Peril
Written by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa
Simon & Schuster, New York
Copyright © 2021, Bob Woodward and Robert Costa
For several weeks, I had all kinds of trouble remembering the title of this book. Given the cascading crises we’re facing these days, “Peril” seemed such an old-fashioned, outdated word. Until I was reminded how our old-fashioned president used it during his inauguration: “We have much to do in this winter of peril.”
“Peril” provides a comprehensive reliving of our recent political life, told to us via the interview testimony of many of the players. Much of the attention has focused on General Mark Milley’s phone calls. You might even have watched our Republican Congressional representatives grill the general about his China call, demanding to know exactly what he told his Chinese counterpart, General Li Zuocheng, and why. Some suggested he had committed treason when he tried to reassure the Chinese military that we weren’t about to obliterate them. This perilous incident justifiably made big news, but I was more impressed by Milley’s recognition of the growing threat of homegrown American fascism. Which, whether he knew about it or not, relates to the revelations of John Eastman’s preposterous legal memo, which claimed that Vice President Pence, with the help of deceitful state legislatures, could somehow dispense with the real results of the 2020 election and install electors who would throw the election to Trump.
While so many Republicans, especially Republican politicians, deny the serious consequences of January 6, 2021, General Milley, “ever the historian, thought of the little remembered 1905 revolution in Russia. The uprising had failed, but it had set the stage for the successful 1917 revolution that led to the creation of the Soviet Union … Milley told senior staff, ‘What you might have seen was a precursor to something far worse down the road.’” [Emphasis added]
Then for comparison’s sake, “Trump tweeted at 6:01 p.m. ‘Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!’” [Emphasis added]
Back to the Milley/China story. Because Woodward and Costa tell this story over several chapters, I’ve allowed myself some simple edits to restore the real-life timeline:
“Trump was attacking China on the campaign trail at every turn … ‘I beat this crazy, horrible China virus,’ he told Fox News on October 11. Milley knew the Chinese might not know where the politics ended and possible action began … On October 30, four days before the presidential election, sensitive intelligence showed that the Chinese believed the U.S. was plotting to secretly attack them. The Chinese thought that Trump, in desperation, would create a crisis, present himself as the savior, and use the gambit to win reelection.
“Milley knew the Chinese assertion that the U.S. was planning a secret strike was preposterous. He had then called General Li … to persuade the Chinese to cool down. He invoked their long-standing relationship and insisted the U.S. was not planning an attack … Milley said, ‘General Li, I want to assure you that the American government is stable and everything is going to be okay. We are not going to attack or conduct any kinetic operations against you.
“‘General Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise … If there was a war or some kind of kinetic action between the United States and China, there’s going to be a buildup, just like there has been always in history … And I’m going to be communicating with you pretty regularly,’ Milley said. ‘So this is not one of those times. It’s going to be okay. We’re not going to have a fight.’
“Okay,” General Li said, “I take you at your word.”
“Milley instantly realized how valuable and important a channel he had. In a few minutes, he had been able to deescalate and avoid miscommunication that could lead to an incident or even a war between the U.S. and China.
“Milley could see the Lincoln Memorial from Quarters 6, his home. Arlington National Cemetery was nearby. ‘I’ve buried 242 kids up here,’ he later told others one Saturday morning. ‘I’m not really interested in having a war with anybody. I’ll defend the country if it’s necessary. But war, the military instrument, must be a last resort, not a first resort.’
“He did not tell Trump about his call with General Li.”
While Republicans were ignoring January 6, the Chinese weren’t: “On January 8, it was evident China’s fears had only been intensified by the insurrection. Milley knew from extensive reports that Li and the Chinese leadership were stunned and disoriented by the televised images of the unprecedented attack on the American legislature.
“Li fired off questions to Milley. Was the American superpower unstable? Collapsing? What was going on? Was the U.S. military going to do something?
“‘Things may look unsteady,’ Milley said … ‘But that’s the nature of democracy, General Li. We are 100 percent steady. Everything’s fine. But democracy can be sloppy sometimes.’”
“It took an hour and a half — 45 minutes of substance due to the necessary use of interpreters — to try to assure him. When Milley hung up, he was convinced the situation was grave. Li remained unusually rattled, putting the two nations on the knife-edge of disaster.
