A decision with limited immediate consequences could have more impact over the long run in elevating the role of the president’s lawyers in future conflicts with Congress.
Latest in White House
We all remember the conclusions of the January 2017 Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) report:
The White House has released a memorandum of President Trump's July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The document is available here and below.
There is no reason to doubt that in seeking reelection, President Trump will consider once more breaking or skirting laws or ethical limits to win. He has already proclaimed a willingness to accept campaign support from a foreign government, retreating only somewhat under public pressure.
Former White House Counsel Donald McGahn had his work cut out for him as legal adviser to this particular president, and his successor, Pat A. Cipollone, cannot expect an easier time. Among the looming challenges: whatever comes of special counsel Mueller’s investigation and, if the Democrats regain control of the House of Representatives, the potential institution of impeachment proceedings.
The White House released the National Strategy for Counterterrorism on Oct. 4. It is the first such strategy to be released since the publication of the Obama administration’s strategy in 2011. The full document can be read below.
Two good government groups, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the Government Accountability Project, have written to the Office of Special Counsel requesting an investigation into White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer's comments on the draft State Department dissent memo regarding the President'
Focusing on what's truly important in the many challenges facing America, President Trump got right to work picking a fight with reality over the size of the crowd at his inauguration. And yesterday, White House spokesman Sean Spicer kicked up a firestorm by berating the media for its reporting on inauguration attendance.
Editor's Note: Most national security bureaucracies regularly go through time-consuming reviews and strategic planning exercises. Are these efforts valuable? Jordan Tama of American University argues that they are – at least some of the time and under select conditions. Reviews can change policy when an external crisis or failure challenges existing policy and when the president or other senior leaders are directly involved. In addition, they can help bureaucracies achieve buy-in and otherwise sort themselves out.