried to derail the Russia investigation and clear his name.   One of his first acts in office was to have a private diner with then FBI Director James Comey.  According to Comey, Trump sought Comey's personal loyalty and asked that the FBI director make a statement clearing him.  Comey had been investigating possible collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign.  On May 9, Trump dismissed Comey and later told NBC News, "When I decided to do it, I said to myself, I said 'you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it's an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.'"  Critics immediately declared that Trump had obstructed justice, which is an impeachable offense.

The acting attorney general appointed Special Counsel Robert Mueller to take over the investigation.  Mueller, a Republican, is one of the most highly respected attorneys in Washington, yet he became the target of attacks from the White House.  Three congressional committees have been investigating Russia's role in the election since earlier this year. 

Mueller put together a top team of criminal attorneys and began interviewing witnesses.  Their efforts began to bear fruit this week with the announcement that a grand jury had indicted former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his close associate, Rick Gates.  Manafort and Gates had done millions of dollars in business with Russian oligarchs that they failed to report on their federal tax forms.  Mueller may be using the indictments to squeeze Manafort for more information relating to Russian interference.  

A few hours later, Mueller revealed that Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos had pleaded guilty to perjury.  Papadopoulos admitted that during the campaign he had tried to set up a meeting with Russian officials to obtain Hillary Clinton's "missing" emails in an effort to help the Trump campaign.  At about the same time during the campaign, Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner took a meeting at Trump Tower in New York, which was arranged by Russians seeking to pass on "dirt" about Hillary Clinton.  Mueller has promised Papadopoulos a reduced sentence for his cooperation, and there is speculation that he has plenty more to offer about Trump campaign collusion with the Russians. 

Meanwhile, Trump and White House officials have tried to shift the story to Hillary Clinton for her alleged role as Secretary of State in approving the sale of uranium to a Canadian company controlled by Russians.  The Trump claim is that the Russians donated $145 million to the Clinton foundation in return for her approval.   The big flaw with this charge is that Clinton had no role in making the decision.  

Monday's indictments and guilty plea have many White House officials near panic.  There are internal debates over what the president should do next.  Some Trump allies are urging the president to fire Mueller.  But if he did so he would be inviting congressional Republicans to consider his impeachment.  This would create a constitutional crisis that the nation hasn't seen since Watergate.

Meanwhile, Mueller and his team are continuing to interview witnesses, including White House staff, and more indictments are expected in the near future, according to some reports.  At some point the president may be questioned under oath about what he knows of obstruction of justice and collusion.  The criminal charge for collusion would be conspiracy.  Of course, lying to a grand jury is perjury.  So the president would then be facing his moment of truth.