The FBI's Search of Mar-a-Lago Is a Reminder That Trump Has Always Been a National Security Threat
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
DANGER IN POWER
The former president was the most dangerous person in the world when he held power, and he never had respect for the rule of law.
David Rothkopf
Updated Aug. 09, 2022 5:46PM ET / Published Aug. 09, 2022 2:10PM ET 
Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast
This week we have been forcefully reminded that Donald Trump was, and is, a national security risk unlike any the United States has ever faced.
The FBI search of Trump's Florida retreat, Mar-a-Lago, and the revelations of details of his war with America's generals as detailed in a preview of a new book from the New Yorker' s Susan Glasser and New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker, underscored yet again that Trump, as president, posed a unique threat. The flaws in his character, his ignorance of and contempt for our laws and institutions, and his dubious loyalties made him the most dangerous and powerful man in the world.
And that threat remains, as he seems likely to run for president for a third time. In many ways, it's even more grave as Trump and his supporters grow increasingly brazen in their embrace of ideas that could render the nation unable to protect itself against him in the future.
Republican howls of protest in the wake of the FBI's search of Trump's Florida residence were as loud as they were cynical, hypocritical, and irresponsible.
They knew full well that Trump had illegally removed classified documents from the White House—because not only was it acknowledged, but some of the documents were returned. They knew that to conduct such an operation, the FBI had to obtain a warrant from a judge, demonstrate that there was probable cause that a crime was committed, and almost certainly clear a higher bar than usual both within the Department of Justice and in the court because the target of the search was a former president. They were also aware that there was a clear pattern of destruction of records within the Trump administration in its final days and that credible reports suggested that Trump on a regular basis destroyed documents that he by law should have preserved, sometimes by flushing them down the toilet.
"While the revelation that he condemned generals for not being as loyal to him as Hitler's generals were to the Nazi leader has garnered the most headlines, Trump's problems with military leadership ran much deeper."
They knew all this but they complained nonetheless because their playbook in such situations is to deflect and project. Facts be damned. Hence, we had statements like House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy warning Attorney General Garland to "preserve documents" and prepare for an investigation into how he had politicized the Department of Justice—an exquisite twofer of simultaneous projection and deflection.
Similarly, the hue and cry about politicization of the FBI and the Department of Justice was equal parts cynicism and hypocrisy. Trump ran for office, after all, calling for FBI investigations into the handling of classified information on the part of his opponent, Hillary Clinton. (The "lock her up" chant was a mainstay of Trump's 2016 campaign rallies.) And as president, Trump sought to blackmail a foreign power by improperly using the resources of the U.S. government to dig up dirt on his next opponent, Joe Biden, and Biden's family. In other words, Trump and his party were the ones guilty of politicizing the administration of justice by pursuing largely baseless investigations.
Perhaps most significant is the gross irresponsibility of the GOP defenses of Trump—their complete renunciation of any claim they once had on being a party that stood for strong U.S. national security.
Trump has been a multi-faceted national security threat since he arrived on the national stage.
President Donald Trump and Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov shake hands as they meet in the Oval Office on May 10, 2017.
Russia Foreign Minister Press Office/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images
It is an indisputable fact that he reached out to a foreign enemy to help him win the 2016 election. He compromised U.S. national security by naming a national security adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn, about whose foreign ties he had been warned, and who would last only days in office and would later lie to the FBI. Trump again compromised our security when he provided classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador during an infamous spring 2017 Oval Office meeting. He did so again by pushing through clearances for members of his family, including his daughter Ivanka and her husband Jared, who career officials said should not receive them. Then there were Trump's off-the-record discussions with Vladimir Putin, and his casual discussion of classified information at parties at Mar-a-Lago—which made it a target of foreign spy operations. And he appointed unqualified political hacks, sometimes illegally, to top national security positions including atop the intelligence community.
Further, as Glasser and Baker's reporting again confirms, Trump's relationship with military leaders was fraught—because his ideas were so dangerous to U.S. interests.
While the revelation that he condemned generals for not being as loyal to him as Hitler's generals were to the Nazi leader has garnered the most headlines, Trump's problems with military leadership ran much deeper.
1174310091
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army General Mark A. Milley listens while U.S. President Donald Trump speaks before a meeting with senior military leaders in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington, DC on October 7, 2019.
