ReportWire

Tag: Mark Milley

  • All the Top Trump Officials Warning Against Voting for Him

    All the Top Trump Officials Warning Against Voting for Him

    Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post/Getty Images

    Over the past few months, Donald Trump has racked up a number of prominent endorsements, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk and former campaign rival Robert F. Kennedy Jr. But the remaining weeks before Election Day have become defined by those whose support he lacks, namely several key members of his presidential administration. Former members of Trump’s Cabinet as well as high-ranking military leaders who reported to him have issued stark warnings about the possibility of a second Trump term, describing their former boss as “fascist” and “dangerous.” Here’s a look at the biggest names coming out against Trump as the election nears.

    He is a retired four-star Marine Corps general who first served as the secretary of Homeland Security before he became White House chief of staff for nearly two years. The two’s relationship soured during Kelly’s brief stint, with rumored reports of Kelly privately trashing Trump, though he denied them at the time. Recently, though, he’s made his negative feelings about Trump clearer. When asked if he believed Trump was a fascist, Kelly said the term seemed to fit him.

    “Certainly the former president is in the far-right area, he’s certainly an authoritarian, admires people who are dictators — he has said that. So he certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure,” he said in an interview with the New York Times.

    He told the Times that Trump “prefers the dictator approach to government,” adding that he “never accepted the fact that he wasn’t the most powerful man in the world — and by power, I mean an ability to do anything he wanted, anytime he wanted.”

    Kelly also confirmed reporting from other outlets that Trump had previously praised Adolf Hitler. “He commented more than once that, ‘You know, Hitler did some good things, too,’” Kelly told the Times.

    Kelly also confirmed The Atlantic’s reporting from 2020 that Trump had referred to World War II soldiers buried in France as “suckers” and “losers” during a 2018 visit, telling the outlet that wasn’t the only time Trump used those words. “President Trump used the terms suckers and losers to describe soldiers who gave their lives in the defense of our country. There are many, many people who have heard him say these things. The visit to France wasn’t the first time he said this,” he told the outlet this week.

    In his recently published book War, veteran journalist Bob Woodward cited comments from Mark Milley, who once served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In the book, Woodward writes that he ran into Milley, a source for a previous work, at a reception in 2023, where he expressed his growing concerns about Trump. “He is the most dangerous person ever. I had suspicions when I talked to you about his mental decline and so forth, but now I realize he’s a total fascist. He is now the most dangerous person to this country,” Milley told Woodward, per The Guardian. Woodward writes that Milley fears being recalled to uniform to be court-martialed under a second Trump administration, according to the Washington Post.

    In 2023, Milley took what many considered to be a swipe at Trump during his passionate resignation speech as the top U.S. general. “We are unique among the world’s militaries,” he said. “We don’t take an oath to a country, we don’t take an oath to a tribe, we don’t take an oath to a religion. We don’t take an oath to a king, or a queen, or a tyrant or a dictator.”

    In an interview on The Bulwark podcast, Woodward said that Milley’s words resonated with another former member of Trump’s administration: James Mattis, the retired four-star Marine Corps general who served as Trump’s first Defense secretary. According to Woodward, Mattis reached out to him via email, telling him that he agreed with Milley’s thoughts on Trump as recounted in his book.

    When asked if Mattis’s email was him backing the book’s warnings about a future second Trump term, Woodward said, “Yes, most certainly. And an endorsement of this process of trying to explicitly say, ‘Let’s make sure we don’t try to downplay the threat, because the threat is high.’”

    This is not the first time that Mattis has expressed his distaste for Trump. In a lengthy statement published by The Atlantic in June 2020, Mattis wrote, “Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort.”

    The former general was similarly scathing following the riot in the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, writing in a statement, “Today’s violent assault on our Capitol, an effort to subjugate American democracy by mob rule, was fomented by Mr. Trump. His use of the Presidency to destroy trust in our election and to poison our respect for fellow citizens has been enabled by pseudo political leaders whose names will live in infamy as profiles in cowardice.”

    In an interview on CNN earlier this month, the former Defense secretary was asked about recent comments made by Trump, suggesting he would use the military against American citizens that he deemed “the enemy within.” Esper said he believed that Trump would do such a thing.

    “Yes, I do, of course, because I lived through that, and I saw over the summer of 2020, where President Trump and those around him wanted to use the National Guard, in various capacities, in cities such as Chicago and Portland and Seattle,” he said.

    On the possibility of a future Trump presidency, Esper said he worries that it’ll look quite similar to his final year in office. “My concern is that the first year of the second Trump term will look more like the last year of the first Trump term,” he said. “I think President Trump has learned the key is getting people around you who will do your bidding, who will not push back, who will implement what you want to do. And I think he’s talked about that. His acolytes have talked about that. I think loyalty will be the first litmus test.”

    Esper, who was first sworn into office in July 2019, was fired by Trump via tweet shortly after the 2020 election. Earlier this year, Esper said he believed that Trump was a threat to American democracy. “I do regard him as a threat to democracy, democracy as we know it, our institutions, our political culture, all those things that make America great and have defined us as the oldest democracy on this planet.”

    Pence’s break with Trump was, of course, far more public than anyone else in the Trump administration: The former vice-president’s refusal to go along with Trump’s push to overturn the 2020 election results led to chants for his execution from the president’s supporters as they stormed the Capitol.

    Earlier this year, Pence made it clear that he had no intentions of wading into the presidential election after his unsuccessful bid for the Republican nomination. And, unlike other officials, he did not issue a specific warning about Trump’s behavior or intentions. But he did make one thing clear: “It should come as no surprise that I will not be endorsing Donald Trump this year,” he said in an interview with Fox News.

    Pence said that he was proud of the accomplishments he and Trump had achieved during their tenure, but that there was a significant gulf between them on issues including China and abortion. “During my presidential campaign, I made it clear that there were profound differences between me and President Trump on a range of issues, and not just our difference on my constitutional duties that I exercised on January the 6th,” he said.

    Nia Prater

    Source link

  • 10/8/2023: The Godfather of AI; General Milley; Rich Paul; 3D Printing

    10/8/2023: The Godfather of AI; General Milley; Rich Paul; 3D Printing

    10/8/2023: The Godfather of AI; General Milley; Rich Paul; 3D Printing – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    First, Geoffrey Hinton on promise, risks of AI. Then, Gen. Mark Milley: The 60 Minutes
    Interview. Next, Rich Paul: The 60 Minutes Interview. And, 3D printing homes on Earth, someday the moon.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    Source link

  • Gen. Mark Milley: The 60 Minutes Interview

    Gen. Mark Milley: The 60 Minutes Interview

    Gen. Mark Milley: The 60 Minutes Interview – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Gen. Mark Milley looked back at his years as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, including the differences he had with President Trump that nearly caused him to resign.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    Source link

  • Gen. Mark Milley looks back at war in Afghanistan, conflict with former President Trump

    Gen. Mark Milley looks back at war in Afghanistan, conflict with former President Trump

    General Mark Milley completed a four-year term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the nation’s highest ranking military officer, on September 30th. He told us he spent most of his time working to avoid a direct conflict with Russia and China while the country watched him have a very public falling out with former President Trump, the man who picked him for the job.

    General Milley’s time serving President Joe Biden had its own challenges, including America’s calamitous withdrawal from Afghanistan as well as providing Ukraine with billions of dollars worth of American military equipment.

    A few hours before we sat down with the general at the Pentagon, he’d had his final phone call with the commander of Ukraine’s armed forces.

    General Mark Milley: The counteroffensive that the Ukrainians are running is still ongoing. The progress, as many, many people have noted, is slow, but it is steady. And they are making progress on a day-to-day basis. 

    Norah O’Donnell: But expelling 200,000 Russian soldiers–

    General Mark Milley: Very difficult.

    Norah O’Donnell: No easy task.

    General Mark Milley: Very hard, very hard.

    Norah O’Donnell: How long is this gonna look like this? A year? Five years? 

    General Mark Milley: Well, you can’t put a time on it. But it’ll be a considerable length of time. And it’s gonna be long and hard and very bloody. 

    Russia occupies 41,000 square miles of Ukraine. The frontline extends about the distance from Atlanta to Washington, DC.

    In Congress this past week, Republicans ended Kevin McCarthy’s speakership and for now, more aid to Ukraine. According to the White House, of the $113 billion already committed, there’s only enough left to last a few more months.

    Norah O’Donnell: With all of the issues facing Americans at home, why is this worth it?

    General Mark Milley: If Ukraine loses and Putin wins, I think you would be– certainly increasing if not doubling your defense budget in the years ahead. And you will increase the probability of a great power war in the next 10 to 15 years. I think it would be a very dangerous situation if– if Putin’s allowed to win. 

    Gen. Mark Milley
    Gen. Mark Milley

    60 Minutes


    General Mark Milley: Ukraine-Russia obviously is what drives this meeting today.

    The chairman of the Joint Chiefs is the commander in chief’s principal military advisor, but commands no troops in battle.

    General Mark Milley: I am obligated, regardless of consequences, to give my advice to the president. But no president is obligated to follow that advice.

    This past August, General Milley invited us aboard the USS Constitution in Boston Harbor, not far from where he grew up.

    General Mark Milley: We’re the only military in the world that swears an oath– not to a king, a queen, a tyrant, a would-be tyrant, or a dictator. We swear an oath to an idea, the idea that is America. And it’s– and it’s embodied in that document, the Constitution, which sets up our form of government. 

    In 2021, General Milley had counseled President Biden to keep 2,500 troops in and around Kabul. Instead, Mr. Biden ordered a complete withdrawal to end America’s longest war after 10 years. The disaster that followed will be part of both of their legacies.

    General Mark Milley: I go through the entire withdrawal from Afghanistan– chapter and verse all the time. That was a strategic failure for the United States. The enemy occupied the capital city of the country that you were supporting. So, to me, that hurts. It hurts a big way. But no matter what pain I feel or anyone else feels– nothing comes even close to the pain of those that were killed.

    Norah O’Donnell: To those who served in Afghanistan for two decades and lost family members and friends and wonder, “Was it worth it?”

    General Mark Milley: Well, that’s always the question. Right? So, 2,461 killed in action by the enemy in Afghanistan over 20 years. Was it worth it? Lookit, I can’t answer that for other people. This is a tough business that we’re in. This military business. It’s unforgiving. The crucible of combat’s unforgiving. People die. They lose their arms. They lose their legs. It’s an incredibly difficult– life. But is it worth it? Look around you. Lo– ask yourself th– the question. For me, I’ve answered it many times over and that’s why I stay in uniform and that’s why I maintain my oath.

    His commitment to that oath would be both tested and questioned by Donald Trump. while their relationship began with kind words…

    …after the January 6th insurrection, the two men would not speak again.

    Their public estrangement started in the spring of 2020 when protests for racial justice, some violent, spread across the country, including to Washington, DC.

    Norah O’Donnell: Perhaps more than any other chairman in the role, you have become ensnarled in politics and, arguably, threats to the Constitution. What have you learned from that?

    General Mark Milley: Well, I think it’s important to– to keep your North Star, which is the Constitution. We, the military– are not only apolitical, we are nonpartisan. You can’t pick sides.

    Norah O’Donnell: June 1st, 2020. Was that a turning point for you as chairman?

    General Mark Milley: I think it was. Yeah. I realized that I stepped into a political minefield and I shouldn’t have. 

    He’s talking about the day when President Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy the U.S. Army to put down the unrest on America’s streets.

    On the evening of June 1st, after demonstrators near the White House were removed by force, Chairman Milley, dressed in battle fatigues, joined President Trump and members of his Cabinet in a march across Lafayette Square to St. John’s Church, where Mr. Trump posed for photographs.

    Ten days later General Milley apologized in a speech to graduates of the National Defense University.

    Milley (during his speech): My presence in that moment and in that environment created a perception of the military involved in domestic politics. As a commissioned uniformed officer, it was a mistake that I have learned from…

    Norah O’Donnell: It’s rare for a chairman to apologize publicly.

    General Mark Milley: Well, you know, I grew up here in Boston. I’m Irish Catholic and my mother and father taught me that when you make a mistake, you admit it. You go to confession. You say 10 Hail Marys and an Our Father. Everybody makes mistakes. And– and the key is– how you deal with the mistake.

    Norah O’Donnell: After you apologized, former President Trump said you choked like a dog.

    General Mark Milley: Yeah, I’m not gonna comment on anything the former president has said or not said.

    General Milley did tell us he was so disillusioned with the former president’s actions he nearly resigned. Instead, according to former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, he and the general made a pact to protect the military from becoming politicized or misused.

    Norah O'Donnell and Gen. Mark Milley
    Norah O’Donnell and Gen. Mark Milley

    60 Minutes


    Norah O’Donnell: It’s also been reported that you spent several days, several drafts of resignation letters.

    General Mark Milley: That’s right.

    Norah O’Donnell: I was s– very struck by the one that was published in which you said to the president: “It is my deeply held belief that you are ruining the international order, causing significant damage to our country overseas that was fought so hard by the greatest generation in 1945. That generation, has fought against fascism, has fought against Nazism, has fought against extremism. It’s now obvious to me that you don’t understand that world order.” You don’t think Donald Trump understood what World War II was fought over?

    General Mark Milley: I don’t know what– president– former President Trump– understood about World War II or– or– or– or anything else. I can tell you that– from 1914– to 1945– 150 million people or th– thereabouts were slaughtered in the conduct of great power war.

    And in 1945, the United States took the initiative and drafted up a set of rules– that govern the world to this day–  Those rules are under stress internationally, President Putin is a direct frontal assault on those rules. China is trying to revise those rules to their own benefit.  

    Norah O’Donnell: But that’s one thing to say that China is threatening that world order and Russia is threatening that world order. To say that the commander in chief, Donald Trump was “ruining the international order” and “causing significant damage,” what did you see that caused you to write that?

    General Mark Milley: I th– I would say that–

    Norah O’Donnell: It’s gotta be more than Walking into Lafayette Square in uniform.

    General Mark Milley: There was– a wide variety of initiatives that were ongoing, one of them f– of course, was withdrawing troops out of NATO– those were initiatives that placed at risk– you know, I think, America’s role in the world. Now that is the opposite of– what– my parents and– and– 18 million others wore the uniform for World War II to defeat.

