National Park Visitors Are Not Impressed With Trump’s Revisionism

“Honest History Matters!” Protesters lining up

Donald Trump’s EO entitled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” was issued on March 27th, taking aim at the Smithsonian Institution and the National Park Service for daring to try to tell the whole story of American History, and not just the parts that validate the White America version that Trump believes.

Section 1.  Purpose and Policy.  Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed a concerted and widespread effort to rewrite our Nation’s history, replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth.  This revisionist movement seeks to undermine the remarkable achievements of the United States by casting its founding principles and historical milestones in a negative light.  Under this historical revision, our Nation’s unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed.

Kind of hard to read those words the day after the Juneteenth holiday, in the midst of Pride month, and after Trump’s budget slashing the funding of tribal colleges and universities by 90% went up to Congress, but I guess Trump’s gotta Trump.

Fast forward a couple of months, and we can see how the Department of the Interior is looking to implement Trump’s EO. From NPR, June 9, 2025:

The Department of the Interior is requiring the National Park Service (NPS) to post signage at all sites across the country by June 13, asking visitors to offer feedback on any information that they feel portrays American history and landscapes in a negative light.

The June 9 memo sent to regional directors by National Park Service comptroller Jessica Bowron and leaked to NPR states the instructions come in response to President Trump’s March “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” executive order and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum’s follow-up order last month requesting its implementation. Trump’s original order included a clause ordering Burgum to remove content from sites that “inappropriately disparages Americans past or living and instead focuses on the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people.”

I can just see Burgum rubbing his hands together with glee. “MAGA’s gonna love this. It’s DIY DOGE-ing the liberals while they visit the parks!” Similarly, I can hear Stephen Miller’s reply of “Excellent” in his best Mr. Burns voice.

Well fellas, you asked, and National Park visitors answered. Spoiler alert: Burgum and Miller will not be happy. From Government Executive yesterday:

In the responses submitted by visitors to National Park Service sites, however, which were obtained by Government Executive, no single submission pointed to any such examples [of inappropriate signage and language]. Instead, in the nearly 200 submissions NPS received in the first days since the solicitations were posted, visitors implored the administration not to erase U.S. history and praised agency staff for improving their experiences.

[snip]

So far, NPS is not getting the help it was hoping for from those scanning the QR codes now posted around park sites soliciting assistance in identifying language in violation of Trump and Burgum’s orders. Instead, visitors accused the Trump administration of seeking to erase the nation’s history.

What? Unpossible! What did those pesky park visitors say? GovExec goes on:

“There shouldn’t be signs about history that whitewash and erase the centuries of discrimination against the people who have cared for this land for generations,” a visitor to Indian Dunes National Park said.

A visitor to Independence Hall in Philadelphia called the new signs “censorship dressed up as customer service.”

“What upset me the most about the museum—more than anything in the actual exhibits—were the signs telling people to report anything they thought was negative about Americans,” the visitor said. “That isn’t just frustrating, it’s outrageous. It felt like an open invitation to police and attack historians for simply doing their jobs: telling the truth.”

Several visitors to the Stonewall National Monument in New York lamented changes there the park’s website that removed mention of transgender individuals in the Stonewall Uprising.

“Put them back,” the visitor said. “Honor them. There would be no Stonewall without trans people.”

More truth-telling at the link.

Some protesters wave signs as they march in the streets. Others scan QR codes and write comments.

These aren’t comments on lefty websites. These are official public comments to government requests for input from the public – input some poor soul has to read and summarize for Burgum and Miller. Can you picture the cold sweat breaking out on that civil servant’s brow, realizing he or she might be facing their own firing as the bearer of bad news? Sure you can.

Meanwhile, lots of folks are planning their next visit to a national park. By all means, go check them out, and don’t forget to click that QR code. Especially if you visit the Stonewall National Monument.

Last weekend, it was millions of loud voices shouting “No Kings!” This weekend, let it be millions of quiet thumbs and fingers tapping their phones.

Let the Good Trouble Making go on!




Ahead of No Kings Day, the King’s Nobles are Getting Nervous

National (Life)Guard Basic Training

From Mike Kehoe, the Governor of Missouri, as he gets in the Executive Order business today:

WHEREAS, our citizens have the right to peacefully assemble and protest, and the State of Missouri is committed to protecting the lawful exercise of the citizens’ constitutional rights; and

WHEREAS, the events that are occurring or could occur in the cities of Kansas City, Springfield, St. Louis, and other affected communities, in the State of Missouri, have created or may create conditions of distress and hazards to the safety, welfare, and property of the citizens and visitors of the communities beyond the capacities of local jurisdictions and other established agencies; and

WHEREAS, the rule of law must be maintained in the cities of Kansas City, Springfield, St. Louis, and other affected communities, in the State of Missouri, for the protection, safety, welfare, and property of the citizens, visitors, and businesses of those communities; and

WHEREAS, additional resources of the State of Missouri are or may be needed to help relieve the conditions of distress and hazard to the safety and welfare of the citizens of the cities of Kansas City, Springfield, St. Louis, and other affected communities; and

WHEREAS, the conditions necessary to declare the existence of an emergency pursuant to Chapter 44, RSMo, are found to exist due to the potential of civil unrest; and

WHEREAS, an invocation of the provisions of sections 44.010 through 44.130, RSMo, is necessary to ensure the safety and welfare of the citizens of the State of Missouri; and

WHEREAS, in consultation with community leaders, public safety officials, and emergency preparedness officials, I have determined that the following actions are necessary and appropriate to provide for the safety and welfare of Missouri’s citizens, visitors, private property, and businesses.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, MIKE KEHOE, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the Laws of the State of Missouri, including Sections 44.010 through 44.130, RSMo, do hereby declare that a State of Emergency exists in the State of Missouri due to civil unrest.

I further order, pursuant to Sections 41.480 and 41.690, RSMo, the Adjutant General of the State of Missouri, or his designee, to forthwith call and order into active service such portions of the organized militia as he deems necessary to aid the executive officials of Missouri, to protect life and property, and it is further ordered and directed that the Adjutant General or his designee, and through him, the commanding officer of any unit or other organization of such organized militia so called into active service take such action and employ such equipment as may be necessary in support of civilian authorities, and provide such assistance as may be authorized and directed by the Governor of this State.

This order shall terminate on June 30, 2025, unless extended in whole or in part.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused to be affixed the Great Seal of the State of Missouri, in the City of Jefferson, on this 12th day of June, 2025.

I can’t help but note some interesting language in this proclamation – phrases like “or could occur” and “or may create” in the second “whereas,” the phrase “or may be needed” in the fourth “whereas,” and especially “the potential of” in the fifth “whereas.”