Brendan Smialowski / AFP via Getty Images
The New Yorker article details how General Mark Milley—a man who regularly battled with Trump over his desire to use the military to achieve domestic political objectives—nearly resigned rather than continue to deal with an unhinged president. But other reports—such as those found in former Defense Secretary Mark Esper's book, and those gathered while I was researching my upcoming book American Resistance —note that the national security risks included dangerous ideas like promising to leave NATO during his second term, contemplating launching missile attacks against approaching "caravans" in Mexico, coming close to war with North Korea, and considering the use of the military to seize election machines during his coup attempt.
Fortunately, as Glasser and Baker note, "Trump's generals" rejected his dangerous ideas as resolutely as they dismissed his emulation of the Third Reich.
Once again, just as national archives officials triggered the investigation into Trump's mishandling of classified information, the career professionals in the U.S. government served as the public's last line of defense against a rogue president. They put the law and their oath to the Constitution first. That is why Trump and other GOP leaders are so committed to a plan to make it easier to fire such officials should they reclaim power.
Why? Precisely because their goal is to politicize the entire government, to place party loyalty ahead of loyalty to the country, to do exactly what they are dishonestly arguing is happening today.
This is a step toward authoritarianism, and a step away from a system of government in which no one is above the law—our current system, which we saw in action in Florida this week. But it is even worse when those who would lead such an eviscerated autocratic state are known to pose, as Trump does, the gravest sort of national security risk. It would be bad enough to see democracy fall. But if it falls to Trump, an inevitable consequence would be that the U.S. would become weaker, our enemies stronger, and the danger to each and every American would grow both from home and from abroad.
For precisely that reason, we should tune out the cheap political theatrics of the GOP. And we must hope that this week's lawful search at Mar-a-Lago is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to efforts to reveal his crimes and hold him accountable for them.
Tags
Who is online
93 visitors
Two of Donald Trump's campaign managers (Roger Stone and Paul Manafort) and his first National Security Advisor (Michael Flynn) were convicted and subsequently pardoned by Trump for lying about and spying for our foreign enemies. Joe McCartney's number one henchman Roy Cohn had three special protege, Stone, Manafort and Trump. Now, throw in Steve Bannon, Steven Miller and Alex Jones...
What? Me Worry? More like, what would not and could not go wrong?
wo of Donald Trump's campaign managers (Roger Stone and Paul Manafort) and his first National Security Advisor (Michael Flynn) were convicted and subsequently pardoned by Trump for lying about and spying for our foreign enemie
That's not true at all.
It is true, every single word.
I know...
By all means, try and prove your made up allegations. That would be fun.
We're not the ones making shit up.
Notice how they DON'T say exactly what Manafort, Stone and Gen Flynn were "convicted" of? I guess omission of that is an attempt (and failure) on the part of the left to push this fictitious narrative.
Do you actually defend Manafort, Stone and Flynn ? Do you know anything at all about those people?
Do you?
yep
That's the game. They just make shit up because reality doesn't help their argument.
I know Michael Flynn recited a Q Anon slogan on video on social media ('Where we go one , we go all"). Thats all I need to know. It is far too specific a reference to be coincidental. I know he advocated that Trump install martial law after the 2020 election in order to facilitate his stealing the election.
I know Roger Stone is a serial liar who was a semi-regular co-host on Alex Jones conspiracy factory Infowars.
I know Manafort sold US political election polling information, some of it private , to a Russian out of greed and financial desperation. Manafort did this by the way, while he was Trump's 2016 campaign manager.
Are you seriously defending the reputation of these assholes?
So the Three Musketeers were Q too.................../s
So, Q Anon took a three musketeers slogan from the 18th century and ruined it forever. Good catch.
I know you aren't being forthcoming with ALL the information. Just enough to keep your narrative going.
Roger Stone and Paul Manafort were both convicted and both pardoned by Trump.
Michael Flynn plead guilty to lying to federal authorities but was pardoned before his legal problems (investigation on the DoJ order to dismiss the case) ended in conviction.
Your ' not true at all' must be simply taking nit-picky exception to the wording ' lying about and spying for our foreign enemies ' as an editorial on the allegations in the Russian Probe because these men were indeed pardoned by Trump and all were caught up in the Russian Probe.
JBB's point was about the abuse of power by Trump.
OH NO!!!!! TAKE HIM TO THE GALLOWS!!!!! Give me a fucking break. I've heard that slogan used referring the Soldiers and units LONG before Q Anon. You do know Flynn was a General in the US Military don't you? If you're going to throw a hissy fit at least throw one over something more substantial
So he's just like the politicians. But was that what he was "convicted" of? No it wasn't.
But was that what he was "convicted" of? No. it's just something else for you to cry over.
nit-picky exception to the wording ' lying about and spying for our foreign enemi
Lol. That sounds like an argument Trump would make.