    General milley doesn’t just revere the greatest generation. He was raised by it. His father was a Navy medic who served in the Pacific Campaign, including at the Battle of Iwo Jima. His mother joined the Naval Reserve to work as a nurse.

    After the war they settled in Winchester, a small town north of Boston.

    General Mark Milley: Almost every single– male and female– parent that was here, they’re all World War II veterans of one kind or another.

    Norah O’Donnell: The whole block, really, a lot of people had–

    General Mark Milley: All– everybody. Yeah, 100%.

    General Mark Milley: And interesting, no officers. These were 100% (laughs) enlisted. And– and they had their own opinions of officers, too. And–

    Gen. Mark Milley
    Gen. Mark Milley

    60 Minutes


    Norah O’Donnell: Including your parents, right?

    General Mark Milley: Of c– oh, yeah, yeah.

    During high school, he was recruited to play ice hockey at Princeton University and decided to join the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, or ROTC. After graduating in 1980, he went on to become a paratrooper and serve in Special Forces. He did one combat tour in Iraq and three in Afghanistan.

    This past May he returned to Princeton, to commission the graduating ROTC class…and took a particular interest in a few of the young officers, whose language skills are currently in high demand.

    Marine cadet: I speak Chinese sir.

    General Mark Milley: Chinese is really, really important to us.

    Anybody else speak Chinese? Whoa, one, two, three, four, five. If you speak Chinese, if you don’t mind, I’d like to get your names. And we’ll see where life takes you guys. 

    We, the United States– need to take the challenge, the military challenge of China extraordinarily seriously. 

    Norah O’Donnell: How concerned are you that military-to-military communications are not happening right now with China?

    General Mark Milley: Yeah, I think we need to get that established. We had them for a period of time and then they’ve dropped off. So channels of communication are important in order to deescalate in time of crisis.

    General Milley says he held a total of five calls with his Chinese military counterparts during the Trump and Biden administrations. But it was his last two calls during the final months of the Trump presidency that got the attention of the press, Congress, and the former president himself.

    Norah O’Donnell: Why did you think it was so important to call your Chinese military counterpart in the aftermath of the January 6th attacks?

    General Mark Milley: That’s an example of deescalation. So– there was clear indications– that the Chinese were very concerned about what they were observing– here in the United States. 

    Norah O’Donnell: Did you see some movement of Chinese military equipment–

    General Mark Milley: I won’t go over anything classified. So I won’t discuss exactly what we saw or didn’t see, or what we heard or didn’t hear, I will just say that– there was clear indications that the Chinese were very concerned.

    Gen. Mark Milley and Norah O'Donnell
    Gen. Mark Milley and Norah O’Donnell

    60 Minutes


    Norah O’Donnell: President Trump recently said that your “dealings” with China were “so egregious that in times gone by, the punishment would have been death.”

    General Mark Milley: That’s right. He said that. 

    Norah O’Donnell: But for the record, was there anything inappropriate or treasonous about the calls you made to China–

    General Mark Milley: Absolutely not. Zero. None. And not only that, they were authorized. They’re coordinated. Congress knows that. We’ve answered these questions– several different times in writing 

    Norah O’Donnell: Were you giving the Chinese information about thinking of the president of the United States?

    General Mark Milley: The specific conversation was– I think in accordance with– the intent of the secretary of defense, which was to make sure the Chinese knew that we were not going to attack them.

    Norah O’Donnell: Why did the Chinese think that the U.S. under then-president Trump was going to attack them–

    General Mark Milley: The Chinese were concerned about– what– what is commonly referred to in– in– in the English language like an October surprise, wag the dog sort of thing. They were wrong. They were not reading us right. Lookit, President Trump was not going to attack China. And they needed to know that.

    China, Russia and the war in Ukraine are now the problem of his successor, Air Force General Charles Q. Brown, Jr. 

    There are also areas of concern closer to home. Last year, the Army missed its recruiting numbers by 15,000 soldiers, the worst shortfall in decades.

    Norah O’Donnell: Confidence in the U.S. military is at its lowest in two decades, do you bear any personal responsibility for that?

    General Mark Milley: Absolutely. I think as the leader of the military, the uniformed military, I think that I am part of that for sure. I think that the walk from the White House to the St. John’s Church, I think that– helped create some of that.

    I think the withdrawal from Afghanistan– helped create some of that. But I would also say, the United States military is still one of the most respected institutions in the United States by a long shot– by a huge margin. You know, I think we’ve– taken a slip back a little bit–and I think we need to improve on that.

    Produced by Keith Sharman. Associate producer, Roxanne Feitel. Broadcast associate, Eliza Costas. Edited by April Wilson.

    Source link

  • Gen. Mark Milley makes first public response to Trump comments

    Gen. Mark Milley makes first public response to Trump comments

    Gen. Mark Milley makes first public response to Trump comments – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sat down with Norah O’Donnell to make the first public response to former President Donald Trump’s shocking recent comments, which suggested that Milley deserved execution for communications the general had with China during the final months of the Trump administration.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    Source link

  • 9/10: Sunday Morning

    9/10: Sunday Morning

    9/10: Sunday Morning – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    Guest host: Lee Cowan. In our cover story, David Pogue talks with Walter Isaacson about his new biography of Elon Musk. Plus: Norah O’Donnell interviews Oprah Winfrey and Harvard professor Arthur Brooks about their collaboration, a book on happiness; David Martin talks with Gen. Mark Milley about intelligence for the war in Ukraine; Mo Rocca sits down with former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg to discuss a new arts complex at the site of the World Trade Center; Lilia Luciano profiles Colombian megastar Maluma; Faith Salie visits an art installation on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.; and Kelefa Sanneh finds out what chef and restaurateur Mario Carbone puts in his Sunday sauce.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    Source link

  • Gen. Mark Milley on seeing through the fog of war in Ukraine

    Gen. Mark Milley on seeing through the fog of war in Ukraine

    No other American has been more deeply involved in the war in Ukraine than General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. At 6:45 in the morning, he was about to have a call with Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, commander of Ukraine’s armed forces. “I talk to him every week, sometimes twice a week, three times a week,” Milley said.

    Three hours later, he took “Sunday Morning” underground, deep in the bowels of the Pentagon, into a top-secret command center where all the intelligence collected from the battlefields of Ukraine is monitored by his staff, who inform him on a day-to-day basis what’s happening in the current operations. Milley said, “The fog and friction of war is always present, but our information systems are pretty good.”

    screensjpg.jpg
    Gen. Mark Milley (right) observes intelligence about the frontlines of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at a global situational awareness facility in the Pentagon. 

    CBS News


    Since the war began, this center has kept a 24/7 watch on Russia’s catastrophic invasion – indiscriminate strikes against cities, and the leveling of entire villages without letup. According to the latest casualty estimates, Ukraine has lost 200,000 soldiers killed or wounded, and Russia a staggering 300,000.

    Martin asked, “You’ve seen your share of combat. Have you ever seen combat like this?”

    “No,” Milley replied. “I’ve been in a lot of firefights. I’ve been blown up several times in vehicles – mines and IEDs and RPGs. But never to this degree of intensity.”

    For the last 100 days Ukrainian troops have been firing artillery at what U.S. officials say is an unsustainable rate as they try to break through Russian frontlines. The Ukrainian offensive, which Milley helped plan, is running into stiffer-than-expected resistance.  “It’s going slower than people anticipated, [from] the war games that were done where we help them do their war gaming and planning,” he said. “But that’s the difference between war on paper and real war. So, this is real people getting really killed and real vehicles are really blowing up, so people tend to slow down in situations like that. But it’s very deliberate, and they’re making progress every day.”

    Martin asked, “If they’re taking so many casualties, how much more slow and deliberate progress can they stand?”

    “Your question is, how long will the political will of the Ukrainian people withstand this level of carnage? And the same applies to Russia, by the way. That’s an unknown answer.”

    Maps on screens in the command center (showing unclassified information, because of “Sunday Morning”‘s presence) track the painful progress of the offensive – Ukrainians cutting into Russian lines, which are defended with minefields, trenches, ditches, barbed wire, “dragon’s teeth” anti-tank fortifications, and small 10- or 12-man hunter-killer teams armed with anti-tank munitions.

    The U.S. advertises the $44 billion in military equipment it has committed to Ukraine, but says very little about the equally valuable intelligence.

    When asked if the U.S. shares with Ukraine what it knows about Russian troop movements, Milley replied, “Our intelligence pipes to Ukraine are quite open, for sure. And of course, the CIA and interagency, NSA, all those guys … There’s pretty open pipes on intel to Ukraine.”

    “Are you helping Ukraine select targets?” Martin asked.

    “Target selection and authority to strike is with Ukraine,” Milley said. “What we do is provide them situational awareness.”

    “But you tell them, ‘There’s a command post over there. There’s an ammunition dump over there’?”

    “We’ll give them the situational awareness as best we can tell.”

    Martin said, “This really is a proxy war. You don’t have boots on the ground, you’re not making decisions, but you’re helping Ukraine kill Russians.”

    “We’re helping Ukraine defend themselves, is what we’re doing,” Milley replied.

    The Ukrainian goal is to reach the crossroads city of Melitopol, where they would be in a position to cut Russian-occupied territory in two.

    map-melitopol.jpg

    CBS News


    And with the end of summer comes more challenging conditions, when seasonal rains arrive in October. Milley said, “It won’t be the winter; it’ll be the rains that make the ground soft and make it unacceptable for ground maneuvers.”

    Ukraine President Zelenskyy has said he will keep fighting until all of the territory Russia now occupies is liberated. That, said Milley, is no small area: “That area roughly speaking is about the eastern theater of war of the American Civil War. That goes from basically Washington D.C. to Atlanta, and that is a very large piece of ground. So, they’ve got a tough fight ahead of ’em. It’s not over.”

    Martin asked, “And if they don’t achieve their objectives, does that mean we’re into a forever war?”

    “So, neither side at this point in time have achieved their political objectives through military means,” Milley said, “and the war will continue until one side or the other has achieved those means, or both sides have determined it’s time to go to a negotiating table [because] they can’t achieve their objectives through military means.

    “And that time is not yet.”

         
    For more info:

         
    Story produced by Mary Walsh. Editor: Ed Givnish. 

          
    See also:

    Source link

  • The Final Days

    The Final Days

    August 1

    August is the month when oppressive humidity causes the mass evacuation of official Washington. In 2021, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki piled her family into the car for a week at the beach. Secretary of State Antony Blinken headed to the Hamptons to visit his elderly father. Their boss left for the leafy sanctuary of Camp David.

    Explore the October 2023 Issue

    Check out more from this issue and find your next story to read.

    View More

    They knew that when they returned, their attention would shift to a date circled at the end of the month. On August 31, the United States would officially complete its withdrawal from Afghanistan, concluding the longest war in American history.

    The State Department didn’t expect to solve Afghanistan’s problems by that date. But if everything went well, there was a chance to wheedle the two warring sides into some sort of agreement that would culminate in the nation’s president, Ashraf Ghani, resigning from office, beginning an orderly transfer of power to a governing coalition that included the Taliban. There was even discussion of Blinken flying out, most likely to Doha, Qatar, to preside over the signing of an accord.

    It would be an ending, but not the end. Within the State Department there was a strongly held belief: Even after August 31, the embassy in Kabul would remain open. It wouldn’t be as robustly staffed, but some aid programs would continue; visas would still be issued. The United States—at least not the State Department—wasn’t going to abandon the country.

    There were plans for catastrophic scenarios, which had been practiced in tabletop simulations, but no one anticipated that they would be needed. Intelligence assessments asserted that the Afghan military would be able to hold off the Taliban for months, though the number of months kept dwindling as the Taliban conquered terrain more quickly than the analysts had predicted. But as August began, the grim future of Afghanistan seemed to exist in the distance, beyond the end of the month, not on America’s watch.

    July 30, 2021: Joe Biden speaks to reporters before departing the White House for Camp David. (Anna Moneymaker / Getty)

    That grim future arrived disastrously ahead of schedule. What follows is an intimate history of that excruciating month of withdrawal, as narrated by its participants, based on dozens of interviews conducted shortly after the fact, when memories were fresh and emotions raw. At times, as I spoke with these participants, I felt as if I was their confessor. Their failings were so apparent that they had a desperate need to explain themselves, but also an impulse to relive moments of drama and pain more intense than any they had experienced in their career.

    During those fraught days, foreign policy, so often debated in the abstract, or conducted from the sanitized remove of the Situation Room, became horrifyingly vivid. President Joe Biden and his aides found themselves staring hard at the consequences of their decisions.

    Even in the thick of the crisis, as the details of a mass evacuation swallowed them, the members of Biden’s inner circle could see that the legacy of the month would stalk them into the next election—and perhaps into their obituaries. Though it was a moment when their shortcomings were on obvious display, they also believed it evinced resilience and improvisational skill.

    And amid the crisis, a crisis that taxed his character and managerial acumen, the president revealed himself. For a man long caricatured as a political weather vane, Biden exhibited determination, even stubbornness, despite furious criticism from the establishment figures whose approval he usually craved. For a man vaunted for his empathy, he could be detached, even icy, when confronted with the prospect of human suffering.

    When it came to foreign policy, Joe Biden possessed a swaggering faith in himself. He liked to knock the diplomats and pundits who would pontificate at the Council on Foreign Relations and the Munich Security Conference. He called them risk-averse, beholden to institutions, lazy in their thinking. Listening to these complaints, a friend once posed the obvious question: If you have such negative things to say about these confabs, then why attend so many of them? Biden replied, “If I don’t go, they’re going to get stale as hell.”

    From 12 years as the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee—and then eight years as the vice president—Biden had acquired a sense that he could scythe through conventional wisdom. He distrusted mandarins, even those he had hired for his staff. They were always muddying things with theories. One aide recalled that he would say, “You foreign-policy guys, you think this is all pretty complicated. But it’s just like family dynamics.” Foreign affairs was sometimes painful, often futile, but really it was emotional intelligence applied to people with names that were difficult to pronounce. Diplomacy, in Biden’s view, was akin to persuading a pain-in-the-ass uncle to stop drinking so much.

    One subject seemed to provoke his contrarian side above all others: the war in Afghanistan. His strong opinions were grounded in experience. Soon after the United States invaded, in late 2001, Biden began visiting the country. He traveled with a sleeping bag; he stood in line alongside Marines, wrapped in a towel, waiting for his turn to shower.

