Trump invites Putin to attack NATO.

February 12, 2024

As the media continues its journalistic rapture over special counsel Robert Hur’s hit job on Joe Biden, Trump gave the “green light” for Putin to attack NATO if Trump is elected in 2024. Don’t hold your breath waiting for the NYTimes to run five front-page stories on Trump's reckless statement. I will return to the coverage of Robert Hur’s report in a moment, but the more important story (by far) is Trump's dangerous invitation to Putin to invade NATO allies.

First, a reminder about our forward-leaning stance. As I said, on Friday, we must go on offense. Joe Biden is the better candidate by orders of magnitude. The choice has never been clearer in the history of our nation. We need to be aggressive in making that point. Trump's statement over the weekend reinforces the binary choice between democracy and tyranny, sanity and chaos, and decency and depravity.

---

Trump claims he told NATO ally he would welcome Russian attack.

What happened.

At a rally over the weekend, Trump recounted the following conversation with a leader of a NATO ally:

One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’

You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent? No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want.

---

Why it matters.

It matters for three reasons, at least.

First, The story is a fabrication. Trump is a liar (as we know). No president of a “big country” posed the question to Trump, “Well, sir, if we don’t pay . . . .” If Trump had been asked such a question and given the response he recounted during a NATO meeting, we would have heard about it long before a campaign rally in South Carolina in 2024. (Moreover, NATO countries don’t “pay” anyone for membership in NATO. Trump thinks NATO has dues like a country club. It doesn’t. Instead, each member nation agrees to spend a certain percentage of its budget on its own military.)

Second, even though the story is not true as recounted, it is a signal to Putin that Trump's commitment to NATO is illusory. Trump's submissive posture regarding Russia threatens international security—and endangers the lives of Americans who will respond to a Russian attack on NATO.

Indeed, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg made that point, saying,

Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the US, and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk. I expect that regardless of who wins the presidential election, the US will remain a strong and committed NATO ally.

Third, the statement is a reminder of Trump's wild unpredictability when making public comments. He is a reckless madman. He is unfit to be president.

---

The reaction.

Trump's imaginary (but reckless) story was rightly condemned by most major media. The NYTimes led with three front-page stories about the Trump's statement.

• Favoring Foes Over Friends, Trump Threatens to Upend International Order.

• An Outburst by Trump on NATO May Push Europe to Go It Alone

• Trump draws fire for his comments on NATO and Russia

The Washington Post led with a top-of-page headline, “Trump’s NATO-bashing comments rile allies, rekindle European fears.”

The Wall Street Journal included a below-the-fold front page headline, NATO Leader Blasts Trump’s Suggestion He Would Encourage Russian Invasion of U.S. Allies.

But, as expected, leading Republicans excused Trump's reckless statement. Senator Marco Rubio said,

He doesn’t talk like a traditional politician, and we’ve already been through this. You would think people would’ve figured it out by now.

The excuse that “he doesn’t talk like a politician” doesn’t change how our NATO allies feel about Trump's invitation to Putin to invade NATO countries. They would rightly make strategic decisions based on what Trump says without discounting his statement by his unpredictability.

More to the point, Trump doesn’t “talk” like an adult. He speaks like a petulant child with no emotional control. He is unfit to be president.

Speaking of Trump talking like a petulant child, read on!

---

Trump mocks Nikki Haley’s husband, who is deployed with the National Guard in Africa.

During the same speech in South Carolina, Trump insulted Nikki Haley’s husband, Michael Haley, who is a Major in the National Guard. His unit is currently on a year-long deployment in the Horn of Africa. Trump said,

What happened to her husband? Where is he? He’s gone. He knew. He knew.

Trump's comment suggested that Major Michael Haley was out of the country to avoid seeing Nikki Haley’s loss in the Republican South Carolina primary. Of course, Trump's mocking of Major Haley’s service is an insult to all Americans who serve their country in the military.

Nikki Haley condemned Trump's remarks, saying,

Michael is deployed serving our country, something you know nothing about. Someone who continually disrespects the sacrifices of military families has no business being commander in chief.

President Biden also condemned Trump's comments:

The answer is that Major Haley is abroad, serving his country right now. We know [Trump] thinks our troops are ‘suckers,’ but this guy wouldn’t know service to his country if it slapped him in the face.”

Of course—on cue—Senator Marco Rubio declined to criticize Trump's comments about Major Haley’s year-long deployment to Africa.

Every time Trump speaks at a campaign rally, he creates this type of controversy. While his committed base and paid apologists are not moved, some voters will be. Military families, active-duty personnel, and veterans will understand the sacrifice that Major Haley is making—and Trump is mocking.

---

Fallout from Robert Hur’s report.

If you want to skip over this section, that’s fine. Just know that the level of journalistic malpractice on this story is so bad that reputable commentators are noticing and calling out the major media. This story has started out like “but Hilary’s emails” story. It isn’t going to have the legs of the “Hilary’s email” story. I include some further commentary in Concluding Thoughts to give people confidence—which is warranted. We are going to win the day on this issue.

There is plenty of fine writing on this subject, so I refer you to those sources. The place to begin is with this definitive article by Andrew Weissman and Ryan Goodman in Just Security, The Real “Robert Hur Report” (Versus What You Read in the News). If you read this article, you will conclude that almost none of the talking heads discussing the report have actually read it.

Weissman and Goodman cite the report chapter and verse, an explication that leaves no doubt that there is no evidence that Joe Biden knowingly—much less willfully—removed classified documents from his term as vice president. For example, Weissman and Goodman cite the following (among many other examples):

• Because we cannot prove that he knew the memo was classified when he left office, we cannot prove that retaining the memo, he willfully retained national defense information.