“Milley had witnessed up close how Trump was routinely impulsive and unpredictable. Making matters even more dire, Milley was certain Trump had gone into a serious mental decline in the aftermath of the election, with Trump now all but manic, screaming at officials and constructing his own alternate reality about endless election conspiracies.
“‘You never know what a president’s trigger point is,’ Milley told senior staff. When might events and pressures come together to cause a president to order military action?
“In making the president the commander in chief of the military, a tremendous concentration of power in one person, the Constitution gave the president the authority single-handedly to employ the armed forces as he chose. Milley believed that Trump did not want a war, but he certainly was willing to launch military strikes as he had done in Iran, Somalia, Yemen and Syria.” [Emphasis added]
Anyone not thoroughly ensconced in the “hang Mike Pence/Trump won 2020” alternate universe will appreciate that General Milley did his best to avoid nuclear doomsday. But, but, but, the story is more complicated. A few pages later, we learn:
“Milley had misled General Li when he claimed that the United States was ‘100 percent steady’ and the January 6 riot was just an example of a ‘sloppy’ democracy.
“To the contrary, Milley believed January 6 was a planned, coordinated, synchronized attack on the very heart of American democracy, designed to overthrow the government to prevent the constitutional certification of a legitimate election won by Joe Biden.
“‘It was indeed a coup attempt and nothing less than “treason,”’ he said, and Trump might still be looking for what Milley called a “Reichstag moment.” In 1933, Adolf Hitler had cemented absolute power for himself and the Nazi Party amid street terror and the burning of the Reichstag parliamentary building.
“Milley could not rule out that the January 6 assault, so unimagined and savage, could be a dress rehearsal for something larger as Trump publicly and privately clung to his belief that the election had been rigged for Biden and stolen from him.
“Milley was focused on the constitutional countdown: 12 more days of the Trump presidency. He was determined to do everything to ensure a peaceful transfer of power.” [Emphasis added]
So, I guess when it comes to effective crisis intervention, the question is why would Li have believed anything Milley told him. And given the fact that Milley was obviously misleading him, how likely is it that “In a few minutes, he had been able to deescalate and avoid miscommunication that could lead to an incident or even a war between the U.S. and China.” [Emphasis added]
Please, let some of this in: The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is thinking we might be in the midst of our own Nazi Germany moment. He’s witnessed his President and his advisors talk about nuclear strikes and going it alone without our allies, seen Trump’s almost slavish attraction to authoritarians Putin, Erdogan, Orban, and the Saudis, experienced his disdain for democratic dissent and his demeaning of the military men in his cabinet, known his racism and his support of the neo-Nazis at Charlottesville.
Then, in uniform, experienced how the President manipulated him to seemingly lend his support to the clearly political and unnecessary photo op at St. John’s Church.
Onto the Milley/Nancy Pelosi call. Pelosi knew well that President Trump was out of control. In the midst of the assault on the Capitol, knowing her staff had been traumatized, she had no patience for the usual DC politeness: “‘What precautions are available … to prevent an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or from accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike?’”
Milley tried to reassure her: “‘The precautions are procedures that we have in place,’ he said, ‘which require authentication, certification, and any instructions have to come from a competent authority and they have to be legal. And there has to be a logical rationale for any kind of use of nuclear weapon. Not just nuclear weapons, use of force. So I can assure you that we have rock solid systems in place. That there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell this president, or any president can launch nuclear weapons illegally, immorally, unethically without proper certification from…’
“‘And you said not only nuclear, but also use of force?’ she asked. ‘Absolutely,’ Milley said. ‘A lot of people are concerned about, and rightly so, concerned about a potential incident in say Iran. I’m watching that as close as a hawk. Every single hour watching things overseas. The same thing domestically, with things like martial law stuff, the Insurrection Act.
“‘This is one of those moments, Madam Speaker, where you’re going to have to trust me on this. I guarantee it. I’m giving you my word. I can’t say any of this publicly because I really don’t have the authorities and it would be misconstrued in 50 different directions, but I can assure you that the United States military is steady as a rock and we’re not going to do anything illegal, immoral or unethical with the use of force. We will not do it.’”