    On his first trip, in 2002, Biden met with Interior Minister Yunus Qanuni in his Kabul office, a shell of a building. Qanuni, an old mujahideen fighter, told him: We really appreciate that you have come here. But Americans have a long history of making promises and then breaking them. And if that happens again, the Afghan people are going to be disappointed.

    Biden was jet-lagged and irritable. Qanuni’s comments set him off: Let me tell you, if you even think of threatening us … Biden’s aides struggled to calm him down.

    In Biden’s moral code, ingratitude is a grievous sin. The United States had evicted the Taliban from power; it had sent young men to die in the nation’s mountains; it would give the new government billions in aid. But throughout the long conflict, Afghan officials kept telling him that the U.S. hadn’t done enough.

    The frustration stuck with him, and it clarified his thinking. He began to draw unsentimental conclusions about the war. He could see that the Afghan government was a failed enterprise. He could see that a nation-building campaign of this scale was beyond American capacity.

    As vice president, Biden also watched as the military pressured Barack Obama into sending thousands of additional troops to salvage a doomed cause. In his 2020 memoir, A Promised Land, Obama recalled that as he agonized over his Afghan policy, Biden pulled him aside and told him, “Listen to me, boss. Maybe I’ve been around this town for too long, but one thing I know is when these generals are trying to box in a new president.” He drew close and whispered, “Don’t let them jam you.”

    Biden developed a theory of how he would succeed where Obama had failed. He wasn’t going to let anyone jam him.

    In early February 2021, now-President Biden invited his secretary of defense, Lloyd Austin, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, into the Oval Office. He wanted to acknowledge an emotional truth: “I know you have friends you have lost in this war. I know you feel strongly. I know what you’ve put into this.”

    Over the years, Biden had traveled to military bases, frequently accompanied by his fellow senator Chuck Hagel. On those trips, Hagel and Biden dipped in and out of a long-running conversation about war. They traded theories on why the United States would remain mired in unwinnable conflicts. One problem was the psychology of defeat. Generals were terrified of being blamed for a loss, living in history as the one who waved the white flag.

    It was this dynamic, in part, that kept the United States entangled in Afghanistan. Politicians who hadn’t served in the military could never summon the will to overrule the generals, and the generals could never admit that they were losing. So the war continued indefinitely, a zombie campaign. Biden believed that he could break this cycle, that he could master the psychology of defeat.

    Biden wanted to avoid having his generals feel cornered—even as he guided them to his desired outcome. He wanted them to feel heard, to appreciate his good faith. He told Austin and Milley, “Before I make a decision, you’ll have a chance to look me in the eyes.”

    The date set out by the Doha Agreement, which the Trump administration had negotiated with the Taliban, was May 1, 2021. If the Taliban adhered to a set of conditions—engaging in political negotiations with the Afghan government, refraining from attacking U.S. troops, and cutting ties with terrorist groups—then the United States would remove its soldiers from the country by that date. Because of the May deadline, Biden’s first major foreign-policy decision—whether or not to honor the Doha Agreement—would also be the one he seemed to care most about. And it would need to be made in a sprint.

    In the spring, after weeks of meetings with generals and foreign-policy advisers, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan had the National Security Council generate two documents for the president to read. One outlined the best case for staying in Afghanistan; the other made the best case for leaving.

    This reflected Biden’s belief that he faced a binary choice. If he abandoned the Doha Agreement, attacks on U.S. troops would resume. Since the accord had been signed, in February 2020, the Taliban had grown stronger, forging new alliances and sharpening plans. And thanks to the drawdown of troops that had begun under Donald Trump, the United States no longer had a robust-enough force to fight a surging foe.

    Biden gathered his aides for one last meeting before he formally made his decision. Toward the end of the session, he asked Sullivan, Blinken, and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines to leave the room. He wanted to talk with Austin and Milley alone.

    Instead of revealing his final decision, Biden told them, “This is hard. I want to go to Camp David this weekend and think about it.”

    It was always clear where the president would land. Milley knew that his own preferred path for Afghanistan—leaving a small but meaningful contingent of troops in the country—wasn’t shared by the nation he served, or the new commander in chief. Having just survived Trump and a wave of speculation about how the U.S. military might figure in a coup, Milley was eager to demonstrate his fidelity to civilian rule. If Biden wanted to shape the process to get his preferred result, well, that’s how a democracy should work.

    On April 14, Biden announced that he would withdraw American forces from Afghanistan. He delivered remarks explaining his decision in the Treaty Room of the White House, the very spot where, in the fall of 2001, George W. Bush had informed the public of the first American strikes against the Taliban.

    Biden’s speech contained a hole that few noted at the time. It scarcely mentioned the Afghan people, with not even an expression of best wishes for the nation that the United States would be leaving behind. The Afghans were apparently only incidental to his thinking. (Biden hadn’t spoken with President Ghani until right before the announcement.) Scranton Joe’s deep reserves of compassion were directed at people with whom he felt a connection; his visceral ties were with American soldiers. When he thought about the military’s rank and file, he couldn’t help but project an image of his own late son, Beau. “I’m the first president in 40 years who knows what it means to have a child serving in a war zone,” he said.

    Biden also announced a new deadline for the U.S. withdrawal, which would move from May 1 to September 11, the 20th anniversary of the attack that drew the United States into war. The choice of date was polemical. Although he never officially complained about it, Milley didn’t understand the decision. How did it honor the dead to admit defeat in a conflict that had been waged on their behalf? Eventually, the Biden administration pushed the withdrawal deadline forward to August 31, an implicit concession that it had erred.

    But the choice of September 11 was telling. Biden took pride in ending an unhappy chapter in American history. Democrats might have once referred to Afghanistan as the “good war,” but it had become a fruitless fight. It had distracted the United States from policies that might preserve the nation’s geostrategic dominance. By leaving Afghanistan, Biden believed he was redirecting the nation’s gaze to the future: “We’ll be much more formidable to our adversaries and competitors over the long term if we fight the battles for the next 20 years, not the last 20.”


    August 6–9

    In late June, Jake Sullivan began to worry that the Pentagon had pulled American personnel and materiel out of Afghanistan too precipitously. The rapid drawdown had allowed the Taliban to advance and to win a string of victories against the Afghan army that had caught the administration by surprise. Even if Taliban fighters weren’t firing at American troops, they were continuing to battle the Afghan army and take control of the countryside. Now they’d captured a provincial capital in the remote southwest—a victory that was disturbingly effortless.

    Sullivan asked one of his top aides, Homeland Security Adviser Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, to convene a meeting for Sunday, August 8, with officials overseeing the withdrawal. Contingency plans contained a switch that could be flipped in an emergency. To avoid a reprise of the fall of Saigon, with desperate hands clinging to the last choppers out of Vietnam, the government made plans for a noncombatant-evacuation operation, or NEO. The U.S. embassy would shut down and relocate to Hamid Karzai International Airport (or HKIA, as everyone called it). Troops, pre-positioned near the Persian Gulf and waiting at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, would descend on Kabul to protect the airport. Military transport planes would haul American citizens and visa holders out of the country.

    By the time Sherwood-Randall had a chance to assemble the meeting, the most pessimistic expectations had been exceeded. The Taliban had captured four more provincial capitals. General Frank McKenzie, the head of U.S. Central Command, filed a commander’s estimate warning that Kabul could be surrounded within about 30 days—a far faster collapse than previously predicted.

    McKenzie’s dire warning did strangely little to alter plans. Sherwood-Randall’s group unanimously agreed that it was too soon to declare a NEO. The embassy in Kabul was particularly forceful on this point. The acting ambassador, Ross Wilson, wanted to avoid cultivating a sense of panic in Kabul, which would further collapse the army and the state. Even the CIA seconded this line of thinking.


    August 12

    At 2 a.m., Sullivan’s phone rang. It was Mark Milley. The military had received reports that the Taliban had entered the city of Ghazni, less than 100 miles from Kabul.

    The intelligence community assumed that the Taliban wouldn’t storm Kabul until after the United States left, because the Taliban wanted to avoid a block‑by‑block battle for the city. But the proximity of the Taliban to the embassy and HKIA was terrifying. It necessitated the decisive action that the administration had thus far resisted. Milley wanted Sullivan to initiate a NEO. If the State Department wasn’t going to move quickly, the president needed to order it to. Sullivan assured him that he would push harder, but it would be two more days before the president officially declared a NEO.

    With the passage of each hour, Sullivan’s anxieties grew. He called Lloyd Austin and told him, “I think you need to send someone with bars on his arm to Doha to talk to the Taliban so that they understand not to mess with an evacuation.” Austin agreed to dispatch General McKenzie to renew negotiations.


    August 13

    Austin convened a videoconference with the top civilian and military officials in Kabul. He wanted updates from them before he headed to the White House to brief the president.

    Ross Wilson, the acting ambassador, told him, “I need 72 hours before I can begin destroying sensitive documents.”

    “You have to be done in 72 hours,” Austin replied.

    The Taliban were now perched outside Kabul. Delaying the evacuation of the embassy posed a danger that Austin couldn’t abide. Thousands of troops were about to arrive to protect the new makeshift facility that would be set up at the airport. The moment had come to move there.

    Abandoning an embassy has its own protocols; they are rituals of panic. The diplomats had a weekend, more or less, to purge the place: to fill its shredders, burn bins, and disintegrator with documents and hard drives. Anything with an American flag on it needed destroying so it couldn’t be used by the enemy for propaganda purposes.

    Wisps of smoke would soon begin to blow from the compound—a plume of what had been classified cables and personnel files. Even for those Afghans who didn’t have access to the internet, the narrative would be legible in the sky.


    August 14

    On Saturday night, Antony Blinken placed a call to Ashraf Ghani. He wanted to make sure the Afghan president remained committed to the negotiations in Doha. The Taliban delegation there was still prepared to agree to a unity government, which it might eventually run, allocating cabinet slots to ministers from Ghani’s government. That notion had broad support from the Afghan political elite. Everyone, even Ghani, agreed that he would need to resign as part of a deal. Blinken wanted to ensure that he wouldn’t waver from his commitments and try to hold on to power.

    Although Ghani said that he would comply, he began musing aloud about what might happen if the Taliban invaded Kabul prior to August 31. He told Blinken, “I’d rather die than surrender.”


    August 15

    The next day, the presidential palace released a video of Ghani talking with security officials on the phone. As he sat at his imposing wooden desk, which once belonged to King Amanullah, who had bolted from the palace to avoid an Islamist uprising in 1929, Ghani’s aides hoped to project a sense of calm.

    During the early hours, a small number of Taliban fighters eased their way to the gates of the city, and then into the capital itself. The Taliban leadership didn’t want to invade Kabul until after the American departure. But their soldiers had conquered territory without even firing a shot. In their path, Afghan soldiers simply walked away from checkpoints. Taliban units kept drifting in the direction of the presidential palace.

    Rumors traveled more quickly than the invaders. A crowd formed outside a bank in central Kabul. Nervous customers jostled in a chaotic rush to empty their accounts. Guards fired into the air to disperse the melee. The sound of gunfire reverberated through the nearby palace, which had largely emptied for lunch. Ghani’s closest advisers pressed him to flee. “If you stay,” one told him, according to The Washington Post, “you’ll be killed.”

    This was a fear rooted in history. In 1996, when the Taliban first invaded Kabul, they hanged the tortured body of the former president from a traffic light. Ghani hustled onto one of three Mi‑17 helicopters waiting inside his compound, bound for Uzbekistan. The New York Times Magazine later reported that the helicopters were instructed to fly low to the terrain, to evade detection by the U.S. military. From Uzbekistan, he would fly to the United Arab Emirates and an ignominious exile. Without time to pack, he left in plastic sandals, accompanied by his wife. On the tarmac, aides and guards grappled over the choppers’ last remaining seats.

    When the rest of Ghani’s staff returned from lunch, they moved through the palace searching for the president, unaware that he had abandoned them, and their country.

    At approximately 1:45 p.m., Ambassador Wilson went to the embassy lobby for the ceremonial lowering of the flag. Emotionally drained and worried about his own safety, he prepared to leave the embassy behind, a monument to his nation’s defeat.

    Wilson made his way to the helicopter pad so that he could be taken to his new outpost at the airport, where he was told that a trio of choppers had just left the presidential palace. Wilson knew what that likely meant. By the time he relayed his suspicions to Washington, officials already possessed intelligence that confirmed Wilson’s hunch: Ghani had fled.

    Jake Sullivan relayed the news to Biden, who exploded in frustration: Give me a break.

    Later that afternoon, General McKenzie arrived at the Ritz-Carlton in Doha. Well before Ghani’s departure from power, the wizened Marine had scheduled a meeting with an old adversary of the United States, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.

    Baradar wasn’t just any Taliban leader. He was a co-founder of the group, with Mullah Mohammed Omar. McKenzie had arrived with the intention of delivering a stern warning. He barely had time to tweak his agenda after learning of Ghani’s exit.

    McKenzie unfolded a map of Afghanistan translated into Pashto. A circle had been drawn around the center of Kabul—a radius of about 25 kilometers—and he pointed to it. He referred to this area as the “ring of death.” If the Taliban operated within those 25 kilometers, McKenzie said, “we’re going to assume hostile intent, and we’ll strike hard.”

    McKenzie tried to bolster his threat with logic. He said he didn’t want to end up in a firefight with the Taliban, and that would be a lot less likely to happen if they weren’t in the city.

    Baradar not only understood; he agreed. Known as a daring military tactician, he was also a pragmatist. He wanted to transform his group’s inhospitable image; he hoped that foreign embassies, even the American one, would remain in Kabul. Baradar didn’t want a Taliban government to become a pariah state, starved of foreign assistance that it badly needed.

    But the McKenzie plan had an elemental problem: It was too late. Taliban fighters were already operating within the ring of death. Kabul was on the brink of anarchy. Armed criminal gangs were already starting to roam the streets. Baradar asked the general, “Are you going to take responsibility for the security of Kabul?”

    McKenzie replied that his orders were to run an evacuation. Whatever happens to the security situation in Kabul, he told Baradar, don’t mess with the evacuation, or there will be hell to pay. It was an evasive answer. The United States didn’t have the troops or the will to secure Kabul. McKenzie had no choice but to implicitly cede that job to the Taliban.

