Tag Archives: 2016 presidential election

That Time When Donald Trump Embraced Anna Wintour’s Rumored Ambassadorship to London or Paris

October 3, 2016 By in Ambassadors, Elections, Foreign Service, FSOs, Huh? News, Political Appointees, Realities of the FS, Staffing the FS, State Department, U.S. Missions Tags: , , , , , ,

Posted: 1:13 am ET
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

 

Via Politico:

America’s diplomats are shuddering at the notion that Donald Trump, if elected president, will send unqualified cronies around the world as ambassadors, exporting his bombastic style to sensitive jobs that represent the face of the United States.

As the presidential election draws closer, many career diplomats are uncertain about their future should the Republican presidential nominee and his unorthodox foreign policy positions triumph. And while plenty of them are wary of how Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton — a former secretary of state who will owe a lot of favors — will shape her administration, Trump is by far the bigger unknown.

“He probably has no idea what the foreign service is,” lamented one person with deep knowledge of the U.S. diplomatic corps. “At least with her we know who half the people who will get these jobs will be. With him we have no idea.”
[…]
The rise of Trump this year is adding an edge to what otherwise would be routine efforts to get the candidates to pay lip service to the importance of a qualified diplomatic corps.

Read more:

Donald Trump may not know what the Foreign Service is but back in 2012, he was happy to endorsed Vogue Magazine’s Anna Wintour rumored ambassadorship to either the U.K. or France.  She was rumored to be in the running but was never nominated.  The Daily Beast reported in 2013 that Wintour had actually favored the British appointment over France.

The Times writes that after Wintour was notified that her preferred post would likely go to Obama’s top fundraiser Matthew Barzun in November, she was uninterested in pushing for one of the remaining positions. […] At the time, Wintour’s close friend, designer Oscar de la Renta, found the prospect ridiculous, telling the paper, “When you are editor in chief of an extremely successful magazine, you don’t need an ambassadorship for four years. Ambassadors were great in the 18th century. Today, it’s going to the opening of a cafeteria.”

Ouch!

We should note that President Obama appointed to-date the highest number of career diplomats as ambassadors at 70.8%, and the lowest number of non-career, political appointees at 29.2%.  The challenge is to persuade the next president to break that record and go lower when it comes to political appointees.  See Obama’s Career Ambassadorship Appointments: Highest on Record at 70.8% #ThanksObama.

Whether or not The Donald has heard of the Foreign Service is a guessing game, but he has certainly heard of the State Department, and he has nothing good to say about it.

As to who might received appointments in a potential Trump Administration, we can only guess with trepidation given the quality of surrogates on teevee who appear to reside in an alternate universe where up is down, where inside is out and where smarts is measured by looks, and the ability to suspend disbelief.

#

Clinton v. Trump: Debate Reactions From Around the World, See Who’s Laughing Now

September 27, 2016 By in Elections, Hillary Clinton, Media Tags: , , ,

Posted: 3:51 am ET
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

Here’s a bonus:

And see? The Canadians are just making fun of us now, America. Register to vote today.

#

Former SecState Hillary Clinton Makes History as Democratic Presidential Nominee

July 29, 2016 By in Elections, Hillary Clinton, Nominations, Secretary of State, US Presidents Tags: , , , ,

Posted: 3:20 am ET
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

 

The 67th Secretary of State  Hillary Rodham Clinton (2009–2013) made history on July 28 as she became the first woman to win a major party’s nomination for president.

If she wins the election in November, she would become the 45th President of the United States, the first Madam President, and only the 7th Secretary of State to become President of the United States.

SecState #1 Thomas Jefferson (1790–1793) became 3rd POTUS (1801-1809)

SecState #5  James Madison (1801–1809) became 4th POTUS (1809-1817)

SecState #7 James Monroe (1811–1817) became 5th POTUS (1817-1825)

SecState#8 John Quincy Adams (1817–1825) became 6th POTUS (1825-1829)

SeState #10 Martin Van Buren (1829–1831) became 8th POTUS (1837-1841)

SecState #17 James Buchanan (1845–1849) became 15th POTUS (1857-1861)

Click here for the list of Secretaries of State via history.state.gov.

Click here for list of Presidents of the United States via wikipedia.

Probably the best line of the night:

#

 

 

 

Trump’s Wild Talk About America’s NATO Treaty Obligations — Not/Not a Misquote

July 21, 2016 By in Elections, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Huh? News, Media Tags: , , , , 1 Comment

Posted: 12:19 pm ET
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

 

SANGER: But I guess the question is, If we can’t, do you think that your presidency, let’s assume for a moment that they contribute what they are contributing today, or what they have contributed historically, your presidency would be one of pulling back and saying, “You know, we’re not going to invest in these alliances with NATO, we are not going to invest as much as we have in Asia since the end of the Korean War because we can’t afford it and it’s really not in our interest to do so.”

