The four American Green Berets who died in Niger. We'll look at the mission, and the uproar over President Trump's comments on their deaths.
A team transfers the remains of Army Staff Sgt. Dustin Wright upon arrival at Dover Air Force Base, Del. (Staff Sgt. Aaron J. Jenne/U.S. Air Force via AP)
Two weeks ago, in a remote part of North Africa you probably never think about, in Niger, a dozen US troops were wrapping up a meeting with village leaders when all hell broke loose. An ambush, we’re told. By ISIS-linked fighters. It got fierce in a hurry. When it was over, four American Green Berets were dead. For twelve days, there was silence on the deaths from President Trump. When he did speak, all hell broke loose, again. This hour, On Point: What happened in Niger, and the President on military deaths. --Tom Ashbrook
CNN: U.S. Has Drones And Hundreds Of Troops In Niger — Here's Why -- "The killing of four American soldiers in Niger has drawn attention to the role of US troops in western Africa, where several terror networks roam freely. In the region, the US has enemies all around. Niger shares a border with Mali, where an al Qaeda affiliate and other Islamist groups thrive in the vast desert. It also borders Libya, where ISIS and other extremists are regrouping, and Nigeria, where Boko Haram is a major challenge."
The Atlantic: Why Trump Accused Obama Of Not Consoling The Families Of Fallen Sol... — "Those comments join Trump with many of his predecessors, who have also spoken publicly about the burden of sending troops into battle, and the wrenching process of speaking with the families of slain servicemembers. But then Trump went on to suggest that other presidents hadn’t done what he did."
Washington Post: Fallen Soldier's Mother: 'Trump Did Disrespect My Son' -- "Sgt. La David T. Johnson's mother, Cowanda Jones-Johnson, told The Washington Post that she was present during the call from the White House on Tuesday to Johnson's widow, Myeshia Johnson. Johnson's mother also stood by an account of the call from Rep. Frederica S. Wilson (D-Fla.) that Trump told Johnson's widow that her husband 'must have known what he signed up for.'"
Russia’s official news agency photographed President Trump’s meeting with Sergey V. Lavrov in the Oval Office on Wednesday. The American press was denied access.Credit Alexander Shcherbak/TASS, via Getty Images
WASHINGTON — When President Trump met with top Russian officials in the Oval Office on Wednesday, White House officials barred reporters from witnessing the moment. They apparently preferred to block coverage of the awkwardly timed visit as questions swirled about whether the president had dismissed his F.B.I. director in part to squelch the investigation into possible ties between his campaign and Moscow.
But the Russians, who have a largely state-run media, brought their own press contingent in the form of an official photographer. They quickly filled the vacuum with their own pictures of the meeting with Mr. Trump, Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, and Sergey I. Kislyak, Moscow’s ambassador to the United States.
Within minutes of the meeting, the Foreign Ministry had posted photographs on Twitter of Mr. Trump and Mr. Lavrov smiling and shaking hands. The Russian embassy posted images of the president grinning and gripping hands with the ambassador. Tass, Russia’s official news agency, released more photographs of the three men laughing together in the Oval Office.
The White House released nothing.
The result was a public relations coup of sorts for Russia and Mr. Lavrov in particular, who not only received a collegial Oval Office welcome from the president, but the photographic evidence to prove it. By contrast, when Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson traveled to Moscow last month, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia kept him waiting for hours before granting him an audience at the Kremlin. Then, too, Mr. Tillerson left his American press contingent behind.
The historic moments, head-spinning developments and inside-the-White House intrigue.
Conservatives, With Bannon’s Help, Look for Revenge in Mississippi OCT 21
McCain in Twilight: An Unfettered Voice Against Trumpism OCT 21
Conflicting Accounts in Niger Ambush Are Subject of Pentagon Investigation OCT 20
Kelly, in Defending Trump Call, Holds Up Military as an Elite Class OCT 20
Yellen Says Reduction of Bond Portfolio Going Well OCT 20
With Awkward Timing, Trump Meets Top Russian Official MAY 10, 2017
Days Before Firing, Comey Asked for More Resources for Russia Inquiry MAY 10, 2017
Mr. Kislyak has figured prominently in the furor surrounding the Trump team’s contacts with Moscow. It was conversations between the ambassador and Michael T. Flynn, the president’s former national security adviser, that ultimately led to Mr. Flynn’s ouster in February, ostensibly because he had lied to Vice President Mike Pence about whether the two had discussed United States sanctions on Russia. The White House had not divulged that Mr. Kislyak was to be present at Wednesday’s meeting.