    Baradar walked toward a window. Because he didn’t speak English, he wanted his adviser to confirm his understanding. “Is he saying that he won’t attack us if we go in?” His adviser told him that he had heard correctly.

    As the meeting wrapped up, McKenzie realized that the United States would need to be in constant communication with the Taliban. They were about to be rubbing shoulders with each other in a dense city. Misunderstandings were inevitable. Both sides agreed that they would designate a representative in Kabul to talk through the many complexities so that the old enemies could muddle together toward a common purpose.

    Soon after McKenzie and Baradar ended their meeting, Al Jazeera carried a live feed from the presidential palace, showing the Taliban as they went from room to room, in awe of the building, seemingly bemused by their own accomplishment.

    photo of group of men, many carrying weapons, sitting and standing around an ornate wooden desk
    August 15: Taliban fighters take control of the presidential palace in Kabul. (Associated Press)

    They gathered in Ghani’s old office, where a book of poems remained on his desk, across from a box of Kleenex. A Talib sat in the president’s Herman Miller chair. His comrades stood behind him in a tableau, cloth draped over the shoulders of their tunics, guns resting in the crooks of their arms, as if posing for an official portrait.


    August 16

    The U.S. embassy, now relocated to the airport, became a magnet for humanity. The extent of Afghan desperation shocked officials back in Washington. Only amid the panicked exodus did top officials at the State Department realize that hundreds of thousands of Afghans had fled their homes as civil war swept through the countryside—and made their way to the capital.

    The runway divided the airport into halves. A northern sector served as a military outpost and, after the relocation of the embassy, a consular office—the last remaining vestiges of the United States and its promise of liberation. A commercial airport stared at these barracks from across the strip of asphalt.

    The commercial facility had been abandoned by the Afghans who worked there. The night shift of air-traffic controllers simply never arrived. The U.S. troops whom Austin had ordered to support the evacuation were only just arriving. So the terminal was overwhelmed. Afghans began to spill onto the tarmac itself.

    The crowds arrived in waves. The previous day, Afghans had flooded the tarmac late in the day, then left when they realized that no flights would depart that evening. But in the morning, the compound still wasn’t secure, and it refilled.

    In the chaos, it wasn’t entirely clear to Ambassador Wilson who controlled the compound. The Taliban began freely roaming the facility, wielding bludgeons, trying to secure the mob. Apparently, they were working alongside soldiers from the old Afghan army. Wilson received worrying reports of tensions between the two forces.

    The imperative was to begin landing transport planes with equipment and soldiers. A C‑17, a warehouse with wings, full of supplies to support the arriving troops, managed to touch down. The crew lowered a ramp to unload the contents of the jet’s belly, but the plane was rushed by a surge of civilians. The Americans on board were no less anxious than the Afghans who greeted them. Almost as quickly as the plane’s back ramp lowered, the crew reboarded and resealed the jet’s entrances. They received permission to flee the uncontrolled scene.

    But they could not escape the crowd, for whom the jet was a last chance to avoid the Taliban and the suffering to come. As the plane began to taxi, about a dozen Afghans climbed onto one side of the jet. Others sought to stow away in the wheel well that housed its bulging landing gear. To clear the runway of human traffic, Humvees began rushing alongside the plane. Two Apache helicopters flew just above the ground, to give the Afghans a good scare and to blast the civilians from the plane with rotor wash.

    Only after the plane had lifted into the air did the crew discover its place in history. When the pilot couldn’t fully retract the landing gear, a member of the crew went to investigate, staring out of a small porthole. Through the window, it was possible to see scattered human remains.

    Videos taken from the tarmac instantly went viral. They showed a dentist from Kabul plunging to the ground from the elevating jet. The footage evoked the photo of a man falling to his death from an upper story of the World Trade Center—images of plummeting bodies bracketing an era.

    Over the weekend, Biden had received briefings about the chaos in Kabul in a secure conference room at Camp David. Photographs distributed to the press showed him alone, talking to screens, isolated in his contrarian faith in the righteousness of his decision. Despite the fiasco at the airport, he returned to the White House, stood in the East Room, and proclaimed: “If anything, the developments of the past week reinforced that ending U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan now was the right decision. American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in a war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves.”


    August 17

    John Bass was having a hard time keeping his mind on the task at hand. From 2017 to 2020, he had served as Washington’s ambassador to Afghanistan. During that tour, Bass did his best to immerse himself in the country and meet its people. He’d planted a garden with a group of Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts and hosted roundtables with journalists. When his term as ambassador ended, he left behind friends, colleagues, and hundreds of acquaintances.

    Now Bass kept his eyes on his phone, checking for any word from his old Afghan network. He moved through his day dreading what might come next.

    Yet he also had a job that required his attention. The State Department had assigned him to train future ambassadors. In a seminar room in suburban Virginia, he did his best to focus on passing along wisdom to these soon‑to‑be emissaries of the United States.

    As class was beginning, his phone lit up. Bass saw the number of the State Department Operations Center. He apologized and stepped out to take the call.

    “Are you available to talk to Deputy Secretary Sherman?”

    The familiar voice of Wendy Sherman, the No. 2 at the department, came on the line. “I have a mission for you. You must take it, and you need to leave today.” Sherman then told him: “I’m calling to ask you to go back to Kabul to lead the evacuation effort.”

    Ambassador Wilson was shattered by the experience of the past week and wasn’t “able to function at the level that was necessary” to complete the job on his own. Sherman needed Bass to help manage the exodus.

    Bass hadn’t expected the request. In his flummoxed state, he struggled to pose the questions he thought he might later regret not having asked.

    “How much time do we have?”

    “Probably about two weeks, a little less than two weeks.”

    “I’ve been away from this for 18 months or so.”

    “Yep, we know, but we think you’re the right person for this.”

    Bass returned to class and scooped up his belongings. “With apologies, I’m going to have to take my leave. I’ve just been asked to go back to Kabul and support the evacuations. So I’ve got to say goodbye and wish you all the best, and you’re all going to be great ambassadors.”

    Because he wasn’t living in Washington, Bass didn’t have the necessary gear with him. He drove straight to the nearest REI in search of hiking pants and rugged boots. He needed to pick up a laptop from the IT department in Foggy Bottom. Without knowing much more than what was in the news, Bass rushed to board a plane taking him to the worst crisis in the recent history of American foreign policy.


    August 19–25

    About 30 hours later—3:30 a.m., Kabul time—Bass touched down at HKIA and immediately began touring the compound. At the American headquarters, he ran into the military heads of the operation, whom he had worked with before. They presented Bass with the state of play. The situation was undeniably bizarre: The success of the American operation now depended largely on the cooperation of the Taliban.

    The Americans needed the Taliban to help control the crowds that had formed outside the airport—and to implement systems that would allow passport and visa holders to pass through the throngs. But the Taliban were imperfect allies at best. Their checkpoints were run by warriors from the countryside who didn’t know how to deal with the array of documents being waved in their faces. What was an authentic visa? What about families where the father had a U.S. passport but his wife and children didn’t? Every day, a new set of Taliban soldiers seemed to arrive at checkpoints, unaware of the previous day’s directions. Frustrated with the unruliness, the Taliban would sometimes simply stop letting anyone through.

    photo: a line of figures in a debris-strewn area outside the walled airport with mountains in background in dim hazy light
    August 24: Afghan families hoping to flee the country arrive at Hamid Karzai International Airport at dawn. (Jim Huylebroek)

    Abdul Ghani Baradar’s delegation in Doha had passed along the name of a Taliban commander in Kabul—Mawlawi Hamdullah Mukhlis. It had fallen to Major General Chris Donahue, the head of the 82nd Airborne Division, out of Fort Bragg, to coordinate with him. On September 11, 2001, Donahue had been an aide to the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Richard Myers, and had been with him on Capitol Hill when the first plane struck the World Trade Center.

    Donahue told Pentagon officials that he had to grit his teeth as he dealt with Mukhlis. But the Taliban commander seemed to feel a camaraderie with his fellow soldier. He confided to Donahue his worry that Afghanistan would suffer from brain drain, as the country’s most talented minds evacuated on American airplanes.

    In a videoconference with Mark Milley, back at the Pentagon, Donahue recounted Mukhlis’s fears. According to one Defense Department official in the meeting, his description caused Milley to laugh.

    “Don’t be going local on me, Donahue,” he said.

    “Don’t worry about me, sir,” Donahue responded. “I’m not buying what they are selling.”

    After Bass left his meeting with the military men, including Donahue, he toured the gates of the airport, where Afghans had amassed. He was greeted by the smell of feces and urine, by the sound of gunshots and bullhorns blaring instructions in Dari and Pashto. Dust assaulted his eyes and nose. He felt the heat that emanated from human bodies crowded into narrow spaces.

    The atmosphere was tense. Marines and consular officers, some of whom had flown into Kabul from other embassies, were trying to pull passport and visa holders from the crowd. But every time they waded into it, they seemed to provoke a furious reaction. To get plucked from the street by the Americans smacked of cosmic unfairness to those left behind. Sometimes the anger swelled beyond control, so the troops shut down entrances to allow frustrations to subside. Bass was staring at despair in its rawest form. As he studied the people surrounding the airport, he wondered if he could ever make any of this a bit less terrible.

    Bass cadged a room in barracks belonging to the Turkish army, which had agreed, before the chaos had descended, to operate and protect the airport after the Americans finally departed. His days tended to follow a pattern. They would begin with the Taliban’s grudging assistance. Then, as lunchtime approached, the Talibs would get hot and hungry. Abruptly, they would stop processing evacuees through their checkpoints. Then, just as suddenly, at six or seven, as the sun began to set, they would begin to cooperate again.

    Bass was forever hatching fresh schemes to satisfy the Taliban’s fickle requirements. One day, the Taliban would let buses through without question; the next, they would demand to see passenger manifests in advance. Bass’s staff created official-looking placards to place in bus windows. The Taliban waved them through for a short period, then declared the placard system unreliable.

    Throughout the day, Bass would stop what he was doing and join videoconferences with Washington. He became a fixture in the Situation Room. Biden would pepper him with ideas for squeezing more evacuees through the gates. The president’s instinct was to throw himself into the intricacies of troubleshooting. Why don’t we have them meet in parking lots? Can’t we leave the airport and pick them up? Bass would kick around Biden’s proposed solutions with colleagues to determine their plausibility, which was usually low. Still, he appreciated Biden applying pressure, making sure that he didn’t overlook the obvious.

    At the end of his first day at the airport, Bass went through his email. A State Department spokesperson had announced Bass’s arrival in Kabul. Friends and colleagues had deluged him with requests to save Afghans. Bass began to scrawl the names from his inbox on a whiteboard in his office. By the time he finished, he’d filled the six-foot‑by‑four-foot surface. He knew there was little chance that he could help. The orders from Washington couldn’t have been clearer. The primary objective was to load planes with U.S. citizens, U.S.-visa holders, and passport holders from partner nations, mostly European ones.

    In his mind, Bass kept another running list, of Afghans he had come to know personally during his time as ambassador who were beyond his ability to rescue. Their faces and voices were etched in his memory, and he could be sure that, at some point when he wasn’t rushing to fill C‑17s, they would haunt his sleep.

    “Someone on the bus is dying.”

    Jake Sullivan was unnerved. What to do with such a dire message from a trusted friend? It described a caravan of five blue-and-white buses stuck 100 yards outside the south gate of the airport, one of them carrying a human being struggling for life. If Sullivan forwarded this problem to an aide, would it get resolved in time?

    Sullivan sometimes felt as if every member of the American elite was simultaneously asking for his help. When he left secure rooms, he would grab his phone and check his personal email accounts, which overflowed with pleas. This person just had the Taliban threaten them. They will be shot in 15 hours if you don’t get them out. Some of the senders seemed to be trying to shame him into action. If you don’t do something, their death is on your hands.

    Throughout late August, the president himself was fielding requests to help stranded Afghans, from friends and members of Congress. Biden became invested in individual cases. Three buses of women at the Kabul Serena Hotel kept running into logistical obstacles. He told Sullivan, “I want to know what happens to them. I want to know when they make it to the airport.” When the president heard these stories, he would become engrossed in solving the practical challenge of getting people to the airport, mapping routes through the city.

    When Wendy Sherman, the deputy secretary of state, went to check in with members of a task force working on the evacuation, she found grizzled diplomats in tears. She estimated that a quarter of the State Department’s personnel had served in Afghanistan. They felt a connection with the country, an emotional entanglement. Fielding an overwhelming volume of emails describing hardship cases, they easily imagined the faces of refugees. They felt the shame and anger that come with the inability to help. To deal with the trauma, the State Department procured therapy dogs that might ease the staff’s pain.

    The State Department redirected the attention of its sprawling apparatus to Afghanistan. Embassies in Mexico City and New Delhi became call centers. Staff in those distant capitals assumed the role of caseworkers, assigned to stay in touch with the remaining American citizens in Afghanistan, counseling them through the terrifying weeks.

    Sherman dispatched her Afghan-born chief of staff, Mustafa Popal, to HKIA to support embassy workers and serve as an interpreter. All day long, Sherman responded to pleas for help: from foreign governments’ representatives, who joined a daily videoconference she hosted; from members of Congress; from the cellist Yo‑Yo Ma, writing on behalf of musicians. Amid the crush, she felt compelled to go down to the first floor, to spend 15 minutes cuddling the therapy dogs.

    The Biden administration hadn’t intended to conduct a full-blown humanitarian evacuation of Afghanistan. It had imagined an orderly and efficient exodus that would extend past August 31, as visa holders boarded commercial flights from the country. As those plans collapsed, the president felt the same swirl of emotions as everyone else watching the desperation at the airport. Over the decades, he had thought about Afghanistan using the cold logic of realism—it was a strategic distraction, a project whose costs outweighed the benefits. Despite his many visits, the country had become an abstraction in his mind. But the graphic suffering in Kabul awakened in him a compassion that he’d never evinced in the debates about the withdrawal.

    After seeing the abject desperation on the HKIA tarmac, the president had told the Situation Room that he wanted all the planes flying thousands of troops into the airport to leave filled with evacuees. Pilots should pile American citizens and Afghans with visas into those planes. But there was a category of evacuees that he now especially wanted to help, what the government called “Afghans at risk.” These were the newspaper reporters, the schoolteachers, the filmmakers, the lawyers, the members of a girls’ robotics team who didn’t necessarily have paperwork but did have every reason to fear for their well-being in a Taliban-controlled country.