“Pelosi interjected. ‘But he just did something illegal, immoral and unethical and nobody stopped him. Nobody. Nobody at the White House. This escalated in the way it did because of the intent of the president. The president incited it and nobody in the White House did anything about it. Nobody in the White House did anything to stop him.’
“‘I’m not going to disagree with you,’ Milley replied.
“‘So you’re saying you’re going to make sure it doesn’t happen?’ the speaker asked. ‘It already did happen. An assault on our democracy happened and nobody said, you can’t do that. Nobody.’
“‘Well, Madam Speaker, the launching of nuclear weapons and the incitement of a riot…’
“‘I know they’re different. Thank you very much. What I’m saying to you is that if they couldn’t even stop him from an assault on the Capitol, who even knows what else he may do? And is there anybody in charge at the White House who was doing anything but kissing his fat butt all over this?’
“‘I agree 100 percent with everything you’ve said,’ Milley replied. ‘The one thing I can guarantee is that as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I want you to know that — I want you to know this in your heart of hearts, I can guarantee you 110 percent that the military, use of military power, whether it’s nuclear or a strike in a foreign country of any kind, we’re not going to do anything illegal or crazy. We’re not going to do…’
“‘Well,’ Pelosi asked, ‘what do you mean, illegal or crazy? Illegal by whose judgments of illegal? He already did and nobody did anything about it.’
“‘So I’m talking about the use of the U.S. military,’ Milley said. ‘I’m talking about us striking out, lashing out militarily. U.S. military power domestically and/or internationally.’ …‘I can give you my word,’ Milley said. ‘The best I can do is give you my word and I’m going to prevent anything like that in the United States military.’
“‘But it is a sad state of affairs for our country that we’ve been taken over by a dictator who used force against another branch of government. And he’s still sitting there. He should have been arrested. He should have been arrested on the spot. He had a coup d’état against us so he can stay in office. There should be some way to remove him. But anyway, it’s no use wasting your time on this. I appreciate that. Thank you, General. Thank you.’
“‘Madam Speaker, you have to take my word for it. I know the system and we’re okay. The president alone can order the use of nuclear weapons. But he doesn’t make the decision alone. One person can order it, several people have to launch it.’
Once again, after the phone call is over, we’re offered the authors’ description of his additional thoughts: “Pelosi had a case, Milley realized. Her profound worries were well founded. Since the dawn of the nuclear age, the procedures, techniques, even the means and equipment, of controlling the possible use of the nukes had been analyzed, debated, and, at times, changed.
“Milley often said that the use of nuclear weapons had to be ‘legal’ and the military did have rigorous procedures. But no system was foolproof, no matter how finely tuned and practiced. Control of nuclear weapons involved human beings and he knew that human beings, including himself, made mistakes. As a practical matter, if a president was determined to use them, it is unlikely a team of lawyers or military officers would be able to stop him.” [Emphasis added]
So, after all the pledges, the truth, Milley knew, is that our system isn’t foolproof … and if a president was determined, well then we’d have ourselves a nuclear war.
From Watergate on, Woodward has always had access to Washington’s most powerful. Even Trump, notwithstanding the several times already that Woodward’s rendition of their interviews had proved embarrassing, couldn’t help but accept the challenge and invite him in once again. So along with his Washington Post colleague, Bob Costa, they were able to extract stories not known by so many other reporters.
There is, though, a danger that accompanies this access, a comfort that comes with it, a peculiarly inside-the-Beltway shared sensibility, and a willingness to appreciate, and empathize with the requirements, and burdens, of wielding power.
So we’re offered two phone calls where General Milley is basically … how did the surviving Parkland students put it, well, with due respect, I call B.S. There’s barely a suggestion from Woodward and Costa that Milley’s call to General Li Zuocheng might not have been as effective as he imagined. Why exactly would General Li take his word or believe Milley could, in fact, keep this critical promise to warn them.
There were many reasons for objective observers to imagine that, as Trump’s world was collapsing around him, and as his rage escalated, he might replace with China the possible targets he loved to imagine attacking: Iran, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria. Hadn’t he already launched a stupid, terribly counterproductive trade war with China? Hadn’t he already manufactured major hostility, even anti-Chinese American hysteria in America by insisting COVID was the China Virus? And while so many Americans seemed, and still seem, willing to ignore — or worse, forgive — Trump’s growing madness and out-of-control cruelty, the Chinese couldn’t afford the largesse of Milley.