TRUMP: If we cannot be properly reimbursed for the tremendous cost of our military protecting other countries, and in many cases the countries I’m talking about are extremely rich. Then if we cannot make a deal, which I believe we will be able to, and which I would prefer being able to, but if we cannot make a deal, I would like you to say, I would prefer being able to, some people, the one thing they took out of your last story, you know, some people, the fools and the haters, they said, “Oh, Trump doesn’t want to protect you.” I would prefer that we be able to continue, but if we are not going to be reasonably reimbursed for the tremendous cost of protecting these massive nations with tremendous wealth — you have the tape going on?

SANGER: We do.

HABERMAN: We both do.

TRUMP: With massive wealth. Massive wealth. We’re talking about countries that are doing very well. Then yes, I would be absolutely prepared to tell those countries, “Congratulations, you will be defending yourself.”

[…]

SANGER: I was just in the Baltic States. They are very concerned obviously about this new Russian activism, they are seeing submarines off their coasts, they are seeing airplanes they haven’t seen since the Cold War coming, bombers doing test runs. If Russia came over the border into Estonia or Latvia, Lithuania, places that Americans don’t think about all that often, would you come to their immediate military aid?

TRUMP: I don’t want to tell you what I’d do because I don’t want Putin to know what I’d do. I have a serious chance of becoming president and I’m not like Obama, that every time they send some troops into Iraq or anyplace else, he has a news conference to announce it.

SANGER: They are NATO members, and we are treaty-obligated ——

TRUMP: We have many NATO members that aren’t paying their bills.

[…]

TRUMP: I’m a fan of the Kurds, you understand.

SANGER: But Erdogan is not. Tell us how you would deal with that?

TRUMP: Well, it would be ideal if we could get them all together. And that would be a possibility. But I’m a big fan of the Kurdish forces. At the same time, I think we have a potentially — we could have a potentially very successful relationship with Turkey. And it would be really wonderful if we could put them somehow both together.

SANGER: And what’s your diplomatic plan for doing that?

TRUMP: Meetings. If I ever have the opportunity to do it, meaning if I win, we will have meetings, we will have meetings very early on.

There’s mooooore, oh, dear.

Meanwhile — in Russia, Trump is apparently “inspiring a new generation of optimism.”

Here’s the NATO reaction:

#

Will ambassadorships become part of the horse trading for delegates this summer?

March 21, 2016 By in Ambassadors, Diplomacy, Elections, Foreign Service, Politics, State Department, U.S. Missions, Video of the Week Tags: , , , , 1 Comment

Posted: 12:32 am EDT
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

 

According to Fox News, delegates become “unbound” and are free to support other contenders as soon as their candidate withdraws.

Rubio, in suspending his campaign after his home-state Florida loss, leaves 169 delegates behind. Ben Carson accrued eight delegates before he dropped out of the race, while Jeb Bush picked up four. Carly Fiorina, Mike Huckabee and Rand Paul each picked up one in Iowa.

And if either Ted Cruz or John Kasich drop out in the weeks ahead — and Donald Trump still has not clinched the nomination with the necessary 1,237 delegates — additional zombie delegates could be in play in Cleveland.
[…]
They would become essentially free agents, prizes to be wooed by the candidates duking it out in Cleveland.
[…]
In the 1976 Republican convention, it was the unbound delegates moving toward President Gerald Ford instead of Ronald Reagan that handed Ford the nomination that year. Ford held a slight lead going into the convention, but was shy of an outright majority.In part by using the power of the White House, with promises of visits and patronage to woo over delegates, Ford won the nomination on the first ballot, by a slim 60 votes.

In addition to these “zombie” delegates, there are apparently also 112 Republican delegates who are “unbound” because their states and territories – North Dakota, Colorado, Wyoming, American Samoa and Guam – hold no primaries or caucuses. According to Real Clear Politics, delegates are chosen at state convention without reference to voters’ views on the presidential candidates.

Below is a link to a video clip with Ben Ginsberg, a Republican attorney who has served as counsel to the Republican National Committee and several presidential campaigns talking on MSNBC.  He explains what happens to Marco Rubio’s delegates now that the candidate has suspended his campaign, and the role that unbound delegates play in the Republican primary process. It looks like promises and patronage can play a big part in wooing over delegates. Will ambassadorships become part of the horse trading as candidates duke it out in Cleveland this summer?  Oh boy!  “A lot of ambassadorships out there and some 1500 Schedule C jobs.” See the great legal question and the answer.  Watch at the 1:59 mark.

The video can also be viewed here on MSNBC.

 

#

OPM Issues Guidelines For Incentive Awards During 2016 Election Period

January 19, 2016 By in Awards, Federal Agencies, Obama, Political Appointees, Regulations, State Department Tags: , , , , , , ,

Posted: 12:55 am EDT
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

 

On January 11, Acting Director Beth F. Cobert issued the  OPM guidelines for Appointments and Awards During the 2016 Presidential Election Period. Below is an excerpt on the prohibition of awards  from June 1, 2016 – January 20, 2017:

Under 5 U.S.C 4508, an incentive award may not be given during the period beginning June 1, 2016, through January 20, 2017, to a senior politically appointed officer, defined as:

  1. An individual who serves in an SES position and is not a career appointee as defined in 5 U.S.C. 3132(a)(4), or
  2. An individual who serves in a position of a confidential or policy determining character as a Schedule C employee.