Somehow, Kehoe manages to take all this subjunctive language about possible future situations as justification for his big THEREFORE: “I, Mike Kehoe . . . do hereby declare that a State of Emergency exists in the State of Missouri due to civil unrest.” I think he left “the possibility of” out of that last sentence, as that sentence probably ought to end with “the possibility of civil unrest.”

There have been plenty of protests across the state of Missouri over the last few months, in large blue cities and smaller red towns, and no reports of violence against people or property. None. Nada. Zip. The protests have targeted Musk and the DOGE cuts, RFK Jr’s dismantling of the nation’s public health infrastructure, the ICE crackdowns, and more, with the number of protests growing and spreading. This weekend, the planned No Kings protests have been gaining more and more attention, with more and more people getting more and more upset about what it being done in their names.

So the King’s Nobles are apparently pushing back.

First it was Texas and Greg Abbott, and now Mike Kehoe here in Missouri is trying to catch up. Some of this is surely a desire to show the King that they are following his example. The Nobles are also jostling with one another, as each seeks to shove him- or herself ahead of the others. That’s what the King’s Nobles do: they presume, they posture, they pretend, they position, and they pose, all so they can be seen by the King and gain the King’s approval.

The protest in Missouri I am wondering about this weekend is down in Springfield MO, in the southwest corner of the state. Broadly speaking, that’s a very conservative region (home to the Ashcroft clan and the Assemblies of God), though the city of Springfield itself has been represented in the state legislature by a Democrat. I was not surprised to see Kehoe mention St. Louis and Kansas City as hotbeds of (possible) discontent, violence, and mayhem. But Springfield? How did Springfield end up in this executive order?

Then I saw the Springfield television station KY3’s story about this weekend’s planned protests and it all became clear. “Ozarks Pridefest and Springfield’s No Kings protest will happen on Saturday in downtown Springfield” said the headline. It’s one thing for a bunch of lefty political agitators to march around with their signs, shouting their slogans, but quite another if you add the gays and their creativity to the mix. “Gov. Kehoe, let us show you how to pose . . .”

I can see it now . . .

Coming down the street as a unit are dozens of buff men in nothing but flip flops and red speedos, preceded by a banner that reads “Call out the National (Life)Guard!” They are marching in formation with pool noodles held out in front of them, mirroring the scenes in LA with lines of baton-wielding ICE and LAPD folks in their masks and top to bottom black uniforms. The unit’s leader carries a ring buoy, and he holds it high as his voice calls out like a grizzled drill sergeant: “Lifeguaaaaards . . . HALT!” and the formation stops in unison. “Shoulderrrrr . . . NOODLES!” he calls, and they put their pool noodles on their shoulders like rifles. The leader’s voice rings out again, “Sing out, Lifeguards! . . . I like my state like I like my scotch!” says the leader, and the the crew calls back “NEAT! (pause) NO ICE!”

Again the leader repeats the call, and now the crowds of people on the sidewalks start to join in on that “NEAT! (pause) NO ICE!” refrain. Again and again the leader calls, and again and again the crowd replies, getting louder and louder each time.

Then the leader stops. “Lifeguaaaards, Face OUT!” he shouts, and the formation splits in two down the middle, with each half turning to face the sidewalk on either side of the street. “To the currrrbbbb, MARCH!” and they step off in unison, stopping at the edge of the street. “Abouuuut FACE!” and they turn 180 degrees to face each other again.

He blows his whistle with three sharp tweets, waves his bouy back down the street, and every eye turns to see what’s coming. Two elegant queens are carrying a sign identifying the group following the (Life)Guards: “Call out the National Bard!” A second banner follows, announcing “National Bard Unit One: The E Street Chorus”, with leather-and-denim clad men, singing in full voice. They pass through the (Life) Guard lining the curb, and then chorus splits in half, and moves to the curbs as well.

Next comes a banner with “National Bard Unit Two: The Chicks” with a crew of lesbians singing something about Earl, and they too move to the curb to add themselves to the parade units lining the street.

National Bard Unit Three comes after them, the Guthries, singing about the Group W Bench, a restaurant, Thanksgiving, and the draft, and they get in line on each side of the streets next to The Chicks unit.

Finally, bringing up the rear, is National Bard Unit Four. There is no unit name on the banner, but everyone knows who this crew of singers are in their bright red and sumptuously bedazzled gowns, playing their banjos and fiddles. As they begin to sing, it is obvious that the (Life) Guard, the E Street Chorus, the Chicks, and the Guthries are their honor guard, and as the banjo-strumming, fiddle-playing, gown-wearing singers pass, the honor guard joins in the song of the Swifties unit:

‘Cause all you are is mean
And a liar, and pathetic
And alone in life, and mean
And mean, and mean, and mean

All you’re *ever* gonna be is mean.

OK, maybe this is just a Boomer’s imagination of what Springfield will look like on Saturday, but still.

Donald Trump is afraid, and so is Mike Kehoe. That’s why they called out the National Guard.

What Trump fears isn’t loud voices spouting off against black-clad police. What Trump fears isn’t media pundits soberly pontificating about Rule of Law and whether The King can send the Marines to LA. What Trump fears is not sternly worded letters from Democrats as Susan Collins clutches her pearls.

What The King and all The King’s Nobles and all The King’s Men fear is mockery.

I can’t help but hope that the combination of Ozarks Pride and the No Kings protesters gives them exactly that, with Harvey Milk and John Lewis smiling down from heaven and watching folks making all kinds of Good Trouble.

‘Cause that would be fabulous!




Cardinal Cody, Cardinal Bernardin, and Pope Leo XIV

Pope Leo XIV

As a pastor, I and my clergy colleagues are shaped by a wide variety of forces, not the least of which is the situation in the world and the church at the time we attended seminary and were ordained for service in the church. As I look at all the news about the newly elected Pope Leo XIV, I can’t help but see how he was shaped by his early life in his tumultuous hometown of Chicago . . .

When the now-Pope Leo XIV was but Robert Prevost, a young Catholic boy, there were two major forces in his native Chicago. One was the legendary Richard J. Daley, the authoritarian Irish-Catholic mayor who ruled the city from the day Prevost was born until Daley’s death 21 years later. The other was Cardinal John Cody, the equally authoritarian ruler of the Archdiocese of Chicago from 1965 to 1982. When Cody was transferred from New Orleans to Chicago, stories were told that the local New Orleans priests sang the classic hymn Te Deum in celebration.