He lied about what they were convicted for and falsely accused them of spying for foreign countries.
Sure, that's "nitpicky" to point out those lies. Is that your standard? You just make shit it up and its okay if the lies support your "point"
And to think this all stems from the the Democrats disbelief that they lost to the FNG and used their version of the Gestapo (FBI) to break the law and obtain warrants.
Makes me wonder if they lied to the judge to get the warrants for this weeks raid.
I did not make anything up. I cited the two sources for the content of my comment.
Instead of just qualifying what you found wrong since clearly you are incorrect to say that JBBs comment is "not true at all" you immediately resort to making this personal. Illustrates that your position is weak.
Ultimately you take exception to how JBB characterized the charges. Yeah, that is nit-picky given JBBs point was not the legal specifics of the charges but rather the abuse of power by Trump.
The original claim that those three were pardoned for spying for foreign enemies and lying about it is 100% false.
Illustrates that your position is weak.
No. the way to prove my position is weak it by demonstrating that the thee people at issues were convicted of spying for foreign enemies.
You know, by using facts and not making things up.
Yeah, that is nit-picky
lol sure .It's nitpicky to object to falsely accusing someone of being a traitor. I look forward to you objecting to any attempt to correct slurs about Biden.
[deleted]
I did not make that claim. Get your facts straight Sean.
Yeah, I hold that it is nit-picky by definition to focus on aspects of a comment that are irrelevant to the point made.
Your comment "not at all true" which you applied to JBBs comment in its entirety is demonstrably false; and I demonstrated it.
And you continue to make it personal instead of just dealing with the content.
Before he became 'president' he was a known national security threat.
With the trumpturd - Hillary was right - all roads lead to Russia
hopefully it's 5 years in prison for each classified document in his possession or that he destroyed.
It's nice to have dreams.
It's sad when you have to spam your own articles like this.
Beginning by at least 2014 and continuing right up to election day in 2016 Donald Trump was in secret negotiations with clandestine agents of Russian State Intelligence Services to build Trump Tower Moscow. He even went so far as to offer Vlad Putin a luxury penthouse as a bribe. If that was not colluding with Putin I'd like to know what is. Give me a break!
Ooooh, secret negotiations!!
How did you become aware of these top-secret meetings?
What did you personally learn that somehow Meuller could not?
You remember the "Big Talking Head" from 3rd Rock From the Sun? That's how they get all their information.
An FBI gone rogue and 87,000 IRS agents to audit the the inflation stricken poor and middle class is a greater threat to our democracy and freedoms than anything else.
All this foolish exercise did was to strengthen Trump and fire up his supporters....of which I am NOT one
time.com /6204928/irs-87000-agents-factcheck-biden/
No, Biden is Not Hiring 87,000 New IRS Agents
By Eric Cortellessa 7-8 minutes
S ince news broke on Monday that the FBI searched former President Donald Trump’s South Florida home, Republican members of Congress and right-wing media figures have launched a new line of attack against Democrats: that the Internal Revenue Service intends to use nearly $80 billion in new funding to pursue similar intrusions on average Americans. Those dollars, Trump allies are saying, will go toward the hiring of 87,000 new IRS agents.
“Do you make $75,000 or less?” tweeted House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. “Democrats’ new army of 87,000 IRS agents will be coming for you—with 710,000 new audits for Americans who earn less than $75k.” Richard Grenell, Trump’s former Acting Director of National Intelligence, wrote on the social media platform: “The FBI raids Trump’s house and the Democrats vote to add 87,000 new IRS agents to go after Americans. Wake up, America.”
Other high-profile conservatives have insinuated that the Biden administration intends to direct those additional auditors to dig up dirt on the President’s political opponents. “After todays raid on Mar A Lago what do you think the left plans to use those 87,000 new IRS agents for?” tweeted Sen. Marco Rubio.
It’s a notion that has taken off like wildfire , signaling what is likely to be a prominent broadside from Republicans against Democrats in the midterm elections.
There’s only one problem. It’s not true.
The Inflation Reduction Act , a landmark climate, health care and tax package that passed the Senate on Sunday and is expected to head to Biden’s desk after the House approves it on Friday, includes roughly $78 billion for the IRS to be phased in over 10 years. A Treasury Department report from May 2021 estimated that such an investment would enable the agency to hire roughly 87,000 employees by 2031. But most of those hires would not be Internal Revenue agents, and wouldn’t be new positions.
