,
8 tweets,
7 min read
Read on Twitter
NatSec Republicans were first to forcefully speak out against Trump's nomination, including some who knew they would've been on the shortlist for top posts if he won.
And they've stuck to it--with good reason--even as so many other Republicans abandoned their supposed principles.
And they've stuck to it--with good reason--even as so many other Republicans abandoned their supposed principles.
Worth looking back at this remarkable letter from NatSec Republicans, dated Mar 6, 2016. Coordinated by @EliotACohen (top adviser to Condi Rice at State). Signatories include @KoriSchake (NSC and State under GWBush, top adviser to McCain) and @RadioFreeTom
warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-l…
warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-l…
@EliotACohen @KoriSchake @RadioFreeTom The letter struck me as remarkable at the time. GOP NatSec experts, many who served under Reagan, HW Bush, and/or W Bush, denouncing likely GOP nominee.
Can't think of anything like it from either party. (Then again, I can't think of any nominee besides Trump who'd warrant it.)
Can't think of anything like it from either party. (Then again, I can't think of any nominee besides Trump who'd warrant it.)
@EliotACohen @KoriSchake @RadioFreeTom The letter's warnings--which many outside of the GOP were making too--have proven prescient.
Such as these three: Trump's admiration for foreign dictators, especially Putin, his fundamental dishonesty, and his belief that what works in business will work in foreign policy.
Such as these three: Trump's admiration for foreign dictators, especially Putin, his fundamental dishonesty, and his belief that what works in business will work in foreign policy.
@EliotACohen @KoriSchake @RadioFreeTom In office, Trump has treated alliances like a protection racket, weakening various alliances.
The most egregious is with South Korea, where he's repeatedly argued that they should pay the US (rather than just cover most of the basing costs) while he also cozies up to North Korea.
The most egregious is with South Korea, where he's repeatedly argued that they should pay the US (rather than just cover most of the basing costs) while he also cozies up to North Korea.
@EliotACohen @KoriSchake @RadioFreeTom Warnings on border and trade wars were, if anything, understated.
On the border, Trump's abused power, moving funds Congress did not authorize, and deploying military on US soil to help sell a lie about NatSec threats.
And trade wars hurt geopolitically, not just economically.
On the border, Trump's abused power, moving funds Congress did not authorize, and deploying military on US soil to help sell a lie about NatSec threats.
And trade wars hurt geopolitically, not just economically.
@EliotACohen @KoriSchake @RadioFreeTom One warning that hasn't fully panned out is about how Trump "swings from isolationism to military adventurism."
His rhetoric does. But he's refrained from adventurism (so far). This means he's trashed US credibility with empty threats--Venezuela, Iran--but it could be worse.
His rhetoric does. But he's refrained from adventurism (so far). This means he's trashed US credibility with empty threats--Venezuela, Iran--but it could be worse.
@EliotACohen @KoriSchake @RadioFreeTom Reviewing March 2016 warnings from GOP NatSec leaders shows
1) Always should've taken Trump literally, not just seriously
2) He's terrible at NatSec/foreign policy, and in ways we saw coming
3) Much of GOP scrapped principles--free trade, constitutionalism--to support Trump
(END)
1) Always should've taken Trump literally, not just seriously
2) He's terrible at NatSec/foreign policy, and in ways we saw coming
3) Much of GOP scrapped principles--free trade, constitutionalism--to support Trump
(END)