While the Second Vatican Council tried to push the Roman Catholic church into a more collegial mode of operation, Cody was among those who dug in their heels. It didn’t help matters that Cody was at the center of a double scandal – over a million dollars had disappeared from the church’s books, and his cousin/mistress/aunt’s step-daughter (the exact relationship varied depending on who you asked) Helen Dolan Wilson. She had followed him to his post in New Orleans, then to Chicago, receiving various small positions arranged by Cody and living in circumstances well beyond her seemingly meager financial resources. The Chicago Sun-Times published a blockbuster set of articles about Cody in late 1981, which included the revelation that the US attorney was investigating Cody and the Archdiocese. Cody fought it by delay and deflection, and succeeded insofar as he died the next year without having been formally indicted, and the investigation died with him.

Cody’s successor as Archbishop was Joseph Bernardin, who could not have been more unlike Cody. Where Cody was aloof, Bernardin was personable. Where Cody was autocratic, Bernardin was collegial. Where Cody pronounced, Bernardin discussed. Where Cody’s world was centered on the Catholic church, Bernardin was anxious to engage his ecumenical colleagues, as seen in 1989, when Lutherans and Roman Catholics in Chicago signed a groundbreaking covenant.

On May 13, 1989, the Metropolitan Chicago Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church and the Archdiocese of Chicago entered a historic covenant, the nation’s first such accord. The churches were brought together by their respective bishops at the time – Cardinal Joseph Bernardin and Bishop Sherman G. Hicks – to cooperate in ministry, to promote dialogue and collaboration on issues of faith and mutual concern, both theological and pastoral, and to deepen the unity existing between the two churches.

As a child, any Prevost family discussions about the church would have been filled with stories of Cardinal Cody. As a newly-ordained priest and member of the Augustinian order, Bernardin would have been equally prominent in family conversations. Even though Prevost would by this time have begun his ministry elsewhere, moving between Peru, Rome, and Chicago, it is hard to imagine that the epic contrast between Cody and Bernardin would not be part of his own self-understanding of what it means to be a priest.

Looking at the biography of the new pope posted by the Vatican News Service, it’s easy to see which model of ministry young Father Prevost chose to embody for himself. Four and a half years ago, Steven Millies, the head of the Bernardin Center, wrote an opinion piece in the National Catholic Reporter on the 25th anniversary of Bernardin’s death. Reading it today, it certainly appears to me that Bernardin was one to whom Prevost looked at with admiration:

In Bernardin, Catholics had a leader who anticipated the style and ministry of Pope Francis in his openness to dialogue and his efforts to engage the world in constructive conversations. But Bernardin’s final years also anticipated the sort of opposition Francis has faced, especially among American Catholics.

The seeds of our divisions, as Catholics and Americans, were being watered in 1996. As those seeds have blossomed and propagated in 2021, we can look back on Bernardin to understand what has happened and how things might be different.

Bernardin was the Roman Catholic archbishop of Chicago from 1982 until his death, but his importance stretched far beyond Chicago. No bishop in the U.S. could be associated more with the church’s efforts after Vatican II to engage and embrace the modern world as St. John XXIII had hoped when he called the council.

The title of Millies’ piece was “If we’d listened to Cardinal Bernardin, the Catholic Church would not be where it is today.” If the church at large had not listened to Bernardin, it is clear that the young boy, then young priest, and now Pope Leo listened to him.

And as the saying goes, a new pope may have to take the church as it is, but he doesn’t have to leave it that way — which may have been why Francis chose Prevost to head the Vatican office charged with recommending who should be named a bishop and which bishops should serve in which places. Francis had more than a few run-ins with bishops like Cody during his tenure (the name Raymond Burke comes quickly to mind), and had no desire to elevate folks who would follow Cody’s example. Francis chose Prevost to be the church’s servant in helping select its leadership for precisely this reason.

And when the cardinals in the conclave were looking for someone to lead the Roman Catholic church at its highest level, they appear to have confirmed Francis’ judgement. The church, they seemed to have said, needs more servant-leaders like Bernardin and Francis, and fewer autocrats like Cody and Burke.

As Francis might have put it, in Prevost, the cardinals selected a shepherd who smells like the sheep.




The Special Relationship is Now Pretty Ordinary

The UK Foreign Office and the UK Department for Business and Trade are rethinking some things

You knew that sooner or later, this was coming. From the Guardian:

UK officials are tightening security when handling sensitive trade documents to prevent them from falling into US hands amid Donald Trump’s tariff war, the Guardian can reveal.

In an indication of the strains on the “special relationship”, British civil servants have changed document-handling guidance, adding higher classifications to some trade negotiation documents in order to better shield them from American eyes, sources told the Guardian.

[snip]

Before Trump’s inauguration, UK trade documents related to US talks were generally marked “Official – sensitive (UK eyes only)”, according to examples seen by the Guardian, and officials were allowed to share these on internal email chains. This classification stood while British officials attempted to negotiate with Joe Biden’s administration, even after a full-blown trade deal was ruled out by the White House.

Now, a far greater proportion of documents and correspondence detailing the negotiating positions being discussed by officials from No 10, the Foreign Office and the Department for Business and Trade come with additional handling instructions to avoid US interception, with some classified as “secret” and “top secret”, sources said. These classifications also carry different guidance on how documents may be shared digitally, in order to avoid interception.

Companies with commercial interests in the UK have also been told to take additional precautions in how they share information with the trade department and No 10, senior business sources said. These include large pharmaceutical companies with operations in the UK and EU.

Trump sure is succeeding with that “disruption” stuff, isn’t he?

Then consider this: if the Foreign Office and Department for Business and Trade are doing this, one can only imagine what the Ministry of Defence is doing along these lines, as well as MI5, MI6, and GCHQ.

Slowly but surely, the Special Relationship is becoming pretty damn ordinary.




The Erasure of January 6th Continues, US Mint Edition

If you bought this bronze January 6th commemorative medal from the US Mint, its value just went up.

While everyone was watching as Trump and Vance were taunting Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office, other things were happening.

From last Friday at the rather niche publication Numismatic News:

The U.S. Mint has removed the bronze medal commemorating law enforcement officers who defended the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, from its website. The removal appears to have been done without prior notice or explanation, leaving collectors and observers speculating about the reason behind the decision.

The medal was originally created as part of a congressional initiative to honor the U.S. Capitol Police, the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police, and other first responders who helped secure the Capitol during the events of January 6. Congress authorized gold medals to be awarded for their service, with bronze replicas made available to the public for purchase through the U.S. Mint.

[snip]

While the medal has been available for purchase for some time, its product page on the U.S. Mint’s website now returns an error message indicating it has been removed.

NBC News adds a few more details:

Former Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell, who was injured by the mob on Jan. 6, told NBC News that he tried to purchase a number of the replica medals this week, planning to hand them out as gifts, and was surprised to see they were no longer available.