    This was a different sort of mission. The State Department hadn’t vetted all of the Afghans at risk. It didn’t know if they were genuinely endangered or simply strivers looking for a better life. It didn’t know if they would have qualified for the visas that the administration said it issued to those who worked with the Americans, or if they were petty criminals. But if they were in the right place at the right time, they were herded up the ramp of C‑17s.

    In anticipation of an evacuation, the United States had built housing at Camp As Sayliyah, a U.S. Army base in the suburbs of Doha. It could hold 8,000 people, housing them as the Department of Homeland Security collected their biometric data and began to vet them for immigration. But it quickly became clear that the United States would fly far more than 8,000 Afghans to Qatar.

    As the numbers swelled, the United States set up tents at Al Udeid Air Base, a bus ride away from As Sayliyah. Nearly 15,000 Afghans took up residence there, but their quarters were poorly planned. There weren’t nearly enough toilets or showers. Procuring lunch meant standing in line for three or four hours. Single men slept in cots opposite married women, a transgression of Afghan traditions.

    The Qataris, determined to use the crisis to burnish their reputation, erected a small city of air-conditioned wedding tents and began to cater meals for the refugees. But the Biden administration knew that the number of evacuees would soon exceed Qatar’s capacity. It needed to erect a network of camps. What it created was something like the hub-and-spoke system used by commercial airlines. Refugees would fly into Al Udeid and then be redirected to bases across the Middle East and Europe, what the administration termed “lily pads.”

    In September, just as refugees were beginning to arrive at Dulles International Airport, outside Washington, D.C., four Afghan evacuees caught the measles. All the refugees in the Middle East and Europe now needed vaccinations, which would require 21 days for immunity to take hold. To keep disease from flying into the United States, the State Department called around the world, asking if Afghans could stay on bases for three extra weeks.

    In the end, the U.S. government housed more than 60,000 Afghans in facilities that hadn’t existed before the fall of Kabul. It flew 387 sorties from HKIA. At the height of the operation, an aircraft took off every 45 minutes. A terrible failure of planning necessitated a mad scramble—a mad scramble that was an impressive display of creative determination.

    Even as the administration pulled off this feat of logistics, it was pilloried for the clumsiness of the withdrawal. The New York TimesDavid Sanger had written, “After seven months in which his administration seemed to exude much-needed competence—getting more than 70 percent of the country’s adults vaccinated, engineering surging job growth and making progress toward a bipartisan infrastructure bill—everything about America’s last days in Afghanistan shattered the imagery.”

    Biden didn’t have time to voraciously consume the news, but he was well aware of the coverage, and it infuriated him. It did little to change his mind, though. In the caricature version of Joe Biden that had persisted for decades, he was highly sensitive to shifts in opinion, especially when they emerged from columnists at the Post or the Times. The criticism of the withdrawal caused him to justify the chaos as the inevitable consequence of a difficult decision, even though he had never publicly, or privately, predicted it. Through the whole last decade of the Afghan War, he had detested the conventional wisdom of the foreign-policy elites. They were willing to stay forever, no matter the cost. After defying their delusional promises of progress for so long, he wasn’t going to back down now. In fact, everything he’d witnessed from his seat in the Situation Room confirmed his belief that exiting a war without hope was the best and only course.

    So much of the commentary felt overheated to him. He said to an aide: Either the press is losing its mind, or I am.


    August 26

    Every intelligence official watching Kabul was obsessed with the possibility of an attack by ISIS-Khorasan, or ISIS‑K, the Afghan offshoot of the Islamic State, which dreamed of a new caliphate in Central Asia. As the Taliban stormed across Afghanistan, they unlocked a prison at Bagram Air Base, freeing hardened ISIS‑K adherents. ISIS‑K had been founded by veterans of the Pakistani and Afghan Taliban who had broken with their groups, on the grounds that they needed to be replaced by an even more militant vanguard. The intelligence community had been sorting through a roaring river of unmistakable warnings about an imminent assault on the airport.

    As the national-security team entered the Situation Room for a morning meeting, it consumed an early, sketchy report of an explosion at one of the gates to HKIA, but it was hard to know if there were any U.S. casualties. Everyone wanted to believe that the United States had escaped unscathed, but everyone had too much experience to believe that. General McKenzie appeared via videoconference in the Situation Room with updates that confirmed the room’s suspicions of American deaths. Biden hung his head and quietly absorbed the reports. In the end, the explosion killed 13 U.S. service members and more than 150 Afghan civilians.


    August 29–30

    The remains of the dead service members were flown to Dover Air Force Base, in Delaware, for a ritual known as the dignified transfer: Flag-draped caskets are marched down the gangway of a transport plane and driven to the base’s mortuary.

    So much about the withdrawal had slipped beyond Biden’s control. But grieving was his expertise. If there was one thing that everyone agreed Biden did more adroitly than any other public official, it was comforting survivors. The Irish journalist Fintan O’Toole once called him “the Designated Mourner.”

    photo: Marines carry a flag-draped coffin on tarmac with a large group of people standing and saluting in background
    August 29: President Biden watches as the remains of a Marine killed in the attack on Hamid Karzai International Airport are returned to Dover Air Force Base. (Associated Press)

    Accompanied by his wife, Jill; Mark Milley; Antony Blinken; and Lloyd Austin, Biden made his way to a private room where grieving families had gathered. He knew he would be standing face to face with unbridled anger. A father had already turned his back on Austin and was angrily shouting at Milley, who held up his hands in the posture of surrender.

    When Biden entered, he shook the hand of Mark Schmitz, who had lost his 20-year-old son, Jared. In his sorrow, Schmitz couldn’t decide whether he wanted to sit in the presence of the president. According to a report in The Washington Post, the night before, he had told a military officer that he didn’t want to speak to the man whose incompetence he blamed for his son’s death. In the morning, he changed his mind.

    Schmitz told the Post that he couldn’t help but glare in Biden’s direction. When Biden approached, he held out a photo of Jared. “Don’t you ever forget that name. Don’t you ever forget that face. Don’t you ever forget the names of the other 12. And take some time to learn their stories.”

    “I do know their stories,” Biden replied.

    After the dignified transfer, the families piled onto a bus. A sister of one of the dead screamed in Biden’s direction: “I hope you burn in hell.”

    Of all the moments in August, this was the one that caused the president to second-guess himself. He asked Press Secretary Jen Psaki: Did I do something wrong? Maybe I should have handled that differently.

    As Biden left, Milley saw the pain on the president’s face. He told him: “You made a decision that had to be made. War is a brutal, vicious undertaking. We’re moving forward to the next step.”

    That afternoon, Biden returned to the Situation Room. There was pressure, from the Hill and talking heads, to push back the August 31 deadline. But everyone in the room was terrified by the intelligence assessments about ISIS‑K. If the U.S. stayed, it would be hard to avoid the arrival of more caskets at Dover.

    As Biden discussed the evacuation, he received a note, which he passed to Milley. According to a White House official present in the room, the general read it aloud: “If you want to catch the 5:30 Mass, you have to leave now.” He turned to the president. “My mother always said it’s okay to miss Mass if you’re doing something important. And I would argue that this is important.” He paused, realizing that the president might need a moment after his bruising day. “This is probably also a time when we need prayers.”

    Biden gathered himself to leave. As he stood from his chair, he told the group, “I will be praying for all of you.”

    On the morning of the 30th, John Bass was cleaning out his office. An alarm sounded, and he rushed for cover. A rocket flew over the airport from the west and a second crashed into the compound, without inflicting damage.

    Bass, ever the stoic, turned to a colleague. “Well, that’s about the only thing that hasn’t happened so far.” He was worried that the rockets weren’t a parting gift, but a prelude to an attack.

    Earlier that morning, though, Bass had implored Major General Donahue to delay the departure. He’d asked his military colleagues to remain at the outer access points, because there were reports of American citizens still making their way to them.

    Donahue was willing to give Bass a few extra hours. And around 3 a.m., 60 more American-passport holders arrived at the airport. Then, as if anticipating a final burst of American generosity toward refugees, the Taliban opened their checkpoints. A flood of Afghans rushed toward the airport. Bass sent consular officers to stand at the perimeter of concertina wire, next to the paratroopers, scanning for passports, visas, any official-looking document.

    An officer caught a glimpse of an Afghan woman in her 20s waving a printout showing that she had received permission to enter the U.S. “Wow. You won the lottery twice,” he told her. “You’re the visa-lottery winner and you’ve made it here in time.” She was one of the final evacuees hustled into the airport.

    Around 7 a.m., the last remaining State Department officials in Kabul, including Bass, posed for a photo and then walked up the ramp of a C-17. As Bass prepared for takeoff, he thought about two numbers. In total, the United States had evacuated about 124,000 people, which the White House touted as the most successful airlift in history. Bass also thought about the unknown number of Afghans he had failed to get out. He thought about the friends he couldn’t extricate. He thought about the last time he’d flown out of Kabul, 18 months earlier, and how he had harbored a sense of optimism for the country then. A hopefulness that now felt as remote as the Hindu Kush.

    photo of President Biden speaking behind lectern with presidential seal, with hallway behind; the numerous cameras, microphones, and reporters recording him; and staff to the side near a television
    August 31: President Biden delivers remarks on the end of the war in Afghanistan. (Chip Somodevilla / Getty)

    In a command center in the Pentagon’s basement, Lloyd Austin and Mark Milley followed events at the airport through a video feed provided by a drone, the footage filtered through the hazy shades of a night-vision lens. They watched in silence as Donahue, the last American soldier on the ground in Afghanistan, boarded the last C-17 to depart HKIA.

    Five C‑17s sat on the runway—carrying “chalk,” as the military refers to the cargo of troops. An officer in the command center narrated the procession for them. “Chalk 1 loaded … Chalk 2 taxiing.”

    As the planes departed, there was no applause, no hand-shaking. A murmur returned to the room. Austin and Milley watched the great military project of their generation—a war that had cost the lives of comrades, that had taken them away from their families—end without remark. They stood without ceremony and returned to their offices.

    Across the Potomac River, Biden sat with Jake Sullivan and Antony Blinken, revising a speech he would deliver the next day. One of Sullivan’s aides passed him a note, which he read to the group: “Chalk 1 in the air.” A few minutes later, the aide returned with an update. All of the planes were safely away.

    Some critics had clamored for Biden to fire the advisers who had failed to plan for the chaos at HKIA, to make a sacrificial offering in the spirit of self-abasement. But Biden never deflected blame onto staff. In fact, he privately expressed gratitude to them. And with the last plane in the air, he wanted Blinken and Sullivan to join him in the private dining room next to the Oval Office as he called Austin to thank him. The secretary of defense hadn’t agreed with Biden’s withdrawal plan, but he’d implemented it in the spirit of a good soldier.

    America’s longest war was now finally and officially over. Each man looked exhausted. Sullivan hadn’t slept for more than two hours a night over the course of the evacuation. Biden aides sensed that he hadn’t rested much better. Nobody needed to mention how the trauma and political scars might never go away, how the month of August had imperiled a presidency. Before returning to the Oval Office, they spent a moment together, lingering in the melancholy.


    This article was adapted from Franklin Foer’s book The Last Politician: Inside Joe Biden’s White House and the Struggle for America’s Future. It appears in the October 2023 print edition with the headline “The Final Days.” When you buy a book using a link on this page, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.

    Franklin Foer

    Source link

  • What we know about the document Trump mentioned in the taped Bedminster meeting | CNN Politics

    What we know about the document Trump mentioned in the taped Bedminster meeting | CNN Politics


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The tape of a conversation with Donald Trump and others made at his golf club in New Jersey has become perhaps the most critical publicly known evidence in the federal indictment against the former president.

    Special counsel Jack Smith has charged Trump with mishandling classified information after leaving the White House. And the recording – parts of which were made public by CNN earlier this week – features Trump in July 2021 discussing what he called a “highly confidential” Pentagon document that contained “secret” US military plans to attack Iran.

    Trump has offered a firehose of differing and contradictory explanations of what he claimed happened. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

    Here’s a breakdown of what we know about the document, and what Trump has said about it.

    Prosecutors revealed some key details in their 44-page indictment against Trump. Importantly, prosecutors said Trump “showed and described” the document during the recorded meeting.

    • The audiotape was recorded on July 21, 2021.
    • The meeting was at Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.
    • Trump attended the meeting with two of his staffers, plus a writer and a publisher.
    • None of the people in the room with Trump had security clearances.

    CNN and other news outlets reported that one of the Trump staffers was Margo Martin, a communications specialist, who previously worked with Trump during his presidency. The other staffer in the room was Liz Harrington, a Trump spokesperson.

    The writer and publisher were there to interview Trump for the then-upcoming autobiography of Mark Meadows, who was Trump’s final chief of staff.

    Meadows’ memoir, which was released in December 2021, appears to reference the meeting.

    “The president recalls a four-page report typed up by Mark Milley himself,” Meadows’ book says, referring to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. “It contained the general’s own plan to attack Iran, deploying massive numbers of troops, something he urged President Trump to do more than once during his presidency. President Trump denied those requests every time.”

    The book additionally bashes Milley for bad-mouthing Trump in the press. During the taped meeting, Trump is heard using the “highly classified” Iran attack plan to push back on Milley’s public comments that Trump tried to start a war.

    Before indicting Trump, federal investigators asked witnesses about the Bedminster tape and the Pentagon document, while they were testifying to the grand jury. Investigators also questioned Milley.

    The special counsel’s grand jury also heard from Martin, the Trump aide who attended the Bedminster meeting. Immediately after her testimony, prosecutors issued a new subpoena to Trump, demanding that he return the Pentagon document about Iran, and related material.

    Trump’s team turned over some Milley-related documents, but said it couldn’t find the specific document that Trump mentioned during the meeting with Meadows’ biographers.

    Prosecutors charged Trump with mishandling 31 sensitive documents, though it’s unclear if any of the charges pertain to the Iran attack plan. Regardless, prosecutors quoted extensively from the Bedminster tape in the indictment, demonstrating that after leaving the White House, Trump knew he still possessed sensitive government secrets, and that they hadn’t been declassified.