Hadn’t they had survived an unrelenting 10 years of Mao’s mad Cultural Revolution? The forced relocation, re-education, and blatant murder of so many intellectuals and teachers, and the relentless purging of previously loyal Party members. The Chinese leadership well understood the devastating nexus of insanity and charisma; the extraordinary damage caused by a personality cult like Mao’s. And they, perhaps more than most Americans, knew it would be extraordinarily foolish, even fatal, to ignore the clear and present dangers of an insurrection, the risk posed by a populace angry enough to revolt. Hadn’t they chosen in 1989 not to take any chances, to eliminate the most dangerous, to massacre the young people demonstrating for more democracy at Tiananmen Square?
So I’m guessing General Li Zuocheng was relying far more on the recent military gains of China than any rhetoric Milley might offer. In fact, they had made monumental strides when it came to self-protection. By 2020, China had “marshalled the resources, technology, and political will over the past two decades to strengthen and modernize the PLA in nearly every respect … China is already ahead of the United States in certain areas such as shipbuilding – ‘they have the largest navy in the world’ – land-based conventional ballistic and cruise missiles – and integrated air defense systems.”
The truth is, there was nothing steady about the last days of the Trump presidency, and nothing steady about American life right now. Nothing – not everything – is fine. And while the lame excuses the Republicans have adopted may have convinced the 40 percent of FOX-blinded Americans that too much was being made of January 6, the rest of the world, and China especially, knows an insurrection when they see one.
I guess the question is/was who is more likely to launch a first strike. I suspect the Chinese knew the answer was Trump. It wasn’t just China. “‘Half the world was friggin nervous,’ Milley said … Many countries were ramping up their military operating tempo and cueing spy satellites.”
With their impressive access to some of the major players, “Peril” provide insight into the ins and outs of the Trump campaign and does a good job replaying the twisting turns of Biden’s emergence from a mostly unlikely candidate to the winner. With, of course, the decisive help of Jim Clyburn and the black voters of South Carolina, who made clear that their support was what Bernie Sanders lacked and Joe Biden possessed.
And there are special appearances by Bill Barr, Steve Bannon, Mark Meadows, and Brad Parscale, some of those most likely to subpoenaed in the days to come.
Now, forgive my cynicism, but I suspect some folks believe talking to Woodward is the best way to rehabilitate one’s reputation. Bill Barr seems somehow to have turned himself from a collaborator into one of the few prepared to tell the tyrant the truth. He’s gone from allowing the Department of Justice to function pretty much as the President’s private attorney to transforming himself into a fierce advocate for an independent DOJ.
“Peril” reminds us of Trump’s modus operandi: “‘I need to be a fighter,’ Trump said. ‘I’ve gotten where I am because I’m willing to fight. They like that I’m willing to fight. I have to fight.’ His advisers, he said, told him if he got 65 million votes, he would win … Despite Barr’s pleas, Trump would not change.” [Emphasis added]
Barr took a call from former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone on November 23. “‘Bill,’ Cipollone said, ‘it’s getting a little awkward. He’s asking about you. You haven’t shown up.’ Barr went to the White House. ‘Mr. President,’ he said, ‘you did a great job there at the end, and it’s too bad it worked out the way it did.’
“‘Well, we won. We won by a lot. And, you know, it’s fraud. Bill, we can’t let them get away with this. This is stealing the election. I hear that you guys are hanging back. You’re not — somehow you don’t think it’s your role to look at this.’”
“‘No, Mr. President, that’s not correct. You know, it’s not our role to take sides. The Justice Department can’t take sides, as you know, between you and the other candidate. That’s what we have elections to decide.
“‘But if there’s a crime of sufficient magnitude, of specific and credible information indicating potential fraud on a scale that could affect the outcome, I’m willing to take a look …’ In five states where the numbers were close, he had asked the U.S. attorneys to look at the big-ticket items, when someone made an allegation of systematic fraud that could affect the outcome. Those states were Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia and Pennsylvania. He had directed them not to open a full-fledged investigation but a preliminary analysis or assessment. If there was anything there and sufficient grounds, they should talk to him.