Gonell said the erasure of the medals fits in a broader pattern, pointing to the failure of Congress to place a memorial for law enforcement officers who defended the Capitol up in the building before Trump’s second inauguration last month.

Justice Department webpages that listed the cases and featured summaries of the work of the federal prosecutors who brought Jan. 6 cases were also removed from the web after Trump took office.

“Not only do Republican members of Congress refuse to put up the plaque, but they are even erasing and removing the ability to purchase the coin for the Congressional Gold Medal,” Gonell said.

Before the listing was erased from the Mint’s website, a description noted that the medal was struck under the authority of Public Law 117-32, an act passed in August 2021 to honor the “sacrifice of heroes including Capitol Police Officers Brian Sicknick and Howard Liebengood, Metropolitan Police Department Officer Jeffrey Smith, and those who sustained injuries, and the courage of Capitol Police Officer Eugene Goodman.”

Tonight, Donald Trump will enter the US Capitol to address a joint session of Congress, entering the House chamber through the same door that Ashli Babbitt tried to climb through before being shot by US Capitol Police on January 6th.

George Orwell wrote 1984 as a warning, and Ray Bradbury did the same with Fahrenheit 451; Trump is using them both as instruction manuals. Trump and his minions are going after the FBI agents who played a part in the January 6th investigation, and also the DOJ lawyers who prosecuted the hundreds of the January 6th insurrectionists, declaring them to be workers of injustice. Trump has pardoned those hundreds – some who had pleaded guilty and others who were found guilty by a judge and/or jury – and declared them to be innocent victims of a political plot against him. Trump launched primary challenges against members of Congress who voted to impeach him, and threatens to do the same to any who stand in his way today. Up is down, declares the leader, and woe to any who dare to disagree.

And in this context, reports emerged last Friday that the US Mint has joined the effort to “disappear” the January 6th insurrection. We don’t know whether they were ordered to stop selling these medals by the White House or whether they decided this on their own as a way of trying to keep their heads down during the Trump/Musk purge of the government. Either way, the result is the same: the history of January 6th is being slowly erased.

The wording on those January 6, 2021 commemorative medals is simple and direct: “Honoring the service and sacrifice of those who protected the US Capitol.” The US Mint may have stopped selling the medals, and Trump may have pardoned those who stormed the Capitol, but the service and sacrifice which the medals recognize cannot be erased.

It can be forgotten, though – and nothing would please Trump more than that.

 




Four Years and Five Weeks

Trump announces the end of the transatlantic alliance

First it was Emmanuel Macron, putting his hand on Trump’s knee as he publicly corrected Trump in the Oval Office, in the presence of cameras, on the fact that Europe’s contributions to support Ukraine were (a) grants, not loans, and (b) larger than the contributions made by the US. Trump, in turn, tried to toss out his well-worn talking points, but the damage was done. Trump was called out by a foreign leader as a liar, in his very own office and seat of power.

Then it was Keir Starmer, waving a fancy invitation from King Charles to a state dinner, who did exactly the same thing. He publicly corrected Trump in the Oval Office, in the presence of cameras, on Europe’s support for Ukraine. Again, Trump hemmed and hawwed, and embraced the (Starmer: “unprecedented!”) invitation to a second state visit, but the damage was done. Trump was called out by a second foreign leader as a liar, in his very own office and seat of power.

You had to know this would not sit well.

As network after network played the clip of Macron’s hand on Trump’s knee, after all the networks showed Trump fawning over the Bright Shiny Thing that Starmer dangled in front of him, as Starmer very politely called Trump a liar, everyone knew that this would not end well.

And today, it was Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s turn . . . and as anyone with half a brain could anticipate, it *did* not end well.

Personally, I was amused by J.D. Vance’s holier-than-thou whining about Zelenskyy making a benign appearance in Pennsylvania saying “thank you” to the US for their support and calling it Election Interference. I don’t remember Vance taking up umbrage when the head of DOGE Elon Musk appeared and spoke at the national political rally of the neo-Nazi Alternative for Germany (AfD) party just days ahead of the recent German election, and who repeatedly praised the AfD via Xitter. After the AfD came in second, with a sizable caucus in the new Bundestag, Musk called the head of the AfD to offer congratulations and called her party the future of Germany, and Vance’s reaction was *crickets*.

Well, to be scrupulously fair, that’s not true. He *did* say something, but rather than condemning such interference, Vance joined it. At the Munich Security Conference, Vance praised the AfD (not by name but by lauding their political positions on immigration and other policies) and attacked mainstream German political parties for refusing to work with the AfD.

Americans might not have been listening to all of this, but the Europeans were – especially the Germans – and they knew exactly who Vance was praising. After the German elections, the victorious chancellor-elect made a stunning statement. From Deutsche Welle:

After his party’s victory in the election was confirmed Sunday night, [CDU party leader Friedrich] Merz said that he wanted to work on creating unity in Europe as quickly as possible, “so that, step by step, we can achieve independence from the US.”

Until recently, this would have been a highly unusual thing for any leader of the CDU to say. After all, it has always had a strong affinity for the US.

“Merz aligns himself with the legacy of historical CDU leaders such as [former chancellors] Konrad Adenauer and Helmut Kohl, both of whom played pivotal roles in strengthening transatlantic relations,” said Evelyn Gaiser, a policy advisor on transatlantic relationships and NATO with the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, a German think tank that is associated with but independent of the Christian Democrats.

[snip]

Merz spoke out after JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference (MSC) in February, in which the US vice president said that the biggest threat to Europe did not come from Russia or China, but “from within.”

“This is really now the change of an era,” Merz said on stage at the MSC. “If we don’t hear the wake-up call now, it might be too late for the entire European Union.”

Add this into the context of withdrawing from the World Health Organization and eliminating all the work done by USAID, and the message is crystal clear. While yes, this meeting today in the Oval Office was about Ukraine, it was really a sign of something much much larger.

In April 2021, when Joe Biden addressed a joint session of Congress in a non-State of the Union address, he said this:

I’ve often said that our greatest strength is the power of our example – not just the example of our power. And in my conversations with world leaders – many I’ve known for a long time – the comment I hear most often is: we see that America is back – but for how long?

We now know the answer: four years and five weeks.

RIP the Transatlantic Alliance (1945-2025).




Who Needs Intelligence Sharing?

On January 27th, an AP story appeared on the news website Military.com with the headline “Intelligence Sharing by the US and Its Allies Has Saved Lives. Trump Could Test Those Ties.” On the surface, it reads like one of those analysis pieces that come out when the White House changes from one party to the next, with the added twist of knowing what the first Trump administration was like.

The Associated Press spoke with 18 current and former senior European and U.S. officials who worked in NATO, defense, diplomacy or intelligence. Many raised questions and concerns about Trump’s past relationship with America’s spies and their ability to share information at a time of heightened terror threats and signs of greater cooperation between U.S. adversaries.