What you need to know to start your day, delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday.
Mr. Trump’s session with Mr. Lavrov was listed on his schedule as “Closed Press,” meaning the news media would not have a chance to photograph or otherwise document the meeting. “Our official photographer and their official photographer were present — that’s it,” a White House aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity, lacking authorization to describe the ground rules.
The difference, of course, is that while official White House photographers have broad access to the president, their presence is not considered a substitute for that of independent news media, which routinely request and secure access to official presidential movements and meetings so they can obtain their own images and produce their own reports. In Russia, where the independent news media are severely limited, there is no such regular press access to government officials apart from state-controlled organizations.
On Wednesday morning, when the American press pool was assembled unexpectedly in the West Wing, reporters thought that White House officials might have reconsidered and decided to allow a glimpse of Mr. Trump’s meeting with the Russians after all. But instead, they were allowed into the Oval Office for a few moments to cover another, previously undisclosed meeting: between Mr. Trump and Henry Kissinger, the Nixon administration’s secretary of state.
Former White House officials were left to wonder about the security implications of having allowed a Russian photographer unfettered access to the American president’s office.
Colin H. Kahl, the former national security adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., took to Twitter to pose what he called a “deadly serious” question: “Was it a good idea to let a Russian gov photographer & all their equipment into the Oval Office?”
Chief of Staff John Kelly made an emotional defense of the president's conversations with gold star families. Will it quell criticism? Steve Inskeep talks to Johan Goldberg of the National Review.
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Three public figures in the past day have faced some of the most basic American questions - who we are, what we value, what we honor. Two former presidents stepped back onstage to address American politics, bigotry and nativism. And then there's the current president's chief of staff, who asked if anything in America is still held sacred. John Kelly described a phone call, President Trump's call to the widow of a fallen soldier. Kelly denounced a Democratic congresswoman for listening in to that call and also tried to explain what the president meant when he said he knew what he signed up for.
JOHN KELLY: He knew what he was getting himself into because he enlisted. There's no reason to enlist. He enlisted. And he was where he wanted to be - exactly where he wanted to be with exactly the people he wanted to be with when his life was taken.
INSKEEP: Kelly appealed to reporters in the room to hold wartime sacrifice as sacred. That is the beginning of our discussion with Jonah Goldberg, who's here once again. He's from National Review.
JONAH GOLDBERG: Hey, Steve. It's great to be here.
INSKEEP: Let's start with the man at the podium. What gives him such authority on this topic?
GOLDBERG: Well, he's a decorated former Marine - or I guess you're always a Marine. And he's not only a Gold Star father - his son was killed in action...
GOLDBERG: ...But he's made these phone calls many, many, many times. And he sort of exudes this moral authority on these issues.
INSKEEP: Although it's strange in this case in that he is explaining a statement that, for all we know, the president made awkwardly on this phone call, but explaining what it meant, why it was a legitimate thing to try to say. But it's a statement that the president himself repeatedly has denied that he said.
GOLDBERG: Yeah. Look, we are used to a lot of these sorts of stories where Donald Trump steps on his own message, that he muddies the waters, he revives issues that everyone hopes were put to bed. This seems a whole new category of it. The White House Spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders said that this conversation didn't happen the way the congresswoman described, that Donald Trump did have proof. Then General Kelly comes out and basically confirms the story. If you actually look at the text of what he says...
GOLDBERG: ...He basically says that what the family said is true.
INSKEEP: And this is what it meant and what it should have meant.