    George Conway reacts to newly obtained audio of Trump discussing classified documents

    Trump has offered several convoluted and contradictory explanations about the Bedminster meeting.

    At a CNN town hall on May 11, Trump was asked if he showed classified documents to anyone after leaving office. He said, “Not really. I would have the right to. By the way, they were declassified.” When pressed again on the same question, he said, “Not that I can think of.”

    After his indictment, but before the tape became public, Trump ramped up his denial, telling Fox News “there was no document” shown at Bedminster, just news clippings.

    “There was no document. That was a massive amount of papers and everything else talking about Iran and other things,” Trump said in the interview which aired on June 19. “And it may have been held up or may not, but that was not a document. I didn’t have a document, per se. There was nothing to declassify. These were newspaper stories, magazine stories and articles.”

    But CNN’s report Monday about the Bedminster tape revealed that Trump told those in the room, “These are the papers,” while discussing the Iran plans. That line was not in the indictment.

    After a 2024 campaign event Wednesday in New Hampshire, Trump told Fox News that after leaving the White House, he held onto “copies of different plans” as well as “newspaper articles” and magazine clippings. His comment about possessing “plans” raised eyebrows, because it was seen as an indication that he did in fact mishandle the US attack plan for Iran.

    Shortly after those comments, a Trump campaign spokesperson told CNN Trump was referring to “political plans.”

    Trump later told reporters he was actually referring to “plans for a golf course” and “building plans.” He also repeated his denial that he “didn’t have documents.”

    Source link

  • Trump Reacts To Audio Of Him Discussing Sensitive Document

    Trump Reacts To Audio Of Him Discussing Sensitive Document

    Former President Donald Trump responded with fury Monday after CNN published an audio file of him discussing a sensitive military document he kept after leaving the White House, saying the recording actually exonerates him and reflects an ongoing witch hunt at the Justice Department.

    “The Deranged Special Prosecutor, Jack Smith, working in conjunction with the DOJ & FBI, illegally leaked and ‘spun’ a tape and transcript of me which is actually an exoneration, rather than what they would have you believe,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “This continuing Witch Hunt is another ELECTION INTERFERENCE Scam. They are cheaters and thugs!”

    CNN was the first to publish the 2-minute audio earlier in the day, a key bit of evidence in special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment of the former president. In the clip, Trump references a document he says was compiled by Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when he was president, on potential attacks against Iran.

    “They presented me this ― this is off the record, but ― they presented me this. This was him. This was the Defense Department and him,” Trump says of Milley in the audio as papers are heard shuffling in the background.

    He then tells his guests the documents were classified, saying the papers were “highly confidential” and “secret.”

    “See, as president I could have declassified it,” Trump added. “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”

    Trump was arraigned on 37 criminal charges earlier this month related to his handling of classified files after he left the White House and his alleged efforts to obstruct the government’s attempts to see those documents returned.

    The former president has rejected the charges and pleaded not guilty on all counts earlier this month. He has repeatedly claimed he had the right to take anything he wanted from the White House and that he had a standing order to declassify anything that left the Oval Office.

    But the latest audio appears to undercut those claims as he acknowledges the secret nature of the files he had with him.

    Source link

  • Exclusive: Top US general says Ukraine is ‘well prepared’ for counteroffensive in war that has ‘greater meaning’ for the world | CNN Politics

    Exclusive: Top US general says Ukraine is ‘well prepared’ for counteroffensive in war that has ‘greater meaning’ for the world | CNN Politics

    Watch CNN’s full interview with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley on “The Lead with Jake Tapper” today at 4 p.m. ET.



    CNN
     — 

    The top US general told CNN on Monday that while Ukraine is “very well prepared” for a counteroffensive against Russia, it is “too early to tell what outcomes are going to happen.”

    “They’re in a war that’s an existential threat for the very survival of Ukraine and has greater meaning for the rest of the world — for Europe, really for the United States, but also for the globe,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley said in an exclusive interview with Oren Liebermann from Normandy, France.

    Milley, who is retiring this year, is in Normandy to commemorate the 79th anniversary of the 1944 D-Day invasion – a massive World War II operation that he called the “greatest amphibious invasion in human history” – as the war continues to rage in Ukraine.

    For months now, the US and its allies have been helping arm Ukraine for the counteroffensive, which was expected to start in the spring. Most recently, the US said it would support a joint effort by other nations to train Ukrainian pilots on F-16 fighter jets. Milley said that Ukraine is prepared for the counteroffensive because the US and partner nations have provided “training and ammunition and advice, intelligence.”

    Russia has already begun to claim that it has repelled a “large scale offensive,” in southern Donetsk, though they have not provided evidence to support the claim.

    The war has also begun creeping into Russia, as suspected Ukrainian drone strikes hit inside Moscow and a shelling attack was carried out in Belgorod. Asked Monday if such attacks would risk escalating the conflict, Milley said there is “always risk” of escalation, and it’s something the US is watching “very, very carefully.”

    Speaking to CNN’s Fareed Zakaria last week, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said that the US believes Ukraine’s counteroffensive “will allow Ukraine to take strategically significant territory back from Russia.”

    CNN reported Monday that Ukraine has begun providing drones to a network of agents and sympathizers inside Russia who are working to sabotage Russian efforts. There is no evidence that the recent drone strikes have been carried out by those pro-Ukraine agents, but officials told CNN they had noticed an uptick of attacks inside Russia’s borders.

    “There has been for months now a pretty consistent push by some in Ukraine to be more aggressive,” one source familiar with US intelligence said. “And there has certainly been some willingness at senior levels. The challenge has always been their ability to do it.”

    A spokesperson for the head of the Ukrainian Security Service told CNN that they would comment on “instances of ‘cotton’ only after our victory,” using Ukrainian slang term for explosions.

    Quoting Vasyl Malyuk, head of the Ukrainian Security Service, the spokesperson suggested that the attacks inside Russia would continue, telling CNN that “‘cotton’ has been burning, is burning, and will continue to burn.”

    Source link

  • Trump lawyers told DOJ they couldn’t find classified doc discussed in audio

    Trump lawyers told DOJ they couldn’t find classified doc discussed in audio

    Attorneys for former President Donald Trump have informed the Justice Department that they have been unable to locate a classified document related to Iran sought by investigators that was discussed during a recorded meeting, two people with knowledge of the case confirmed to CBS News. 

    The classified document in question came to the Justice Department’s attention through an audio file it obtained in the course of special counsel Jack Smith’s probe into the former president’s retention of sensitive records and alleged obstruction of the investigation. The audio, recorded by a Trump aide, includes remarks Trump made to two ghostwriters for his last White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, related to Iran and how to confront it militarily, the people said, requesting anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

    One person said it was not clear if the document exists, or if Trump was misidentifying something to the group assembled during the recording. They added that the tape is in the possession of prosecutors.

    CNN first reported the existence of the recording and that Trump’s lawyers told the Justice Department that they were unable to find the classified document referenced. 

    The recording — from a July 2021 meeting at Trump’s golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey — is a crucial piece of evidence that prosecutors obtained in recent months and presented in grand jury proceedings examining the former president’s actions related to sensitive records, CBS News has previously reported.

    CBS News has reported that, according to two people familiar with the matter, Trump can be heard on the recording conceding that there were national security restrictions on the classified memo because it detailed a potential attack on Iran. It is not clear from the recording whether Trump was in possession of the document at the time or was just describing its contents to at least three people who were present during the meeting, the people said. CBS News has not listened to the audio.

    Trump aide Margo Martin, who recorded the meeting, and the other individuals who were working on an autobiography of Meadows were present at the meeting, CBS News previously reported. The sources said that on the audio, the former president mentioned the classified document when he was talking about Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who according to The New Yorker, had fought in the last days of the Trump administration to keep the president from attacking Iran.

    Witnesses brought before the grand jury, per the people with knowledge, have been asked about this exchange and any other mentions by Trump of any classified documents or maps or talk of Milley.

    The subpoena for the document was issued in or around March, a person with knowledge said. The subpoena was first reported by CNN. 

    Representatives for Trump were unavailable for comment.

    Robert Costa, Catherine Herridge and Robert Legare contributed reporting.

    Source link

  • Biden authorizes airstrike in Syria after suspected Iranian-affiliated drone kills US contractor and wounds 5 US troops | CNN Politics

    Biden authorizes airstrike in Syria after suspected Iranian-affiliated drone kills US contractor and wounds 5 US troops | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    The US conducted an airstrike in Syria against what it said were Iranian-affiliated facilities after a suspected Iranian drone on Thursday struck a facility housing US personnel in the country, killing an American contractor and wounding five US service members.

    The contractor was an American citizen, a spokesman for US Central Command confirmed, and an additional US contractor was also wounded in the strike. An official familiar with the matter told CNN that the injured service members are all in stable condition.

    “The intelligence community assess the UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) to be of Iranian origin,” the Pentagon said.

    In response to the strike, President Joe Biden authorized a precision airstrike “in eastern Syria against facilities used by groups affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC),” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in the statement.

    The US, according to the Pentagon statement, “took proportionate and deliberate action intended to limit the risk of escalation and minimize casualties.”

    “As President Biden has made clear, we will take all necessary measures to defend our people and will always respond at a time and place of our choosing,” Austin said. “No group will strike our troops with impunity.”

    The strikes are likely to increase tensions with Iran, with which the proxy groups are aligned, though Tehran isn’t always involved in directing attacks that they conduct. The US has already sanctioned Tehran for providing attack drones to Russia to use in the war in Ukraine. And on Thursday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley reiterated US concerns that Iran has the potential to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in less than two weeks and manufacture one within months.

    The drone intentionally crashed into its target, the official said. The infrastructure that was targeted in the US response was not directly related to the suspected Iranian drone itself, the official said, but was instead targeted by the US because it was known to be supporting Iranian proxy groups in the country with munitions and intelligence.

    The number of casualties from the US airstrike is still being determined, the official said.

    The commander of US Central Command, Gen. Erik Kurilla, said the US could carry out additional strikes if there were more attacks. “We are postured for scalable options in the face of any additional Iranian attacks,” Kurilla said in a statement Thursday evening.

    The US maintains approximately 900 troops in Syria.

    Kurilla said earlier Thursday that Iranian proxies had carried out drone attacks or rocket attacks against US forces in the Middle East 78 times since the beginning of 2021, an average of nearly one attack every 10 days.

    “What Iran does to hide its hand is they use Iranian proxies,” Kurilla told a House Armed Services Committee hearing earlier in the day. “That’s either UAVs or rockets to be able to attack our forces in either Iraq or Syria.”

    Asked if such attacks were considered an act of war, Kurilla said, “They are being done by the Iranian proxies is what I would tell you.”

    The Biden administration has carried out airstrikes against militias affiliated with Iran on multiple occasions following previous attacks on US facilities in the region.

    In February 2021, Biden’s first known military action was to carry out strikes against Iranian-backed militias after rocket attacks on US troops in Iraq. And in August, the US struck a group of bunkers used for ammunition storage and logistics support by Iranian proxies in Syria, after rockets landed near another US facility.

    Milley visited US troops in Syria earlier this month, marking the first time he has visited as the top US general. Milley visited troops in northeast Syria who are there as part of the ongoing campaign to defeat ISIS, a mission the US carries out with its partners in the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces.

    But Milley’s visit also focused on the safety of US troops, his spokesman had said, and he inspected for protection measures in Syria.

    Two weeks before Milley’s visit, US and coalition forces at Green Village in Syria came under rocket attack. No US or coalition troops were injured in that attack, but it underscored the threat emanating from adversaries in the region, often in the form of Iranian-backed proxies or militias.

    Just two days before the rocket attack, four US troops and one working dog were injured in a helicopter raid against a senior ISIS leader in northeast Syria.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    Source link

  • Top US general visits Syria for first time as chairman of the joint chiefs, meets US forces | CNN Politics

    Top US general visits Syria for first time as chairman of the joint chiefs, meets US forces | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley visited Syria on Saturday, according to a statement from his office, marking his first visit to the country as the top US general.

    Milley met with US troops in northeast Syria, who are there as part of the campaign to defeat ISIS, and inspected force protection measures, his spokesman Col. Dave Butler said.

    The Syrian Foreign Ministry condemned what it called Miley’s “illegal” visit to the US military base, saying it was a “flagrant violation of the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” according to state news agency SANA.

    Two weeks before Milley’s visit, US and coalition forces at Green Village in Syria came under rocket attack, according to US Central Command. Two rockets landed near the base, CENTCOM said. No US or coalition troops were injured, and there was no damage to the base.

    Just two days earlier, four US troops and one working dog were injured in a helicopter raid against a senior ISIS leader in northeast Syria. The raid killed Hamza al-Homsi, CENTCOM said. The troops were injured in an “explosion on target,” the command said, though it was unclear if it was a suicide vest, grenade or other explosive that injured the troops.

    The US maintains approximately 900 troops in Syria. While in the country, Milley also reviewed the ongoing repatriation efforts from the al-Hol refugee camp, which houses more than 60,000 displaced persons, including 25,000 children.

    The repatriation efforts have been a particular focus of Gen. Erik Kurilla, the commander of US Central Command, who has visited the camp three times since taking over on April 1, 2022. Kurilla’s most recent visit was in mid-November, when he warned that the children in the camp are “prime targets for ISIS radicalization.”

    In February, US forces conducted 15 partnered operations with local forces, including the Kurdish Syrian Defense Forces, as well as two US-only operations, according to CENTCOM. The operations led to the deaths of five ISIS operatives and the detention of 11 others, the command said.

    This story has been updated with additional reaction.

    Source link

  • Inside Biden’s decision to ‘take care of’ the Chinese spy balloon that triggered a diplomatic crisis | CNN Politics

    Inside Biden’s decision to ‘take care of’ the Chinese spy balloon that triggered a diplomatic crisis | CNN Politics


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    When President Joe Biden learned a likely Chinese spy balloon was drifting through the stratosphere 60,000 feet above Montana, his first inclination was to take it down.

    By then, however, it was both too early and too late. After flying over swaths of sparsely populated land, it was now projected to keep drifting over American cities and towns. The debris from the balloon could endanger lives on the ground, his top military brass told him.

    The massive white orb, carrying aloft a payload the size of three coach buses, had already been floating in and out of American airspace for three days before it created enough concern for Biden’s top general to brief him, according to two US officials.