The importance of trust

The U.S. and its allies routinely share top-secret information, be it about potential terror threats, Chinese cyberattacks or Russian troop movements. America’s closest intelligence partners are New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Britain, and it often shares with other nations or sometimes even adversaries when lives are at stake.

[snip]

Cooperation particularly between the U.S. and the U.K. is “strong and robust enough to withstand some turbulence at the political level,” said Lord Peter Ricketts, former U.K. national security adviser and current chair of the European Affairs Committee of the upper chamber of the British Parliament.

However, any strong intelligence relationship is underpinned by trust, and what if “trust isn’t there?” Ricketts said.

Ricketts’ question is no longer a hypothetical. This is the reality faced by intelligence services who in the past have been friendly with the US intelligence community. The AP put out their story on January 27th, and that seems like years ago. Today this reads like a warning.

The takeover of USAID that has played out this past week is *not* just a battle over who runs offices in DC. The bulk of USAID’s staff work overseas, alongside their local partners. When phone calls from these overseas missions back to DC go unanswered, and when US staffers abroad are told to stand down, all those local partners are going to get very, very nervous, and not just because their paychecks stop. They’re going to talk to others in their government, trying to find out what it going on. At the same time, they will be providing input (either directly or indirectly) to their own country’s intelligence service, as their spooks add it to whatever they are learning from elsewhere. In the US, folks worry about those who are losing their jobs; overseas, these fights will result in people dying, like those who don’t get the clean water, medical care, or disease prevention measures like malaria nets. Those other countries are watching with horror the stories of Musk’s minions breaking into sensitive databases, over the objections of trusted career people, and wonder what of their own information is now in the hands of a privateer, and if the same this is (or will be) going on at the CIA, DIA, and other US intelligence agencies.

I guarantee you that all these other countries are watching the battle over USAID much more carefully than folks in the US.

Or look at the targeting of General Mark Milley, widely respected by his counterparts among our allies and within their intelligence services. OK, Biden pardoned him to protect him, but Trump withdrew his security clearance, and also his personal security detail. On January 29th, newly confirmed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth launched a process to investigate Milley, seeking to strip him of at least one star, cut his retirement pay, and punish him further. Given what the US attorney for DC is doing by going after DOJ attorneys for investigating the rather noticeable break-in of the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, it’s not hard to imagine that Hegseth’s henchmen will be rather thorough in their work and ruthlessly push aside anyone who gets in their way.

Now imagine you are a member of a foreign intelligence service — perhaps the head, or perhaps a mid-level staffer whose specialty is the US. You see the USAID invasion. You see the public decapitation of the FBI. You see the targeting of career DOJ officials. You see Hegseth paint a target on the back of Milley (and others, like John Bolton and John Brennan). You see all this, much of it in the bright light of public reporting. You hear more from your contacts, who paint more detailed pictures of these purges and fights. You see all this, and you ask yourself two questions, over and over again.

1) Are the things we shared with the US intelligence community in the past safe from being revealed in public, and thus causing us harm?
2) Can we trust the US intelligence community with information we might share with them in the future?

Given what we’ve seen over the last week, the answers to these questions are becoming more and more clear: 1) no and 2) no.

I haven’t talked to those “18 current and former senior European and U.S. officials who worked in NATO, defense, diplomacy or intelligence” to whom the AP spoke. The AP headline was hypothetical – “Trump could test those ties” – but now on February 3rd, it’s real. Trump has been f’ing around with those intelligence service ties, and he’s about to find out what happens.

The short answer is becoming clear, as Trump’s vision of America First becomes America Alone.

 

 




On Haggis and Donald Trump

Note, please, the face on the 10 pound note.

On this feast day of Robert Burns, less than a week into the second Trump administration, things are not well. ICE is going nuts, the CDC failed to issue its “Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report” for the first time since 1960 (MMWR is where the medical community first was alerted to what came to be known as AIDS), hundreds of seditionists and insurrectionists were pardoned or had their sentences commuted, Trump seems bent on taking FEMA – an agency whose mission to is to care for neighbors in need – and turn it into a quid-pro-quo program where friends are helped and others left to cry alone, and now the dismissal of 17 inspectors general.

And that’s just for starters.

On this feast day of Robert Burns, one need not wonder what Burns would have to say about Mar-a-Lago and its Lord. In his poem “My Father was a Farmer,” he lays out his own set of values,

My father was a farmer upon the Carrick border, O,
And carefully he bred me in decency and order, O;
He bade me act a manly part, though I had ne’er a farthing, O;
For without an honest manly heart, no man was worth regarding, O.

Hmmm . . . one’s worth is not based on the size of your purse? “Unpossible!” says the Lord of Mar-a-Lago.

Later in the poem, after describing how his efforts to improve his financial situation were less than successful, and unmoved by his lack of money or what society says his values should be, he says this about himself:

But cheerful still, I am as well as a monarch in his palace, O,
Tho’ Fortune’s frown still hunts me down, with all her wonted malice, O:
I make indeed my daily bread, but ne’er can make it farther, O:
But as daily bread is all I need, I do not much regard her, O.

“Unpossible!” says the Lord of Mar-a-Lago. “How can you possibly be cheerful without money?”

The final stanza makes the contrast between Burns and the Trump-like Lords of his day abundantly clear:

All you who follow wealth and power with unremitting ardour, O,
The more in this you look for bliss, you leave your view the farther, O:
Had you the wealth Potosi boasts, or nations to adore you, O,
A cheerful honest-hearted clown I will prefer before you, O.

What is delightful about this poem is that Burns wasn’t speaking metaphorically, but autobiographically. Burns was a working farmer-poet, never wealthy himself, and oft in need of additional income. Writing poetry definitely helped, as various parts of Edinburgh’s High Society oooh-ed and ahhh-ed over his writing and were willing to pay for it.

But even so, Burns had no problem taking aim at their pretentiousness. His famous “Address to a Haggis” (recited far and wide at Burns celebrations each year on this day) is as much a take down and those who adore over-wrought fancy cooking as it is praise of a peasant dish. Burns writes about this sheep’s stomach filled with sheep’s lung, heart, and liver, along with oats, onions, and all manner of spices and herbs, as if it were the finest French cuisine, only to slam those who prefer “fine dining” over hearty fare like the haggis. Haggis, like honest working folks, has substance and nourishment; those who love their fine cuisine he calls devils, as their meal is an inappropriately thin plate of unhealthy trash.