• These facts do not support a conclusion that Mr. Biden willfully retained the marked classified documents in these binders.

• We do not know whether Mr. Biden willfully retained the classified documents or consulted them when writing the book.

• For each of the marked classified documents found in Mr. Biden’s notebooks, we cannot prove that Mr. Biden knew about or intended to keep the document after he was vice president, or we cannot prove the document contains national defense information, or both.

Also, as to Biden’s personal notes and diaries, he asserted that they were his personal property, a position taken by presidents and vice-presidents who preceded him in office. The special counsel concluded that

• Contemporaneous evidence suggests that when Mr. Biden left office in 2017, he believed he was allowed to keep the notebooks in his home.

• The Department of Justice, the National Archives, and others knew that President Reagan treated his diaries (containing classified information) as personal property, but no agency took action to recover the classified materials or to investigate or prosecute the former president

Weissmann and Goodman contrast the findings above with the wildly inaccurate reporting by major media outlets that the special counsel found Joe Biden had “willfully retained classified information.” In light of the above, the headlines and stories are false. And President Biden’s surrogates and independent commentators have begun to push back hard against anchors and reporters who engage in journalistic malpractice.

I also recommend Lucian Truscott’s Substack essay, Vote for the stutterer, not the lying felonious rapist. It's important. Truscott channels our indignation and puts a fine point on the stark differences between the candidates. But most importantly, he urges us to look past the gaffes of both Biden and Trump to look at what they promise to do.

Truscott writes (shortened for brevity; please read the original for full context):

So, let’s take a look at what Donald Trump has said he will do if he is elected.

• Trump has promised to end the Affordable Care Act, which in 2023 alone provided health insurance to more than 40 million Americans. 

• Trump has promised to privatize Medicare, turning the entire program over to the private corporations who run Medicare Advantage.

• At a rally in South Carolina yesterday, Trump bragged that he told the European president, if Russia attacked his country, “I would not protect you, In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.”

• Trump has promised to use the Department of Justice to “go after” the family of Joe Biden if he is elected. 

• He has promised to “round up” millions of undocumented immigrants and keep them in detention camps near the border until he deports them.

There is, of course, much more, but you get the point.

If you are harboring doubts about Joe Biden’s mental acuity, watch the interview of President Biden by John Harwood only ten days before special counsel interviewed Joe Biden. The interview is here: ProPublica Interviews President Biden (youtube.com). The twenty-minute interview demonstrates that Robert Hur completely mischaracterized President Biden’s mental sharpness. If you have doubts about President Biden, please watch the entire interview.

Finally, I urge you to read the letter from Dr. Jill Biden sent to Biden supporters posted by Simon Rosenberg in Hopium Chronicles. In her eloquent letter, Dr. Biden addresses the heartless slander of Robert Hur’s report. She writes, in part,

I don’t know what this Special Counsel was trying to achieve. We should give everyone grace, and I can’t imagine someone would try to use our son’s death to score political points. If you’ve experienced a loss like that, you know that you don’t measure it in years -- you measure it in grief.

Jill Biden speaks the truth. Similar to the experiences of many readers, I was in the hospice room with my mom when she passed away. I can’t tell you the day of the week, the month, or even the year of her passing as I write this newsletter. I can tell you who was in the room when my mom passed. I know where everyone was sitting or standing. I know her last words. I remember her last breath. I can recall the clinical smell of the room, the IV needles in her arm that controlled her pain, and the ice chips we gave her to quench her thirst. But I cannot remember the date on the calendar when she breathed her last.

I have no doubt that Robert Hur would mock me for remembering the grief of the moment but not the date. He is a cruel and heartless man serving the political interests of an aspiring fascist—as are the vapid anchors and celebrity journalists who mindlessly repeat his slander without having read the report or considered the circumstances of Beau Biden’s death or Joe Biden’s enormous responsibilities every day for the last forty years.

---

Concluding Thoughts.

I am confident that the Biden campaign will get past the special counsel’s slander. Why? Because as the candidates make hundreds of campaign appearances, Biden’s mental fitness will compare favorably to Trump’s. Moreover, as the South Carolina rally on Saturday demonstrated, Trump will make outrageous statements every time he speaks. He will continue to do so—and will become more extreme as the campaign wears on. Joe Biden’s campaign operation is hammering Trump daily—and it is setting Trump's fragile ego aflame.

Meanwhile, we must keep the faith. Hur’s report has shaken some readers. I received about a dozen “I give up emails” over the weekend. While I understand feelings of anxiety, we can’t give up or collapse in defeatism. Instead, we must take a cue from Republicans: They suffer body blows each week inflicted by the bizarre behavior of the most corrupt and dangerous candidate in our nation’s history, but they continue their support for him unabated.

We are in a significantly stronger position with a good and decent man who has been a successful president. Surely, Joe Biden deserves the same fierce loyalty Republicans give to Trump.

Finally, to be blunt, this fight isn’t about Joe Biden. Today, a reader sent an email criticizing me for showing “unmitigated support” for Joe Biden. I told him that he was mistaken. I am showing unqualified support for democracy.

At this moment in our history, supporting democracy means doing absolutely everything we can to re-elect Joe Biden. His gaffes and mistakes and age matter not a whit. He is a surrogate for democracy. If you aren’t supporting Joe Biden with every ounce of will you can muster, you are failing our democracy in its hour of need. It’s that simple.

Talk to you tomorrow!