According to a Treasury Department official, the funds would cover a wide range of positions including IT technicians and taxpayer services support staff, as well as experienced auditors who would be largely tasked with cracking down on corporate and high-income tax evaders.
“It is wholly inaccurate to describe any of these resources as being about increasing audit scrutiny of the middle class or small businesses,” Natasha Sarin , a counselor for tax policy and implementation at the Treasury Department, tells TIME.
At the same time, more than half of the agency’s current employees are eligible for retirement and are expected to leave the agency within the next five years. “There’s a big wave of attrition that’s coming and a lot of these resources are just about filling those positions,” says Sarin, an economist who has studied tax avoidance extensively and who was tapped by the Biden administration to beef up the IRS’s auditing power.
In all, the IRS might net roughly 20,000 to 30,000 more employees from the new funding, enough to restore the tax-collecting agency’s staff to where it was roughly a decade ago.
The IRS currently has roughly 78,000 employees. According to John Koskinen, who served as IRS commissioner from 2013 to 2017, that’s down from around 100,000 when he first started. By the time he resigned four years later, he said, it was clear that the agency was in the grip of a systematic attempt by the GOP to weaken it.
They're still planning on going after the little guy.
hey're still planning on going after the little guy.
Yep, waitresses, landscapers, nannies. They are in trouble.
Democrats voted against language that would prevent the new hires from being used to target people making under $400,000
So people making under 400k should be able to lie on tax returns?
No one said that.
Sure, let's ALL pretend THAT is what he wrote.
SMMFH
Why else would the IRS go after people?
So then why would the IRS target people?
What does that have to do with your question in post 4.1.3?
2+2=...
Why should legislation be made that the IRS cannot go after people making under 400k.
As far as I can tell, the only reason the agency would go after people is tax fraud.
2 + 2 =
You asked the question as if he had claimed that.
it was intellectually lazy to attempt to argue something he never said, and now you are just covering your tracks.
What is intellectually lazy is the spin I am seeing over something so simple.
Tell me this, why else would the agency go after people as your friends claim?
Is there another reason I am missing here?
The Treasury Secretary has directed all agents to NOT go after people making less than 400k/yr. You're incredibly bad at this.
You are making shit up, again.
Yellen tells IRS not to increase middle-class audits if it gets more funding
Why not just tell me why you asked the question as if that was something the poster claimed?
Lol. Sure. We should trust a PR statement that has no binding authority and ignore the Democrats vote against an actual law prohibiting the IRS from using the additional money to go after people making less 400,000 a year.
Sure, its the high income people and fortune 500 companies who participate in the cash economy that causes the majority of lost taxes. If only those billionaires reported their tips!
So the poster claimed the agency was going after people. I say, way shouldn't they?
And you come back with things that don't even make sense...
" Marc Goldwein, an economist with the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said getting people to pay what they owe is not the same as raising their taxes.
“Every single president from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump has supported more IRS funding to close the tax gap,” Goldwein said.
The main tax increase in Democrats’ bill is a 15% minimum tax on the 200 or so corporations with profits in excess of $1 billion, projected to raise an estimated $313 billion over a decade."
Republicans Decry Democrats’ Push For IRS Crackdown On Tax Evasion | HuffPost Latest News
The Republicans whining about this bill are really just trying their best to protect their corporate donors.
Guess I should have included a sarc tag.
Gee, then that really makes your response rather strange.
Here it is:
Since he didn't say or write anything of the sort, then yes you are deflecting.
What bullshit. My lord. I am beginning to think understanding simple things is a bridge too far.
Your posts certainly support your thinking,
Says the one that has nothing. But do continue on. Shows everyone what an empty vessel looks like.
I am responsible for what I say, not for what you understand.
Sounds like you are irresponsible then, no ?
Some leftist sycophants forget or ignore the Lois Lerner scandals.
Seriously, what in the fuck have you imagined you have heard now?
I am safe by a wide margin.
That you don't have EZ-PASS and since the bridge WAS too far, you're attempting to tunnel under the sick bay to reach the other Bridge, where you attempt to play rummy while rubbing your tummy as your blind following of the Lying GOP that enabled a LYING Trump to dump a LARGE LOAD OFR CRAP directly on you and your buds to consume, so congratrs Tex, eat up, and digest the crap you've been Fed, you all deserve every morsel....
The former president was the most dangerous person in the world when he held power, and he never had respect for the rule of law.
Breaking news suggests this is about to get much, much worse.
Yes the end is nigh...
Actually nothing should be called breaking news anymore. It should be called breaking conjecture. I understand even the new head of cnn sees the over use of breaking news on everything