GOLDBERG: And then he tried to put it in context. And the clear implication was that Donald Trump basically just fell flat when he was trying to express his condolences. But the message that he was giving was one that he had gotten from people like General Kelly. And so the whole episode, I think, is incredibly ugly. And I have nothing but sympathy for the family. But what Kelly essentially was trying to do is clean this up and put it to bed.
And then Donald Trump once - as is his fashion, tweeted last night and made this a big partisan food fight again...
INSKEEP: And repeated that the Democratic congresswoman had lied about this.
GOLDBERG: ...And said that Wilson was lying and that this was all untrue and that it was completely fabricated - fake news, fake news, fake news. And it does call to mind how General Kelly last week in a press conference had said his only frustration in the job is reading things in the press that aren't true. And I always thought, look, I think he's a man of honor and integrity. But that could not possibly be true.
GOLDBERG: And I think this story demonstrates why.
INSKEEP: Well, the general, while he was at the podium, also expressed broader concerns about the direction of the country - in a sense, an old-time conservative view of the country and the direction of things. Let's listen.
KELLY: You know, when I was a kid growing up, a lot of things were sacred in our country. Women were sacred and looked upon with great honor. That's obviously not the case anymore, as we see from recent cases. Life, the dignity of life was sacred. That's gone. Religion - that seems to be gone as well.
INSKEEP: And he goes on to say respect for Gold Star families is gone, too. Is he right about all that?
GOLDBERG: I think he's overstating it. And I think the partisan thrust of it - like, somehow this is all coming from one direction - is misguided as well. It's very difficult to listen to some of that indictment and not think how squarely it falls on the commander in chief. And - but I think a lot of people were willing to let all of that go in the apparently vain hope of putting this story to bed 'cause nobody likes this story. Nobody likes politicizing Gold Star families. This should be - there should be an absolute zone of sanctity and privacy around this part of life.
INSKEEP: And we think about some of these statements like women were sacred, looked upon with great honor. I think you could talk to a lot of people who would say that women were worse treated in the past and it's just that we talk more openly about what happens to women, what is done to women.
Two presidents, we mentioned, also spoke yesterday - one of them, President Obama. He spoke in Virginia and New Jersey. And he said, when you divide the country to win, you can't govern afterward. And then there's George W. Bush, who said this in New York.
GEORGE W. BUSH: We've seen our discourse degraded by casual cruelty. At times, it can seem like the forces pulling us apart are stronger than the forces binding us together. Argument turns too easily into animosity.
INSKEEP: Was this a speech aimed at President Trump, even though the president was not named?
GOLDBERG: I think President Trump clearly falls within the larger indictment that George W. Bush was laying down. I actually thought the speech, when you read the whole thing or when you listen to the whole thing, was a very well-crafted piece of patriotic statesmanship. He's talking about the decline of democracy in Europe. He's talking about the decline of, essentially, what we used to call the vital center in American politics, the idea of deliberative democracy, of respect for other people, of human dignity.
INSKEEP: I'm trying not to laugh as you say deliberative democracy.
INSKEEP: We're pretty far from it at the moment. Go on.
GOLDBERG: I agree. I agree. And it's sort of like the Edsel. We can be nostalgic for it.
INSKEEP: (Laughter) It was a fine car.
GOLDBERG: (Laughter) And I think that the message was very clearly aimed at part in Trump. But it was a much broader thing. And I think a lot of Bush's former staffers and aides are quick to point out that this was a message that George W. Bush had given many times over many years. But it has new resonance simply because of the partisan nature and the atmosphere that Trump has created.
INSKEEP: Was President Obama right to say that if you divide in your campaign in order to win, you can't govern afterward?
GOLDBERG: I think he's certainly right that it creates a problem. If you demonize a vast chunk of the American electorate - whichever direction - while you're campaigning, saying it's us versus those guys, it's very difficult to get those guys back into the governing coalition when you want to be president for the entire country.
INSKEEP: Jonah, always a pleasure talking with you.
GOLDBERG: Hey, it's great to be here. Thank you.
INSKEEP: That's Jonah Goldberg of National Review and the LA Times.