Because Limited Term/Limited Emergency appointees are not “career appointees,” they meet this definition of senior politically appointed officer and cannot receive incentive awards during the 2016 election period.

In addition, all political appointees continue to be covered by a freeze on discretionary awards, bonuses, and similar payments.  This freeze was established by Presidential Memorandum on August 3, 2010 (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-freeze-discretionary-awards-bonuses-and-similar-payments) and continues to remain in effect until further notice (https://www.chcoc.gov/content/guidance-awards-fiscal-year-2014). Agencies should continue to apply this freeze in accordance with OPM’s guidance at https://www.chcoc.gov/content/guidance-freeze-discretionary-awards-bonuses-and-similar-payments-federal-employees-serving.

For additional guidance regarding appointments of current or former political appointees to competitive service, non-political excepted service, or career SES position, contact Ana A. Mazzi, Deputy Associate Director for Merit System Accountability and Compliance, at (202) 606-4309 or PoliticalConversions@opm.gov.  For guidance on awards during the 2016 Presidential election period, contact Steve Shih, Deputy Associate Director for Senior Executive Services and Performance Management, by calling (202) 606-8046 or Performance-Management@opm.gov.

Read more here.

 

#

 

Ladies & Gentlemen, Your Next Ambassadors to the Best of Europe

October 21, 2015 By in Ambassadors, Elections, EUR|Europe, Political Appointees, Politics Tags: , , ,

Posted: 1:40 am EDT
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

 

#

Abolish the State Department? Really? Should we pretend to freak out now or later?

September 22, 2015 By in Elections, Funnies, Huh? News, Politics, State Department Tags: , , , 1 Comment

Posted: 12:17 am EDT
[twitter-follow screen_name=’Diplopundit’ ]

 

The GOP candidates have been trying to out-crazy each other under the shadow of the Trump circus canopy. Cruz would like to “abolish the IRS; take all 125,000 IRS agents, and put them on our southern border.” The same candidate would also like to get rid of the Department of Education.  Paul asks in a video on the website AbolishNow.com that supporters sign a petition to have Congress also eliminate the IRS. At least seven candidates want to end “birthright citizenship” under the 14th Amendment, which grants everyone born in the United States of America the right of citizenship. Jindal suggested abolishing the Supreme Court. Carson suggested eliminating the Department of Veterans Affairs. Before suspending his campaign, Walker proposed scrapping the National Labor Relations Board, eliminating public employee unions and making right-to-work the national standard for workplaces.

Last week, a former United States Senator representing Pennsylvania, the one with a Google problem, added his voice to the “abolish this or that” crowd. Mr. Santorum was a GOP presidential candidate in 2011; he suspended his campaign in April 2012. This past May, Mr. Santorum announced his candidacy for the 2016 presidential election. Apparently, Mr. Santorum now has a two-campaign cycle dream of abolishing the U.S. Department of State.

Who knew?

.

.

What else did this smart potato say?

[protected-iframe id=”051ec3f838001f830f13b9d055f7f65c-31973045-31356973″ info=”//giphy.com/embed/j0GARdxDb2pgY?html5=true” width=”480″ height=”270″ frameborder=”0″ class=”giphy-embed”]

via GIPHY

 

Can you hear him? No?

Apologies for the glitches, it sound like he does not like the State Department because employees there spend way too much time talking to foreigners?  Maybe they speak way too many foreign languages and not enough American?  American officials also wear strange shoes and un-American clothes, is that it? Ay, caramba! Oooh, do not/do not show him the fantastic headgears, you, internationalists, you!

Here are Santorum’s specific complaints according to BuzzFeed:

“I said that when I ran four years ago — the first thing I’d do is abolish the State Department and start all over.”

“I have to tell you, I dealt with them for 12 years, I was on the committees that had a lot of interaction with them, and, you know, not that there aren’t a few good people in there,” Santorum continued. “I’m sure there are really good, dedicated public — but look, it’s just, they are a bunch of internationalists who do not look after the interests of the United States. They don’t look at the world from the standpoint of the United States and our principles being the ones that are the best.”

“They’re relativists, they’re internationalists, and they are not serving the interests of the American people,” Santorum concluded.

“It’s like, if all the tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail,” Santorum said. “Every problem that the State Department has, the answer is diplomacy. Why? Because if it’s not diplomacy, they don’t have a job.

“And so the answer is never to do anything, the answer is always to appease, to talk,” he continued. “I mean, I’m sure that they, that John Kerry, they’re just having the greatest love-fest over at the State Department right now, because they got a deal!

You guys are having a love-fest and you did not invite us … please send photos?!

Two candidates have already suspended their campaigns but Mr. Santorum’s campaign for some reason appears to still be chugging along. We imagine that his candidacy will fold sooner than later. But it looks like he is unable, as yet, to accept the unbearable inevitability of his short campaign life.

So okay, let’s see who else he plans to abolish with brain waves next week. Then we’ll pretend to freak out.

#