“‘But the problem is this stuff about the voting machines is just bullshit,’ Barr said … Trump kept going on Fox News saying the election was stolen. The election was rigged. The Justice Department was missing in action. ‘These fucking nuts,’ Barr said. Giuliani, Powell and the rest of them. ‘Clown car.’”
If ever you needed a clear indication of the true state of the Republic, Woodward and Costa serve one up for you: “‘When Chairman Milley heard Barr might resign, he quickly called. ‘Man, you can’t leave,’ Milley told him. ‘You know you can’t leave. We need you.’” [Emphasis added]
Exactly who needed the man who did so much to enable and extend Trump’s lawlessness? Who manipulated and downplayed the chilling conclusions of the Mueller Report? Who also emphasized the “obvious” potential for fraud with mail-in voting. So, now we’re supposed to imagine him a savior of sorts. As they say in the Bronx: General Milley, gimme a break!
The nonsensical John Eastman legal strategy — that the Vice-President presiding over the Senate’s state-by-state certification of the electoral votes could unilaterally declare that claims of fraud provided an excuse for Pence to force the issue back to the House of Representatives, who would return the issue to the contested states for a new recounting of votes — provides yet another opportunity for political rehabilitation. The Pence/Quayle story: Pence called former Vice President Quayle for advice. “Despite the Electoral College casting its ballots for Biden on December 14, Trump was convinced that Pence could throw the election to Trump on January 6, when Congress certified the final count. Pence explained to his fellow Indianan that Trump was pressuring him to intervene to ensure Biden would not secure the needed 270 votes during the certification and push the election to a vote in the House of Representatives.
“Quayle thought Trump’s suggestion was preposterous and dangerous … As vice president and president of the Senate, he had to certify the victory of Bill Clinton and Al Gore, who had trounced Bush and Quayle. He had researched his duties. He had read and reread the 12th Amendment. All he had to do was count the votes. ‘The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.’
“That was it. Trump’s effort to cajole Pence was a dark, Rube Goldberg–like fantasy, Quayle believed, and could precipitate a constitutional crisis. ‘Mike, you have no flexibility on this. None. Zero. Forget it. Put it away,’ Quayle said.”
This story is the best thing that happened for former Vice President J. Danforth Quayle in many a decade. He of the trail-blazing culture-war attack on the televised sitcom, “Murphy Brown” for “mocking the importance of fathers.” A prime example of his steadfast embrace of family values.
And then, there are those beyond hope of rehabilitation. Back to January 6: “[National Security Advisor to Vice President Mike Pence] Kellogg went to see Trump in the president’s dining room: ‘Sir, the vice president is secure,’ Kellogg told Trump.
“‘Where’s Mike?’ Trump asked. ‘The Secret Service has him. They’re down in the basement. They’re okay … Mr. President,’ he added, ‘you really should do a tweet … You need to get a tweet out real quick, help control the crowd up there. This is out of control. They’re not going to be able to control this. Sir, they’re not prepared for it. Once a mob starts turning like that, you’ve lost it,’ he said.
“‘Yeah,’ Trump said. Trump blinked and kept watching television.
“Kellogg looked around and realized the West Wing was nearly empty. Meadows was in his office, but Trump was essentially alone. National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien was in Florida. Kushner was not there. Kellogg went to find Ivanka Trump.
“For weeks, Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, had watched as Trump indulged in the legal theories and congressional plots offered by his allies. They had used a light touch with Trump, with Kushner telling aides that it was Trump’s presidency, and he alone should be the one to decide how to finish it.
“As Kellogg and others watched, Ivanka went in two more times to see her father. ‘Let this thing go,’ she told him. ‘Let it go,’ she said.”
You think there’s an award for the 2021 MIA Award, The Most Inane Advice, when confronting an insurrection? She’s got my vote.
It was illuminating to read “Peril’s” description of how the Biden administration fashioned its policy on Afghanistan: “On Wednesday, February 3, Biden called together his national security team to begin a comprehensive review of the 20-year war in Afghanistan. Biden wanted to make a big move: terminate the endless war. It would put his stamp on American foreign policy. He had strongly opposed large numbers of U.S. troops in Afghanistan since he was Obama’s vice president. But he had not been the decision maker then. Now he was.