    Its arrival had gone unnoticed by the public as it floated eastward over Alaska – where it was first detected by North American Aerospace Defense Command on January 28 – toward Canada. NORAD continued to track and assess the balloon’s path and activities, but military officials assigned little importance to the intrusion into American airspace, having often witnessed Chinese spy balloons slip into the skies above the United States. At the time, the balloon was not assessed to be an intelligence risk or physical threat, officials say.

    This time, however, the balloon kept going: high over Alaska, into Canada and back toward the US, attracting little attention from anyone looking up from the ground.

    “We’ve seen them and monitored them, briefed Congress on the capabilities they can bring to the table,” another US official told CNN. “But we’ve never seen something as brazen as this.”

    It would take seven days from when the balloon first entered US airspace before an F-22 fighter jet fired a heat-seeking missile into the balloon on the opposite end of the country, sending its equipment and machinery tumbling into the Atlantic Ocean.

    The balloon’s week-long American journey, from the remote Aleutian Islands to the Carolina coast, left a wake of shattered diplomacy, furious reprisals from Biden’s political rivals and a preview of a new era of escalating military strain between the world’s two largest economies.

    It’s also raised questions about why it wasn’t shot down sooner and what information, if any, it scooped up along its path.

    What was meant to be a high-profile moment of statesmanship -as Secretary of State Antony Blinken prepared to travel to China instead transformed into a televised standoff, testing Biden’s resolve at a new moment of reckoning with China. As Navy divers and FBI investigators sort through the tangle of equipment and technology that tumbled into the Atlantic Ocean on Saturday, Biden and his team must also piece together what the episode means for the broader relationship with Beijing.

    Minutes after the balloon was shot down at his order, a reporter asked Biden what message his decision sent to China. He looked on silently before stepping into his SUV.

    On Tuesday, as Biden darted from Washington to New York City for an infrastructure event and a fundraiser, Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, informed him there was a Chinese balloon floating over Montana.

    The location was unnerving: As officials watched the balloon’s path, there was alarm at what appeared to be deliberate effort to sit over an Air Force base that maintains one of the largest silos of US intercontinental ballistic missiles.

    For some administration officials, the timing also appeared intentional. The balloon floated over the US the same week Blinken was due to depart for China, a high-stakes visit viewed as the culmination of intensive diplomatic efforts launched late last year by Biden and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping at a summit in Bali.

    In his Tuesday briefing with the President, Milley informed Biden the balloon appeared to be on a clear path into the continental United States, differentiating it from previous Chinese surveillance craft. The President appeared inclined at that point to take the balloon down, and asked Milley and other military officials to draw up options and contingencies.

    At the same time, Biden asked his national security team to take steps to prevent the balloon from being able to gather any intelligence – essentially, by making sure no sensitive military activity or unencrypted communications would be conducted in its vicinity, officials said.

    That evening, Pentagon officials met to review their military options. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, traveling abroad in Asia, participated virtually. NASA was also brought in to analyze and assess the potential debris field, based on the trajectory of the balloon, weather, and estimated payload. When options were presented to Biden on Wednesday, he directed his military leadership to shoot down the balloon as soon as they viewed it as a viable option, given concerns about risks to people and property on the ground.

    “Shoot it down,” Biden told his military advisers, he would later recount to reporters.

    But Austin and Milley told Biden the risks of shooting the balloon down were too high while it was moving over the US, given the chance debris could endanger lives or property on the ground below.

    “They said to me, ‘Let’s wait till the safest place to do it,’” Biden told reporters on Saturday

    Biden had another key request, though: he wanted the military to shoot down the balloon in such a way that it would maximize their ability to recover its payload, allowing the US intelligence community to sift through its components and gain insights into its capabilities, officials said. Shooting it down over water also increased the chances of being able to recover the payload intact, the officials said.

    While Beijing insisted on Friday that the balloon was simply a meteorological device that had strayed off course, the US government was confident that the balloons were being used for surveillance. Both the balloon discovered over the US and another spotted transiting Latin America carried surveillance equipment not usually associated with standard meteorological activities or civilian research, officials said – specifically, both featured collection pod equipment and solar panels located on the metal truss suspended below the balloon itself. The US also observed small motors and propellers on the balloons, leading officials to believe Beijing had some control over its path.

    US officials said the balloons were part of a fleet of Chinese spy balloons that have been spotted across five continents over the last several years.

    For the bulk of its journey across the US, the scramble to assess, monitor and eventually debilitate the balloon was kept to a close circle of Biden’s top national security advisers.

    But by the middle of the week, however, the mysterious white object floating above more populated areas of Montana was difficult to conceal. The balloon caused an hours-long grounding of commercial flights around Billings on Wednesday as the military worked to respond.

    And people starting looking up.

    Michael Alverson was working at the mines in Billings when he looked up and noticed a glowing orb in the sky. Realizing it couldn’t be the moon, he brought out his binoculars to take a closer look.

    “Me and my coworkers were shocked,” Alverson said. “It appeared to be a weather balloon – or so we thought.”

    Ashley McGowan told CNN she received a call from her neighbor wondering if she had heard jets flying about their neighborhood in Reed Point, Montana, on Wednesday. McGowan said she went outside with her dogs and saw a bright white dot in the sky.

    “What’s happening?” she recalled wondering. “Is this a UFO or is it like trash or is it the star? I had somebody try to tell me it was the green comet, I’m like that’s way too close to be the comet.”

    “This isn’t normal,” she remembered thinking. “There’s jets flying everywhere.”

    Officials attributed the decision to publicize the balloon’s existence to several factors, including the fact “that people were just going to see the damn thing,” one official acknowledged.

    As the military was fine tuning its options, a parallel effort was underway with the Chinese to assess the feasibility of Blinken making his highly anticipated visit to Beijing at a moment of fresh tension.

    Heading into the visit, White House officials had been cheered by more robust communications with China following Biden’s meeting with Xi late last year. After shutting down virtually all talks following then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan last summit, the Chinese were finally back at the table – a critical step, in the eyes of Biden’s advisers, to maintaining stability in the world’s most important bilateral relationship.

    The balloon would dash all of it.

    US Secretary of State Antony Blinken attends a meeting with China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Indonesia on July 9, 2022.

    On Wednesday evening, China’s top official in Washington was summoned to the State Department, where Blinken and Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman delivered “a very clear and stark message” about the discovery of the surveillance balloon, officials told CNN.

    Biden himself relayed to his top national security officials that he no longer believed the time was right for Blinken to visit Beijing, in part because the balloon would likely end up dominating his talks there.

    The trip was postponed hours before Blinken was due to board his plane.

    “In this current environment, I think it would have significantly narrowed the agenda that we would have been able to address,” a senior State Department official said.

    Republicans immediately moved to attack Biden for not shooting the balloon down immediately. The attacks, which came as Biden ignored questions on the issue throughout the day on Friday, served as an annoyance “that evolved into frustration,” inside the White House, one person familiar with the dynamic said.

    “This was a decision that was made at the recommendation of the Pentagon, for public safety reasons,” the person said in describing the rationale.

    Still, administration officials moved to brief key lawmakers and staff on Capitol Hill. That included briefings for the staff of the top Republicans and Democrats on the intelligence panels, as well as the top four congressional leaders – a group known as the Gang of 8.

    A formal briefing for the lawmakers in the Gang of 8 is scheduled to take place next week.

    Still, coming just ahead of Blinken’s travel to China, it was a move that officials across the administration said made little sense on its face and required a public and private response.

    US officials spoke to their Chinese counterparts throughout the week, making clear the balloon was likely to be shot down, an official said.

    Biden himself would be updated regularly over the course of the week, with his national security team providing updates on their conversations with Chinese counterparts and military officials presenting updated military options.

    US military and intelligence officials moved quickly to identify and close off any risks that may have extended from the balloon, though one official described them as “rather small to begin with,” given ongoing US efforts to mitigate spying threats from more sophisticated satellites.

    Another official also said US assets were immediately put into motion to monitor and collect any intelligence from the balloon as it followed its path through the US – including the scrambling of military aircraft as the balloon floated high above the central part of the country.

    Still, even without a direct threat to the American public, the widely held view inside the administration was that the balloon would need to be shot down, likely after it moved over open water.

    Waiting to carry out the operation allowed the US to “study and scrutinize” the balloon and its equipment, a senior Defense official said.

    “We have learned technical things about this balloon and its surveillance capabilities. And I suspect, if we are successful in recovering aspects of the debris, we will learn even more,” the official added.

    Officials also suggested that collecting debris from the balloon could be easier if it landed in water as opposed to on land.

    Government agencies worked throughout week to find the right place and right time to intercept the Chinese spy balloon, according to a government source familiar with the shoot-down plans. Earlier in the week, the Federal Aviation Administration had been told by the Pentagon to prepare options for shutting down airspace.

    A plan to shoot down the balloon was once again presented to Biden on Friday night while he was in Wilmington, where he approved the execution plan for Saturday.

    “We’re gonna take care of it,” Biden said later on the frigid tarmac Saturday in Syracuse, New York, where he was paying a brief visit to visit family.

    Government officials were told Friday night “decisions would be made (Saturday) morning” on when to close down airspace, and FAA officials were told to “be by the phone” early Saturday morning and “ready to roll.”

    Austin gave his final approval for the strike shortly after noon on Saturday from the tarmac in New York, according to a defense official. Austin had traveled north on Saturday for a funeral, but remained very engaged throughout the planning process and the operation, the official said.

    At about 1:30 p.m. ET, the FAA instituted one of the largest areas of restricted airspace in US history, more than five times the size of the restricted zone over Washington, DC, and roughly twice the size of the state of Massachusetts.

    The Temporary Flight Restriction – put in place at the request of the Pentagon, the FAA said – included about 150 miles of Atlantic coastline that effectively paralyzed three commercial airports: Wilmington in North Carolina and Myrtle Beach and Charleston in South Carolina.

    Biden had just taken off from Syracuse when fighter jets that had taken off from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia fired a single missile into the balloon.

    As its wreckage tumbled toward the Atlantic Ocean, Biden was on the phone with his national security team on Air Force One.

    Source link

  • Next few months crucial for Ukraine’s spring counteroffensive, top Pentagon officials say

    Next few months crucial for Ukraine’s spring counteroffensive, top Pentagon officials say

    The next few months are crucial to the success of any Ukrainian counteroffensive in the spring, according to the top officials at the Pentagon. 

    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Friday said there is “a window of opportunity” ahead of the spring to get Ukraine the capabilities they need to go on the offensive. 

    Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley were at Ramstein air base in Germany this week to attend a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, where representatives from 54 nations gathered to discuss the equipment and training Ukraine would need to expel Russia from its territory. 

    Milley told reporters after the meeting that militarily it would be “very, very difficult” for Ukraine to completely push Russia out of Ukraine this year.

    However, he suggested that Ukrainians could execute a successful operation to reclaim some of the Russian-occupied territory, depending on the training and new equipment they receive in the next few months. 

    He also said it would be a “very heavy lift” to get the equipment to the Ukrainians and then trained on both how to use the equipment and how to maneuver together on the battlefield. 

    Last weekend, the U.S. started its training of approximately 500 Ukrainians per month on combined arms maneuvers — that is, how to operate among battalion-sized groups and coordinate between air and ground. 

    The latest U.S. assistance package, valued at $2.5 billion and released on Thursday, includes more air defense capabilities and additional armored fighting vehicles, but no tanks. 

    Some expected the meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group to pressure Germany to provide or allow the third-party export of German-made Leopard tanks to Ukraine. There are about 2,000 Leopard tanks around NATO, and some countries have signaled they would be willing to provide them to Ukraine but need Germany to approve the transfer. 

    Austin told reporters the German defense minister has not yet made a decision on the Leopard tanks. He also clarified that Germany’s decision is not dependent on the U.S. providing Abrams tanks to Ukraine. U.S. officials have argued that the Abrams tanks, which run on jet fuel that is more difficult to acquire, are too hard to maintain, while the Leopards, which use diesel, are more accessible and easier to use. 

    “We have a window of opportunity here, you know, between now and the spring when they commence their operation, their counteroffensive,” Austin said Friday. “And that’s not a long time, and we have to pull together the right capabilities.” 

    Source link

  • Top US general says increased partnership between Iran, Russia, and China will make them ‘problematic’ for ‘years to come’ | CNN Politics

    Top US general says increased partnership between Iran, Russia, and China will make them ‘problematic’ for ‘years to come’ | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley told lawmakers Wednesday that China, Russia, and Iran would be a problem for the US “for many years to come” as the three are working more closely together.

    Speaking before the House Armed Services Committee alongside Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Milley said Russia and China are “getting closer together.”

    “I wouldn’t call it a true full alliance in the real meaning of that word, but we are seeing them moving closer together, and that’s troublesome,” Milley said. “And then … Iran is the third. So those three countries together are going to be problematic for many years to come I think, especially Russia and China because of their capability.”

    While the US has made clear for years now that the three countries are focuses of the military – particularly China and Russia – tensions with all three have been on the rise in recent months and even weeks.

    The US continues to help fund Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s invasion, which Milley said Wednesday “in and of itself is a war crime.” Tensions with China rose recently following a suspected Chinese spy balloon’s travel over the continental US. It was ultimately shot down by the US military off the eastern coast of the country; Chinese Minister of National Defense Wei Fenghe refused to take a call with Austin regarding the incident.

    And just last week, the US launched retaliatory strikes against Iran-backed groups in Syria, after a suspected Iranian drone struck a facility housing US personnel, killing an American contractor and injuring five service members. Following the US strike, additional rocket and drone attacks were carried out targeting US and coalition personnel in Syria.

    Milley warned during a hearing on Tuesday that Iran could “produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon in less than two weeks,” and ultimately create a nuclear weapon within “several months thereafter.”

    “The United States military has developed multiple options for our national leadership to consider if or when Iran decides to develop a nuclear weapon,” he said.

    But he added Wednesday that China and Russia specifically have “the means to threaten our interests and our way of life,” and mark the first time that the US is “facing two major nuclear powers.”

    And while Milley also said Wednesday that China’s nuclear capabilities are “not matched” with those of the US, he added that they are still significant.