My family roots are German, not Scottish, but “Address to a Haggis” resonates strongly with me. My late grandmother was a delightful baker with a heart of hospitality and always ready to put together a quick coffee cake if guests dropped by. As a daughter of the depression, she had a myriad of ways to stretch her ingredients and her budget. One of the favorite dishes she made that I only ever had at her home was a beef stew using beef heart and tongue, rather than more common cuts of beef. She could get the heart and tongue for next to nothing (or simply for nothing, as cattle-ranching parishioners who knew how badly her pastor-husband was paid would save these for her as an extra gift), and she turned them into a thing of beauty. Alas, she is gone and the recipe with her, though I can still smell it in my mind and taste it in my soul.

On this feast of Robert Burns, in these troubling times when all seems adrift, Burns’ injunction to prefer “a cheerful honest-hearted clown” to folks like the Lord of Mar-a-Lago seems all the more necessary. I invite you to fill your glass with a beverage of your choice, because it’s time to ding.

The roots of dinging at our home go back more than two decades . . .

It started on a Friday when The Kid was not yet two, and we had finally sat down to dinner at the end of a long week for all of us. Mrs. Dr. Peterr raised her glass, I raised mine, and in a quiet, exhausted, but happy voice she smiled at me and said “To the weekend.” “To the weekend,” I echoed, touching my glass lightly against hers. Then, from the high chair, a little voice chimed in loudly and proudly, punctuating each word with a swing of his sippy cup: “To. The. Weekend! Now ding with me!

And so it is at our house, especially on Fridays: We have to ding.

The beverages vary widely, from glass to glass and from day to day – juice, wine, water, sparkling cider, beer, milk, scotch, etc. – and so do the toasts. Some days, we toast each other; other days we toast something great that has happened. Some days, the toasts bring happy thoughts, and on other days, they carry a note of sadness and loss. Some toasts are short, simply naming the person or thing for which we are grateful. Others are longer, and take on Dr. Seuss-like rhymes and rhythms.

The one thing they have in common, though, is a sense of shared gratitude. Mark Twain put it like this: “To get the full value of joy, you must have someone to divide it with.” Science fiction writer Spider Robinson takes Twain one step further: “Shared joy is increased; shared pain is lessened.”

It’s Friday, it’s the end of a rollercoaster of a week, it’s five o’clock somewhere, and we’ve got to ding.

Today is Saturday, not Friday, and it has indeed been a long, long week, so we’ve got to ding. With all that has happened in the last seven days, I can’t help but think that Robert Burns is lifting a glass of Scotch Drink with us today. So fill your own glass, raise it high, and join me in a toast.

Ladies and gentlemen,
. . . friends whom I know well and friends I have only just met,
. . . friends who love to chat and silent friends who lurk in the corners,
. . . friends who agree and friends who argue,
. . . friends who challenge my thinking and friends who confirm it,
. . . friends who trust each other with their open, honest ideas,
. . . friends who come here looking for conversation to get their thoughts in order:
To the poet,
. . . the farmer,
. . . the bard of Scotland,
. . . Robert Burns!

*DING*

Please offer your own toasts, your own odes to the foods of your hearts, and your own perspectives on the values of Lord of Mar-a-Lago and his ilk in the comments.




Herod Goes to the National Cathedral and is Disappointed

The Right Reverend Mariann Edgar Budde, Episcopal Bishop of Washington DC

It was amusing to me to hear Trump’s reaction to the service at the National Cathedral on January 21st. I’ve been a pastor for a long time, and heard many opinions offered about the quality (or lack thereof) of the services I’ve designed and led and the sermons I’ve given. To me, Trump’s reaction says a lot more about him than it does about Episcopal Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde.

To start things off, here’s the printed program [pdf] prepared for those who attended the service. (You can watch the video of the service on the Cathedral’s YouTube channel here.) Notice the title on the front cover: “A Service of Prayer for the Nation.” Notice what isn’t on the front cover? Two words: Donald Trump. The message is clear, right from the start – this isn’t a celebration of Trump, like the inaugural balls or the rally at the Capital One arena. This is a service for the nation.

Not for “the citizens of” the nation.
Not for “the taxpayers of” the nation.
Not for “the leaders of” the nation.
This was a service for the nation – the *whole* nation.

Trump can attend, but it’s not about him or for him. It’s a service for the nation.

It’s also a service of prayer, and as I browse through the program, I can’t help but see the *whole* nation raised up again and again and again.

The pre-service music is an eclectic mix. The carillon selections are largely American composers, pairing old composers with 20th and 21st century arrangers. Two of the compositions are by anonymous composers, whose names have been lost to history while their music has not. The four organ selections are by two Lutherans (Bach and Buxtehude) and two Jews (Fanny Mendelssohn and her younger brother Felix). Bach and the Mendelssohns were German, and Buxtehude’s roots are more complicated because of the changing borders of Denmark, Sweden, and northern Germany at the time he was born. The brass selections come from three great composers from three nations: John Rutter (England), Anton Dvorak (the Czech Republic), and Aaron Copland (one of the greatest American composers). The pre-service music concluded with five choral pieces, each of which has deep roots in American religious life. These selections set the tone: this is a service for all the nation, with a mix of instruments, a mix of composers, and music with a mix of ethnic and religious roots that befit the mixed and diverse roots of the nation.

The Entrance Rite began with words from Jesus in Mark 17: “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all people.” Note those last two words: all people. Not a few, not some, not many, but *all* people. After a blessing from the traditions of the First Americans, the indigenous people who were here long before the Mayflower and Jamestown; long before Cortez, Pizarro, Balboa, and Ponce de Leon; long before Columbus and long before the Norse; the opening hymn by Fred Kaan was sung by all who are present in this moment, beginning like this:

For the healing of the nations, God, we pray with one accord;
for a just and equal sharing of the things that earth affords;
to a life of love in action help us rise and pledge our word.

I can imagine that a beginning like this put Trump in a pickle. “It’s all woke crap” he must have been thinking. “When will we get to the acclamation of my win in the election? When will we get to their acknowledgment of my power, my success, my victory? When are we going to get to the praise of me?” Spoiler alert: Never, never, and never. Because this service was never going to be about Trump, and I’m sure that never even dawned on him as he arrived at the National Cathedral.

But back to the hymn.

Lead us forward into freedom; from despair your world release,
that, redeemed from war and hatred, all may come and go in peace.
Show us how through care and goodness fear will die and hope increase.

In the context of Trump’s campaign, and the even closer context of Trump’s post-election announcements of his plans for the first hours and days of his administration, these words are a respectful yet powerful rebuke. Kaan is quite clear: the vision of the God to whom this prayer is addressed is One who prizes justice, equality, love, freedom, peace, care of others, goodness, and finally hope. This God is likewise dedicated to the end of slavery, despair, war, hatred, and most of all, fear. That last list is Trump’s go-to list, and Kaan named and condemned it out loud, in no uncertain terms, in four part harmony.