“But he promised, ‘I’m here to listen … I absolutely want to hear arguments to the contrary and I’m going to keep an open mind about this because if there is a compelling reason to stay, I will certainly consider it and listen to it.’”
“Trump had announced a May 1, 2021, withdrawal of all U.S. troops, but Biden wanted to make his own decision on his own timetable … He had wanted out, ever since 2009 when he believed the military and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had boxed in and overwhelmed President Obama in his first year. They insisted that Obama add tens of thousands of U.S. troops to the Afghanistan mission.
“Biden … believed the military had manipulated the president. Biden told others privately in 2009, ‘The military doesn’t fuck around with me,’ more than implying they had with Obama.
“Thus began, over the next two months, an extraordinary series of 25 NSC meetings … It was one of the most wide-ranging policy reviews ever held.
“Biden’s primary argument, the one that undergirded the debate, was that the mission had shifted from its original intent … The mission was to stop further attacks. But the war had expanded to a nation-building enterprise to defeat the religiously extreme Taliban … A counterinsurgency effort called COIN grew to include not just defeating the Taliban but protecting the Afghan population and government … At the height of the war a decade ago, the U.S. had 98,000 troops in Afghanistan. That number had dwindled in 2021 to 3,500, including regular and Special Operations forces … Simply put, for him the war had become a battle between the Afghan government and the Taliban. The U.S. military should have no part in a civil war in another country.
“Biden wanted answers to a few questions that deeply reflected his predisposition: One, do we believe that our presence in Afghanistan is fundamentally contributing to a significantly higher likelihood of a durable, negotiated political settlement between the Afghan government and the Taliban?
“Two, do we believe that the nature of the Al Qaeda and ISIS threat from Afghanistan is such that we have to keep thousands of troops on the ground there indefinitely?
“Three, if we go beyond the May 1 deadline and say we’re just staying on an open-ended basis, what is the risk to the force and risk to the mission? … He also said he wanted them to examine, in depth, the humanitarian consequences for the civilian population of Afghanistan if U.S. troops were withdrawn.
Sullivan and the NSC staff ultimately presented Biden with two memos: The strongest case for staying and the strongest case for leaving. The memos were based on the extensive interagency discussions.
“By early April 2021, with Blinken and Austin back supporting the full withdrawal, Biden told his advisers he had decided to do just that. U.S. ground forces would leave by at least September 11, 2021, the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks … He said he saw a higher risk in staying than leaving. It came down to, if not now, when? … The Al Qaeda threat had been significantly degraded, if not eliminated in Afghanistan, but the terrorism threat had shifted to other regions of the Middle East. The clear danger zones were in Somalia and in Iran.
“Chairman Milley thought the review had been fair and open … Though he could see potentially gruesome and destabilizing outcomes, he felt comfortable that his advice was not taken. ‘Just because the general recommends it, doesn’t make it right. The president has a much wider-angle view … Here’s some thoughts for us to think about as the senior leaders of the military … You’re dealing with a president who was the vice president under Obama and the guys like Blinken and Sullivan and all these other guys. These guys were all in the second and third tier positions in the Obama administration. And all of them have a searing memory of the first year of Obama.’ That was when the military and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton strong-armed Obama to send 30,000 more U.S. troops to the Afghanistan War.
“I was a colonel at the time and Mullen was the chairman and I was in the basement. I was a witness to some of this. Admiral Mullen, McChrystal and Petraeus, the uniform guys, had tried to box in a president, a new, young president from Chicago that maybe, I can’t read minds, they thought they could take advantage of and box him in on a surge in Afghanistan.
“Here’s what I take from that as Colonel Milley. Here’s a couple of rules of the road here that we’re going to follow. One is you never, ever ever box in a president of the United States. You always give him decision space. Number two, you don’t play cute and you don’t give your advice on the front page of The Washington Post. And you don’t, you damn sure don’t give it in speeches. You just don’t do that. You give candid, honest advice.
