The First Step of Many

Update to the Threatening Presidency Watch

As I’m sure you heard, as of five days from writing this, the U.S. Navy launched and air strike against a Syrian airfield in response to Assad’s latest chemical attack. Talking politically about such a subject is in poor taste too soon after such an event. That has not stopped partisan media, however, which I feel is too soon. Unfortunately, I must be a hypocrite on that sentiment. My defense is that there are dangers that can sneak by while we adhere to the demands of empathy and patriotism. For me, that means I need to update the Trump Watch for a Threatening Presidency.

The rank has moved from Low to Medium:

• Attempt: Medium 
• Competence: Low -> Medium 
• No Check: High -> Medium 

Before I go further, let me clearly say that I tentatively support the President's actions in Syria. As of now, the attack was appropriate and well executed. I say 'tentatively' because we cannot know the full wisdom of such actions until we see the results and follow-up over time.

Having said that, let me now get into why it raises the risk of a Threatening Presidency. The simple answer is that it was a well-executed attack and military competence is a precursor to exactly the kind of increased power political leaders use to harm their own people. This is why I moved the Competence rating from Low to Medium. As I pointed out before, the dilemma of wanting competent leadership over the next 4 to 8 years is that it makes a Threatening Presidency possible. Military competence is the greatest threat because the President can achieve it unilaterally and the support of the military is a requirement for the most dangerous threats, such as a government overthrow or civil war.

Ok, that sounded pretty disturbing, but don't panic (yet). There are many many steps before we get to that point. And that is the reason for me doing this kind of Trump Watch so we can keep a balanced assessment without devolving into a panic. Furthermore, at the same time, the failure AHCA, republican senators’ current behavior in the Russian investigation, and the recusal of Rep. Nunes are all indications that the let me lower the No Check rank from High to Medium.

To clarify, let me talk about the Syrian strike in terms of good and bad news.

The Good News First

1. The Syrian strike was a conventional action. Reports are that President Trump relied on the advice of serious generals and not his inexperienced and ideologue advisors. The initial indication is that, at least, in military action, he will behave conventionally, which reduces chances of disaster and him using the military to promote a Threatening Presidency.
2. The worst of his supporters were put to the sideline. Reports are that Bannon influenced has decreased, and the attack is contrary to the political philosophy Bannon has been advocating. Lately, there have been some signals that Bannon's issues have been resolved, so it's too soon to tell. However, if Bannon continues to be distanced from the President, I would consider lowering the Attempt rank.
3. This is more evidence that the President "has a heart". I have no doubt that he is capable of viciousness, but remember that people are always more complicated than that. I've noticed for some time that he has not yet countered DACA. There are rumors and threats, but his hesitation, to me at least, suggests that when the President is confronted, in a personal way, with the harm he can do, he is drawn to decency. His response to the Syrian chemical attack is more evidence of this, and, hopefully, decency could stay his head from other actions. 

Now the Bad News

1. This could escalate. I won't get into all the ways the Syrian attack could make the situation worse. There's plenty of other articles detailing this. For our purposes, if our military engagement increases, this creates opportunities for the President to claim more power.
2. The President could learn a bad lesson. There's a good chance the President's approval will go up. Historically, it will not last long, and I doubt it will go beyond the high forties. However, there's about 20% of the population looking for any reason to feel better about the President. Given past behavior, this could lead the President to believe that any kind of military intervention helps him. Where that goes gets scary.
3. This is a return to the Imperial Presidency. Since the 1930s, the presidency has increased in power, especially in the use of military power. Now, this is something, only a portion of political junkies care about, and all presidents have added to this concern, including President Obama. But President H.W. Bush did make a step back by asking for congressional approval to enter the Gulf War. No President has conceded they must get approval, even though the Constitution clearly states so. However, presidents have made either a pretense of constitutionality, before issuing the attack, or directly asked for congressional approval. That President Trump did this unilaterally puts the Imperial Presidency back on track. Normally this would be just academic, but the concern was that if we continued to let the Presidency get unchecked power, one day we would get a president that truly abuses them. Well... 

There is a temptation to say that the attack on Syria was politically motivated. From my research, thus far, I have not found a case where a past president has use military action only to promote him politically. However, there are cases where they have done so to become president. (We now know that Nixon sabotaged Vietnam War peace talks to improve his chances of being elected.) With any other president, I would not have these concerns. Once assuming the office, the awesome responsibility of military action made them act under conventional norms. But, what we all agree on is that President Trump is unconventional.