But Kaan was not done.

All that kills abundant living, let it from the earth be banned;
pride of status, race, or schooling, dogmas that obscure your plan.
In our common quest for justice may we hallow life’s brief span.

I knew Fred Kaan, whose early life was shaped by his family’s work in the Dutch resistance to the Nazis during World War II. He knew, firsthand, the ugliness of life under leaders who prize race and status, who punish and kill those who are Not Like Us. That first word – All! – leaps out with power, this time aimed at each and every power that divides, diminishes, and kills the abundant life God intends for all people.  These are words of resistance, written by one who (along with his family) lived a life of resistance during WWII. These are words offering hope to those unwilling to sell their souls to MAGA and Trump, and sending a shiver through Trump and JD Vance if they were paying attention.

And Kaan is still not done, as he ties up this hymn with one last broadside against the MAGA Un-Gospel:

You, Creator God, have written your great name on humankind;
for our growing in your likeness bring the life of Christ to mind
that by our response and service earth its destiny may find.

Those who pray this prayer — who sing this song — are not praying to shut refugees seeking safety out of the country. They are not praying to round up those who lack the right paperwork to live here, put them in detention camps, and shove them elsewhere. They are not praying to celebrate the exceptionalness of one race or nation or person above the rest of humanity. They are not praying to sit back in comfortable wealth and luxury, leaving it to the poor and needy to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.

In one short hymn, the entire inaugural address that Trump gave the day before was ripped apart, using the voices that come from the throats of everyone sitting around him. His entire campaign message was challenged and opposed, by every voice that rang to the vaulted ceiling and was broadcast out to the world. Kaan died in 2009, but this hymn sounds as if it could have been written last week. And Trump had to sit there and take it, with all the cameras rolling.

Worst of all for Trump, this was but the beginning of the service.

I’m not going to go through the rest of the service in this kind of detail – you can do that for yourself. There were prayers offered by folks from all kinds of religious traditions – Christians of various denominations, as well as Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, and Sikh leaders. These prayers were filled with words like “all” and “every” to paint a picture of our common life together. In the “prayers for all who govern,” the first petition was not for President Trump, but for “all the peoples of the earth,” and moved more narrowly to “the people of our nation” meaning all the people. In the “prayers for those who serve,” the petitions were offered for those in the armed forces and the diplomatic corps, for all civil servants that “they serve with integrity and compassion, without prejudice or partiality to better their communities and the nation,” for all teachers and educators, for all first responders, and critically at the end, “all the people of our land.” In the “prayers for the peoples of this nation,” Methodist Bishop LaTrelle Easterling opened them like this: “O God, whom we cannot love unless we love our neighbor, let us pray for the most vulnerable in our community and lead us to be present with them in their suffering.” This was followed by petitions of specific and vivid mention of those who are most vulnerable.

All this is what led up to the sermon by the Right Reverend Mariann Edgar Budde that garnered such attention in the media and such opprobrium from Trump. He tried to personalize it, demanding an apology from her, but far from her being some isolated voice standing up to him, or some he said/she said debate, Budde was speaking out of the deep religious traditions of a very diverse nation:

In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country.

We’re scared now. The people who pick our crops and clean our office buildings, who labor in poultry farms and meatpacking plants, who wash the dishes after we eat in restaurants and work the night shifts in hospitals.

They may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals. They pay taxes, and are good neighbors. They are faithful members of our churches and mosques, synagogues, gurdwara, and temples.

I ask you to have mercy, Mr. President, on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away, and that you help those who are fleeing war zones and persecution in their own lands to find compassion and welcome here.

This now-famous plea directed specifically to President Trump, offered in a quiet and measured words, was not a one-off. In that plea, she summed up and made plain the implications of Kaan’s opening hymn, the words of the prayers offered throughout the whole service, and everything that took place in the 90 minutes before she took her place in the pulpit and began to speak. If Trump was waiting for the service to finally turn to him, this plea is when it happened — and it pissed him off.

What Budde did, in all humility and in all power, was to name Trump for what he is: one of us, with specific powers and abilities to directly shape life for all the people of the country, and indirectly for the world. Note, though, that what she pleaded for from Trump was of a piece with all the music and prayers, calling on every one of us to use our own far smaller powers and abilities to shape life for all the people in our orbit for the better, as small as our powers may be compared with the powers wielded by Trump.

That, perhaps, is what most put Trump out of joint. She was saying to him “Your title may be fancier, your staff may be grander, cameras may follow your every movement, and microphones strain to catch your every word, but in the end, you share the same task as the lowliest person who cleans hotel rooms, who labors to pick crops and build homes and process poultry while undocumented. You are One of Us, no more special and no less special, no matter how much you long for it to be otherwise.”

I’ve preached to congregations that have included mayors and city officials. I’ve preached to state legislators, state executive branch officials, and state supreme court justices. I’ve preached in services attended by a presidential candidate (Illinois Senator Paul Simon). One thing that has sustained me in those settings, and given me the strength to say what needs to be said, is the strong sense of being surrounded by the voices of the ancestors, preaching this same good news to them that I preach to the lowliest and most marginalized- that all that God has made is good, and all deserve support and care and love from each other.

Several years ago, on the eve of the first anniversary of January 6th, I compared Trump with King Herod who tried to use the wise men so he could kill the infant born to be the Messiah, and I used not simply the account from the Gospel of Matthew but also the retelling of the story by James Taylor in his song “Home By Another Way. Here, in part, is what I wrote that day:

But Taylor isn’t singing just to retell the story of what happened back then. He’s preaching, in his own way, drawing his listeners into the song and changing us here today:

Well it pleasures me to be here
And to sing this song tonight
They tell me that life is a miracle
And I figure that they’re right
But Herod’s always out there
He’s got our cards on file
It’s a lead pipe cinch
If we give an inch
That Herod likes to take a mile

It’s best to go home by another way
Home by another way
We got this far to a lucky star
But tomorrow is another day
We can make it another way
“Safe home!” as they used to say
Keep a weather eye to the chart up high
And go home another way

Yes, Herod *is* always out there, looking to game the system and rape the system and break the system if that’s what it takes to keep himself in power.

But there is also always another way, a way that leaves Herod and his successors powerless and impotent.

My description of Herod’s/Trump’s way came back to mind with a crash on the 20th, as word of all those initial executive orders came tumbling out. Saying Trump is “looking to game the system and rape the system and break the system if that’s what it takes” back then seems frighteningly prescient today.