“Austin and Milley decided to expedite the withdrawal because it would be safer for the U.S troops. They hoped all troops would come home by mid-July. A visitor to Austin’s office said he found the new secretary ‘scared to death’ that a terrorist strike might originate from Afghanistan someday.
“Biden gave a 16-minute address to the nation on April 14. Instead of the high drama of an evening Oval Office address, he spoke from the Treaty Room in the afternoon. ‘I’m now the fourth United States president to preside over American troop presence in Afghanistan: two Republicans, two Democrats,’ he said. ‘I will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth. For the past 12 years, ever since I became vice president, I’ve carried with me a card that reminds me of the exact number of American troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. That exact number, not an approximation or rounded-off number, because every one of those dead are sacred human beings who left behind entire families. An exact accounting of every single solitary one needs to be had.
“As of this day, 2,448 U.S. troops and personnel have died in our Afghanistan conflicts, 20,722 have been wounded. It’s time to end the forever war,” he said.
Biden then visited Arlington National Cemetery and, wearing his mask, walked alone through Section 60 where the dead from Afghanistan and Iraq are buried.
As for the continuing war at home: Senator Lindsay Graham, the self-appointed Trump whisperer, keeps hoping he can rehabilitate Trump just enough to win in 2024: “But before any comeback was possible, it was essential for Trump to purge himself of January 6 … Graham told Trump to please stop excusing the behavior of the Capitol rioters. But Trump would not stop.
“‘They were peaceful people. These were great people,’ he said in a July 11 interview with Fox News. ‘The love, the love in the air, I have never seen anything like it. You have people with no guns that walked down. And frankly, the doors were open and the police, in many cases, you know, they have — they have hundreds of hours of tape. They ought to release the tape to see what really happened.’ Yet more than 100 police officers had been injured during the riot. Graham did not want to hear this. By the summer, federal prosecutors had charged more than 500 people in the riot. [Emphasis added]
“‘How you doing, boss?’ Brad Parscale said to Trump in a phone call in early July. Though Parscale, Trump’s former campaign manager, had been all but banished from his circle a year earlier after the Tulsa rally debacle, he was now back in. Trump often went from hot to cold to hot with advisers.
“‘Sir, are you going to run?’ ‘I’m thinking about it,’ Trump said. He sounded restless. Impatient. He leaned into the idea. ‘I’m really strongly thinking about running.’ ‘Well, that’s all I need to hear,’ Parscale said.
“‘We’ve got to keep doing this, Brad.’ He wondered aloud if Biden was suffering from dementia. ‘Decrepit,’ Trump spat, speaking of Biden. ‘He had an army. An army for Trump. He wants that back,’ Parscale later told others. ‘He feels a little pressure of not being in the fight like he was and he’s wrapping his head around how to get back there. I don’t think he sees it as a comeback. He sees it as vengeance.’”
And here’s how Woodward and Costa leave us, peril begets peril: “Five years ago, on March 31, 2016, when Trump was on the verge of winning the Republican presidential nomination, we worked together for the first time and interviewed Trump at his then unfinished Trump International Hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington.
“That day, we recognized he was an extraordinary political force, in many ways right out of the American playbook. An outsider. Anti-establishment. A businessman. A builder. Bombastic. Confident. A fast-talking scrapper.
“But we also saw darkness. He could be petty. Cruel. Bored by American history and dismissive of governing traditions that had long guided elected leaders. Tantalized by the prospect of power. Eager to use fear to get his way.
“‘Real power is — I don’t even want to use the word — fear,’ Trump told us. ‘I bring rage out. I do bring rage out. I always have. I don’t know if that’s an asset or a liability, but whatever it is, I do.’”
“Could Trump work his will again? Were there any limits to what he and his supporters might do to put him back in power? Peril remains.”
Peril seems to be ever present, everywhere. You might as well get used to it. And Woodward and Costa have provided an essential guidebook.
"book" - Google News
October 26, 2021 at 11:00PM
https://ift.tt/3Gpcfj7
BOOK REVIEW: 'Peril' by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa - theberkshireedge.com
"book" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2Yv0xQn
https://ift.tt/2zJxCxA
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "BOOK REVIEW: 'Peril' by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa - theberkshireedge.com"
Post a Comment