Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world. Furthermore, his expansive view of how presidential power should be wielded against his detractors poses a distinct threat to civil liberty in the United States. Therefore, as committed and loyal Republicans, we are unable to support a Party ticket with Mr. Trump at its head. We commit ourselves to working energetically to prevent the election of someone so utterly unfitted to the office.
From: Open Letter on Trump from GOP National Security Leaders
This statement’s publication the day after Romney’s speech strikes me as non-coincidental.
I’m also not sufficiently well-versed enough in the field to know how many true luminaries there are on the list of signators. But it sure looks impressive.Report
The statement was actually published before the Romney speech.Report
This statement’s publication the day after Romney’s speech strikes me as non-coincidental.
I agree. Thing is, it’s a risky move since this sorta power play really will usher in the destruction of the GOP if it fails. I wouldn’t be surprised if Diebold voting machines in Ohio (and Florida!) receive a bit of extra code come primary day. 🙂Report
Luminary is in the eye of the beholder, of course, but the list includes numerous well-known officials from past administrations, including some high-ranking ones (Chertoff’s and Mukasey’s names jump out). New names are being added as we write: The count was 77 this morning, and is now up to 106 (up from 104 since I began this comment). I wouldn’t be surprised to see Colin Powell and other Bush 41/43 types insisting on the honor of being included.Report
Maybe they could preface it with the tag line, “We, the architects and managers of the Afghan and Iraqi Wars, now in their 13th glorious year, scarcely one Friedman Unit away from Triumphant Victory…”Report
“We particularly abhor Mr. Trump’s refusal to say that he would tear up the nuclear agreement with Iran on day one.”Report
If includes Max Boot and Daniel Pipes; being criticized by them on your foreign policy views is a badge of honor. As would be the same criticism from any Bush 43 types.Report
Yeah… though not as close to the secondary literature on Foreign Policy as I once was… a quick skim of the names made me think that disavowal by exactly this group is the first step to recovery of a sane US foreign policy. Point 1 for Trump.
Being old enough to remember the knock-down drag-out fights with the Neo-Cons back in the 80s… I’m consistently amazed at how utterly and completely they have owned the 3rd leg of the stool. They have done what they wanted without any sort of check for at least 30-years. Mostly because while the executive branch owns Foreign Policy, it is the least scrutinized aspect of an election cycle. While I don’t expect this to change (ever), the dim awakening of the possible costs of abdicating to the current bi-partisan consensus is a happy by-product of the current nonsense.Report
I have to admit that this strikes me as tactically… unsound. What happens next week? The heads of the big banks and hedge funds all sign a letter saying Trump will be bad for the economy?Report
Yes, precisely. “Donald Trump will be bad for our economy because…”
Then prominent military figures, who of necessity will have to be retired. But a slate of generals and admirals and other brass saying, “Donald Trump will be bad for the military because…”
Then a sample platter of the lawyers and scholars from the Federalist Society and other conservative legal advocacy groups. “Donald Trump will be disrespectful to the Constitution because…”
I wonder how long that can be sustained.Report
And none of them will imagine the Donald, standing in front of ever-larger public gatherings, waving copies of the letters and telling the people that look, the establishment is very, very afraid of us, because we’re going to make YUGE changes after you elect me?
Oh, Cleveland is going to be so much fun.Report
Right. Because it’s going to work, you understand!
(Still, I do think these are things that need to be said.)Report
I’m fairly certain this is not aimed at Trump’s core supporters.Report
Michael Brown saying “Donald Trump will be bad for victims of natural disasters because…”Report
Between the Romney speech, this letter and the general NeverTrump movement, it’s going to be a very interesting couple of years for the GOP.
My bet is that Trump wins the nomination and the party — with gritted teeth — does its best to unify. But there are Senators out there in close races who may think that disavowing Trump is the better course of action to get re-elected come November. In any event my follow-up bet is that Trump loses, pretty badly.
Then what? Does the GOP pretend that he never existed? Will Tea Party ver 2.0 form to run Trump-style nationalist / populist candidates in primaries? I know that Perot’s efforts never much went anywhere, but I find it hard to believe that all this energy, leading up to an actual nominee, will simply fizzle away.Report
They’ve already admitted that the “never” in NeverTrump means “not until July”.Report
Japan does pay money for US protection.Report
Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world. Furthermore, his expansive view of how presidential power should be wielded against his detractors poses a distinct threat to civil liberty in the United States.
Therefore, as the party which still refuses to admit any embarrassing truths about the Bush-Cheney administration, we support him 100%.Report
First of all, it’s a bit sketchy for advisors from rival campaigns (e.g. Rubio advisor Max Boot) not to disclose that here. It would be useful to know how many of these folks are currently drawing a paycheck off of letters such as this.
Second, if these are the important issues on which Trump fails, why aren’t the other candidates publicly challenging him on this ground? I don’t hear Cruz or Rubio talking about hateful, anti-Muslim rhetoric. I don’t hear them criticizing expansive use of torture; or being critical of Bush for having looked into Putin’s eyes and seen greatness; or expression anything but “contempt for our southern neighbor”. If this disqualifies Trump why aren’t they shouting this to the heavens in every debate, why do they need to send out surrogates in a on-line only open letter that only politicos will read? Indeed, how different is Trump’s position really from the Cruz strategy:
Report