But like the wise men of old, Bishop Budde knows another way, as do all those who planned this most powerful service, and as did Fred Kaan. In JT’s words, in the face of Trump’s blizzard of executive orders which are designed to take and take and take some more from the most vulnerable among us, Budde didn’t give an inch. Instead, she stood in the path of our American Herod along with a host of others, naming that other way home.

And here’s the really really good news, that would scare Trump even more if he were to think about it: you don’t have to be a bishop to name Herod for who he is, to call out his ways of fear and death, and to lift up our neighbors. That’s what the wise men did, in going home by another way. They protected a poor, vulnerable refugee-to-be from a vengeful tyrant who feared for his own power. And that’s what each of us can do, wherever we are: name Trump’s way as the path of division, destruction, and death, and point to another way.

Because JT was right: it’s best to go home by another way.




The Whole World is Watching, Trump Edition

A Pile of Doozies, waiting to be signed

There are some real doozies among the executive orders that were signed yesterday. As Marcy noted, the pardons were certainly among them. There is also the irony of opening up ANWR for drilling once more and exploiting Alaska’s environmental resources, while at the same time stopping the offshore continental shelf leases to wind farms,

with due consideration for a variety of relevant factors, including the need to foster an energy economy capable of meeting the country’s growing demand for reliable energy, the importance of marine life, impacts on ocean currents and wind patterns, effects on energy costs for Americans –- especially those who can least afford it –- and to ensure that the United States is able to maintain a robust fishing industry for future generations and provide low cost energy to its citizens.

I guess Alaskan fish and the Arctic Ocean are on their own.

There is also an EO giving now-Secretary of State his marching orders:

Section 1.  Purpose.  From this day forward, the foreign policy of the United States shall champion core American interests and always put America and American citizens first.

Sec. 2.  Policy.  As soon as practicable, the Secretary of State shall issue guidance bringing the Department of State’s policies, programs, personnel, and operations in line with an America First foreign policy, which puts America and its interests first.

“And don’t you forget it, Little Marco!” was apparently deleted from the final version that was signed.

It’s not just Americans watching all this play out on Day One. Around the world, the heads of intelligence services of friends and foes alike were no doubt watching as well, to see what was just campaign rhetoric and what Trump actually followed through on with action. The EO that really made me sit up and take notice and most certainly caught their attention was this one:

The Executive Office of the President requires qualified and trusted personnel to execute its mandate on behalf of the American people.  There is a backlog created by the Biden Administration in the processing of security clearances of individuals hired to work in the Executive Office of the President.  Because of this backlog and the bureaucratic process and broken security clearance process, individuals who have not timely received the appropriate clearances are ineligible for access to the White House complex, infrastructure, and technology and are therefore unable to perform the duties for which they were hired.  This is unacceptable.

Therefore, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order:

1.  The White House Counsel to provide the White House Security Office and Acting Chief Security Officer with a list of personnel that are hereby immediately granted interim Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) security clearances for a period not to exceed six months; and

2.  That these individuals shall be immediately granted access to the facilities and technology necessary to perform the duties of the office to which they have been hired; and

3.  The White House Counsel, as my designee, may supplement this list as necessary; and

4.  The White House Counsel, as my designee, shall have the authority to revoke the interim clearance of any individual as necessary.

The introduction blaming the Biden administration for screwing up the process for getting security clearances is a red herring. This EO is straight up slamming the FBI for not immediately giving clearances to his favored people back in 2017. But beyond that . . . wow.

Do you remember how things began for Trump in 2017? As I wrote in 2022, when the FBI executed a search warrant on Mar-a-Lago seeking (and finding) missing very sensitive national security documents, Trump had a history of shoddy security practices dating back to the very beginning of his first administration.

On May 15, 2017, a disturbing story hit the news:

President Donald Trump disclosed highly classified information to Russia’s foreign minister about a planned Islamic State operation, two U.S. officials said on Monday, plunging the White House into another controversy just months into Trump’s short tenure in office.

The intelligence . . . was supplied by a U.S. ally in the fight against the militant group, both officials with knowledge of the situation said.

H.R. McMaster categorically denied it, and as the story unfolded over time, McMaster was lying through his teeth. The unnamed ally was later revealed to be Israel, who had a mole inside an ISIS cell. And Trump blithely blew the cover of that Israeli asset by bragging to Lavrov.

Shortly after this meeting (at which Trump also bragged about just having fired James Comey), US intelligence officials made a bold move. From CNN:

In a previously undisclosed secret mission in 2017, the United States successfully extracted from Russia one of its highest-level covert sources inside the Russian government, multiple Trump administration officials with direct knowledge told CNN.

A person directly involved in the discussions said that the removal of the Russian was driven, in part, by concerns that President Donald Trump and his administration repeatedly mishandled classified intelligence and could contribute to exposing the covert source as a spy.

The decision to carry out the extraction occurred soon after a May 2017 meeting in the Oval Office in which Trump discussed highly classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, concerning ISIS in Syria, had been provided by Israel.

This was the opening act of the Trump presidency. From the very beginning, intelligence officers worried about how Trump handled classified information. Our intelligence officers worried, and so did the intelligence officers of our allies, as they asked themselves some version of the question “Will Trump say something or do something that will get us killed?” In a completely different way, so did the intelligence officers of our adversaries. If Trump were to rashly reveal something he learned about the capabilities of our adversaries, it could have disastrous consequences for those countries and their leaders, as the reaction to the revelation could easily spiral out of control in unforeseeable ways.

And the damage was done.

Fast forward to today, and imagine you are the head of the German Bundesnachrichendienst, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, the Israeli Mossad, or any of the intelligence agencies with whom we regularly share intelligence. This EO says that Trump is giving a six-month waiver to the background check requirement. What could possibly go wrong?

Now imagine you are the head of the intelligence service of an unfriendly country. How large is your smile?

Just as they watched Biden’s new team in 2021, all the foreign intelligence services are watching Trump today. Yes, they are taking note of Trump indicating the US is withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement, and also the World Health Organization. But screwing with security clearances in the White House is on another level.

Little Secretary of State Marco is going to have a lot of work to do, trying to clean up this mess. This kind of thing will turn “America First” into “America Alone,” at least when it comes to sharing intelligence among allies.

And finally, imagine you are a senior person in the CIA, NSA, or another US intelligence agency. Imagine you are an agent in the field, passing sensitive information through your handler back to Langley. How many agents are going to ask to be pulled out? How many agents are going to “go dark” for a time, cutting off the flow of information they had been sending? And how many potential sources are going to rethink any idea of cooperating with US intelligence services, and decide to go to the Germans, the British, or others instead of the US — or decide it’s not worth cooperating with any western country?

The whole world is watching, and it’s not a pretty picture. Unless, of course, you are a certain former KBG agent, who is even more elated today than he was on November 9th.