    “We are probably not going to be able to do anything to stop, slow down, disrupt, interdict, or destroy the Chinese nuclear development program that they have projected out over the next 10 to 20 years,” Milley said. “They’re going to do that in accordance with their own plan. And there’s very little leverage, I think, that we can do externally to prevent that from happening.”

    Source link

  • Inside the furious week-long scramble to hunt down a massive Pentagon leak | CNN Politics

    Inside the furious week-long scramble to hunt down a massive Pentagon leak | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Jack Teixeira, wearing a green t-shirt and bright red gym shorts with his hands above his head, walked slowly backward toward the armed federal agents outside his home in North Dighton, Massachusetts, who took him into custody on charges of leaking classified documents.

    The carefully choreographed arrest of the 21-year-old Air National Guardsman stood in stark contrast to the Biden administration’s scramble one week earlier to deal with the fallout from the revelation that highly classified documents had been sitting publicly on the internet for weeks.

    Those leaked documents, which appeared to catch the Biden administration flat-footed, disclosed a blunt US intelligence assessment of the war in Ukraine, as well as details revealing US intelligence collection on allies.

    The Biden administration raced to determine the identity of the leaker who had posted pictures of folded-up documents online, to understand the full scope of what had been leaked and to soothe allies who were varying degrees of angry that their secrets had spilled out for the world to see.

    While the suspected leaker has been arrested, the administration’s damage assessment is still ongoing. It remains unclear whether the full extent of the impact of the leaks is known, as details from additional classified documents continued to be published throughout the week – even on Friday morning, the day after his arrest.

    Inside the Pentagon, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley was “pissed” at the leak and “deeply concerned” about its national security implications, a US official told CNN. The Defense Department has been holding daily meetings on the leak since Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was first briefed last Thursday.

    The episode represents the most egregious disclosure of classified documents in years. The leaked documents have exposed what officials say are lingering vulnerabilities in the management of government secrets, even after agencies overhauled their computer systems following the 2013 Edward Snowden leak, which revealed the scope of the National Security Agency’s intelligence gathering apparatus.

    It is unlikely, however, that those safeguards would have prevented the most recent leak, sources said. “All classified systems have multiple levels of risk controls, but a determined insider will find the weak points over time,” said a former US official.

    The Pentagon has already taken steps to clamp down on who can access sensitive classified material, while Austin has ordered a review over access to classified documents. And Congress is vowing to investigate exactly what happened and why the US intelligence community failed to discover its secrets were sitting on a public internet forum for weeks.

    In a statement acknowledging the extent of the problem that the leaks exposed, President Joe Biden said Friday that he had directed both the military and intelligence community to “take steps to further secure and limit distribution of sensitive information.”

    “This is a breakdown,” Chris Krebs, the former head of the Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity agency, told CNN. “There’s no question that there will be a lot of introspection inside the intelligence community and across the government of where were those breakdowns? How do we ensure that we tighten that system of military discipline that that was referred to earlier to ensure that these things do not happen?”

    According to charging documents unsealed on Friday, Teixeira allegedly began posting classified information on the Discord server in December 2022.

    Teixeira is believed to be the head of obscure invite-only Discord chatroom called “Thug Shaker Central,” multiple US officials told CNN, where information from the classified documents was first posted.

    One of the users on the Discord server told FBI investigators that Teixeira began posting photographs of documents that appeared to be classified in January 2023, according to the affidavit unsealed Friday after Teixeira was arraigned.

    Investigators wrote in the affidavit that at least one of the documents that described the status of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, including troop movements, was classified at the TS-SCI level, meaning it contains top-secret, sensitive compartmentalized information.

    “The Government Document is based on sensitive U.S. intelligence, gathered through classified sources and methods, and contains national defense information,” the affidavit states.

    Teixeira, an airman first class stationed at Otis Air National Guard Base, was assigned to the 102nd Intelligence Wing, which is a “24/7 operational mission” that takes in intelligence from various sources and packages it into a product for some of the most senior military leaders around the globe, a defense official said.

    His job was not to be the one packaging the intelligence for those senior commanders, but rather to work on the network on which that highly classified intelligence lived. For that purpose, the official said Teixeira would be required to have a TS/SCI clearance, in the instance that he was exposed to that level of intelligence.

    “It’s not like your regular IT guy where you call a help desk and they come fix your computer,” the official said. “They’re working on a very highly classified system, so they require that clearance.”

    CNN has reviewed 53 documents that were posted on social media sites, which include US intelligence assessments of Ukrainian and Russian forces, as well as details about other countries providing weapons to Ukraine and other intelligence matters. The Washington Post has reported on an additional tranche of documents from the server.

    The photos showed crumpled documents laid on top of magazines and surrounded by other random objects, such as zip-close bags and Gorilla Glue, suggesting they had been hastily folded up and shoved into a pocket before being removed from a secure location.

    A Discord user told investigators that Teixeira had become concerned “he may be discovered making the transcriptions of text in the workplace, so he began taking the documents to his residence and photographing them,” according to the affidavit.

    Four Discord users active in a different Discord chatroom where the documents later appeared told CNN they began circulating on Thug Shaker. Another user who was in the Thug Shaker chatroom told CNN they saw the original posts of classified documents but declined to speak further about them.

    While the documents were being shared on Discord, there’s no indication that the US intelligence community was aware they were on the internet. Discord servers are typically small, private online communities that require an invitation to join.

    On April 6, The New York Times first reported on the leaked documents and the Pentagon having launched an investigation into who may have been behind the leak.

    The investigation into finding the leaker quickly moved into the hands of the Justice Department, while the Pentagon investigation focused on a damage assessment of the leaks themselves.

    But the number of leaked documents continued to grow in the hours and days that followed the initial disclosure, revealing new intelligence assessments on everything from South Korea’s hesitance to provide the US weapons that might be sent to Ukraine to intelligence suggesting Egypt planned to supply rockets to Russia.

    US diplomats were forced to deal with the fallout. Seoul said it would hold “necessary discussions with the US” following the leak.

    The documents that were leaked appear to be part of a daily intelligence briefing deck prepared for the Pentagon’s senior leaders, including Milley, the top US military general. On any given day, the slides in that deck can be properly accessed by hundreds, if not thousands, of people across the government, officials said.

    Last Friday’s announcement of a Justice Department investigation underscored just how high a priority the leak was considered.

    By Monday, FBI agents from Washington to California to Boston were combing through evidence, conducting interviews and tracking volumes of computer data that within days pointed to Teixeira. They worked with Army CID investigators experienced in classified document probes.

    Anthony Ferrante, a former FBI agent, said that the “first few hours are critical” in a case like the Discord leaks as investigators rush to preserve digital evidence before it becomes harder to find online or vanishes altogether.

    FBI agents likely worked backward from the initial Discord posts to build a profile of the leaker, combing through his other online accounts to “put a human behind a keyboard,” Ferrante, who is now global head of cybersecurity at FTI Consulting, told CNN.

    Even though Teixeira emerged quickly as the most obvious suspect, counterintelligence agents trained in uncovering foreign spies looked through Teixeira’s background to try to find any sign that he could be working with a foreign intelligence service.

    The FBI agents’ work was made more urgent because the trove of documents had set off a media frenzy and reporters found ready interviews among members of Teixeira’s Internet social circle.

    On Monday, the FBI interviewed a user of the Discord chatroom where the classified information had been posted, according to the affidavit. That person told investigators that a user who went by “Jack” and said he was in the Air National Guard was the server’s administrator.

    A day earlier, the investigative news outlet Bellingcat posted an interview with a member of that same chatroom.

    On Wednesday, a day before Teixeira’s arrest, the FBI obtained records from Discord that included the subscriber information of the server’s administrator, which had Teixeira’s name and address, according to the affidavit.

    By day 5 of the FBI’s search, agents believed they had enough to charge Teixeira, and they began surveilling him.

    In a different scenario, without the intense public attention, agents might have watched him for weeks to see if he was meeting anyone suspicious or if he had accomplices.

    Instead, they moved to make an arrest Thursday, as news helicopters flew above.

    Teixeira was charged under the Espionage Act with unauthorized retention and transmission of national defense information and unauthorized removal of classified information and defense materials. He will next appear on Wednesday in federal court in Massachusetts.

    For the Biden administration, the episode has already prompted the Pentagon to begin to limit who across the government receives its highly classified daily intelligence briefs, amid lingering questions over why a 21-year-old junior Air National Guardsman had access to such classified information – and why it wasn’t discovered more quickly.

    Austin and Milley spent time on the phone speaking with US allies and partners around the world regarding the sensitive intelligence and top-secret documents suddenly thrust into the public sphere. Those conversations were expected to continue through the end of the week, another US official said.

    Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman was tapped to lead the diplomatic response to the leaked US intelligence documents, according to a US official familiar with the matter.

    Biden was continually briefed on the state of the investigation while abroad, as well as the efforts of his top officials to engage with allies over the leaked information, officials said. Behind the scenes, that effort was a reality that loomed over a deeply personal and important foreign trip for Biden, one official acknowledged. 

    Still, the leaks didn’t arise when Biden met Wednesday with British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, a Five Eyes intelligence sharing ally.

    Biden publicly downplayed the significance of the leak when he made his first comments on the matter. “I’m concerned that it happened, but there is nothing contemporaneous that I’m aware of that is of great consequence,” Biden told reporters Thursday.

    Source link

  • Trump on tape: Here’s what it means and what’s next | CNN Politics

    Trump on tape: Here’s what it means and what’s next | CNN Politics



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump’s history of making inappropriate or questionable comments on tape got another chapter on Wednesday with fresh revelations from his post-White House life.

    The latest example emerged from CNN’s exclusive reporting that federal prosecutors have an audio recording of Trump acknowledging he held onto a classified Pentagon document after leaving office. The tape seems unlikely to dent his political position as the frontrunner for the GOP nomination in 2024. But it could have real consequences in the legal limbo where he lives.

    Most people recall the “Access Hollywood” tape of Trump using vulgar language to argue that “stars” can grab women. The emergence of that tape just before the 2016 election didn’t hurt him politically. But he later defended that statement as true, “unfortunately or fortunately,” in a video deposition, and jurors in New York recently found him liable for sexual abuse after the deposition was played back to them.

    And then there’s the recording of him asking election officials in Georgia to “find” votes to help him change the results of the 2020 presidential election. Those efforts to overturn President Joe Biden’s win in the Peach State are part of an ongoing investigation.

    This latest tape could also end up as part of a criminal case. The recording is in the possession of the Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith, who’s investigating the retention of national defense information. Smith’s investigation has shown signs of nearing its end, although it hasn’t resulted in any criminal charges.

    So why is this revelation so significant?

    “First of all, prosecutors love tapes,” CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor, told Jake Tapper on “The Lead” Wednesday.

    “If you have a subject on tape, that’s his own words, that’s his own voice. The defense can’t say, well, some witness is fudging the truth.”

    The recording of the July 2021 meeting, which CNN has not listened to but was described by multiple sources, seriously undercuts Trump’s longstanding argument that he mentally declassified material he took with him from the White House. It also adds his Bedminster club to the potential locations where Trump had classified documents after leaving office.

    The recording of the meeting captures the sound of paper rustling, sources said, though it is not clear if it was the actual document in question. That raises questions about exposure of the document since attendees at the meeting included people who did not have security clearances that would have allowed them to access classified information, sources said.

    Smith has focused on the meeting as part of the criminal investigation into Trump’s handling of national security secrets, and prosecutors have asked witnesses about the recording and the document before a federal grand jury, CNN’s Katelyn Polantz, Paula Reid and Kaitlan Collins reported.

    In response to the report, a Trump campaign spokesman said “leaks” are meant to “inflame tensions” around Trump.

    The recording also recalls the chaos at the end of his presidency. On the tape, sources tell CNN, Trump points to a classified Pentagon document to try to refute the idea that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley had been trying to stop him from starting a war with Iran.

    In July 2021, journalist Susan Glasser had reported that, near the end of Trump’s presidency, Milley had raised concerns about Trump trying to strike Iran and had told the Joint Chiefs to ensure Trump issued no illegal orders and that he be informed if there was any concern.

    That New Yorker story outraged Trump. On the tape, he mentions the document, which he said came from Milley, in response to that story – arguing that if others could see it, it would discredit Milley, sources said. (The document Trump references was not produced by Milley, CNN was told.)

    The document’s existence is hardly unusual. The Joint Chiefs of Staff has a directorate focused on developing and proposing strategies and plans for the chairman, and another that provides guidance about current plans and operations to commanders throughout the force.

    “You could pick any country and scenario and there is likely a contingency plan,” a US official told CNN’s Haley Britzky.

    It is even less unusual for Milley to have briefed Trump on those plans, the official added. As chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Milley’s job is to advise and brief the president on his military options as commander in chief.

    “That does not mean that Gen. Milley is a warmonger,” Beth Sanner, a former deputy director of National Intelligence who was involved with intelligence briefings during her career, said on CNN. “Quite the opposite. I spoke to him many times during my role as an intelligence official, and he absolutely did not want to go to war with Iran.”

    CNN’s report on the recording also includes the incredible development that investigators have questioned Milley, who is still the nation’s top general.

    The most important thing here could be Trump’s acknowledgment that the document is classified, contradicting his argument that he had the unilateral power to declassify things and take them from the White House.

    During a CNN town hall in New Hampshire earlier this month, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins asked Trump if he had shown anyone classified documents to anyone.

    “Not really,” he told her, adding, “Let me just tell you, I have the absolute right to do whatever I want with them.”

    He had said that any classified documents he had were declassified, which is apparently contradicted by the audio recording.

    As CNN reported, Trump’s comments on the tape suggested he wanted to share the information but was aware of limitations on his ability post-presidency to declassify records, two of the sources said.

    The documents case is hardly the only legal matter hanging over Trump.

    The former president, and the country he wants to lead again, needs a color-coded calendar to keep track of all the legal developments involving him – and help separate potential trials and appeals from upcoming debate and primary dates.

    Besides the ongoing investigations into the aftermath of the 2020 election, here’s what else is looming over Trump.

    • His criminal trial in New York, which stems from the investigation into his alleged role in a hush money scheme, will coincide with March primary contests.
    • More immediately, there’s an October 2023 trial for the New York attorney general’s $250 million lawsuit against Trump, his eldest children and the Trump Organization. The Trump Organization was already convicted of criminal tax fraud in December.

    Source link