Trump and Nixon...
Will History Repeat Itself?
This morning I was re-reading my second book, The Liar’s Ball, published in 2014 about the world of New York real estate - about which Trump tweeted ““Just finished reading a poorly written & very boring book on the General Motors Building by Vicky Ward. Waste of time!” This was actually pretty helpful in terms of marketing.
In fact, I am not critical of Trump in the book; if anything: perhaps the Middle East leaders mulling the proposed “Riviera” in Gaza should take notes from it: his love of building and construction is readily apparent. No question he created value. And he made money.
But, in the book I do point out an unavoidable fact, which is that Trump lost the chance to buy the prestigious General Motors Building for very little, given that its owner, his partner, had gone bust. For this he blamed the 9/11 attacks, which rendered the offices of his lender, Deutsche Bank, out of action.
I was re-reading my book chiefly, because I suddenly remembered a small detail which now doesn’t feel so small - which is that, according to a senior executive who worked for Trump, one of Trump’s frequent guests at Trump Tower was Richard Nixon. Trump even wanted the Nixons to live at Trump Tower.
That strikes me as particularly relevant given Trump’s impounding of USAID - and much else.
In the 1970s it was President Nixon who told Russell Train, the administrator of the EPA he did not want to spend funds appropriate by Congress on an anti-pollution project in New York. But New York City turned around and sued Train. The Supreme Court settled it, saying, essentially if Congress has appropriated the funds, the president cannot simply impound them - which led Congress to pass the Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
So: Does Trump think this Supreme Court, the background of which I have made an entire podcast series about and you can listen to here, might rule differently over USAID? That the court will agree that Trump should have the power over funds that Congress has already appropriated?
Wiser heads than mine believe whom I have canvassed yesterday and today say: No.
In fact most Constitutional law experts I spoke to believe that the Supreme Court won’t want to even get into this - and will want the matter to get worked out at the Federal and Appeals level.
Meanwhile, of course, chaos reigns - because, as of now, no one has sued over USAID.
But if history is any indicator: they will.
Meanwhile, on a completely different note, I re-read the part of Kushner, Inc. in which poor Rex Tillerson, then the new Secretary of State under Trump’s first presidency stumbled across his Mexican counterpart Luis de Videgaray at dinner at Cafe Milano in DC. Tillerson was shocked. How come he had not known - per protocol - Videgaray was in town? Well, it emerged, because he was there to see the man really running State Department: Jared Kushner.
How history is repeating itself!
I give you the example of Marco Rubio.
Our new Secretary of State announced his recent big trip to Central America with much fanfare; he wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street journal, discussing our new priorities abroad: China, fentanyl and migration. And he gave several TV inteviews touting his Cuban American buddy, the new US special envoy to Latin America, Mauricio Claver-Carone,
But before he even got off the plane in Panama he was big-footed by Trump’s other “special missions” envoy (and, as it happens, close Kushner pal) Ric Grenell, who had made it to Caracas, and was photographed shaking hands and smiling with Venezuela’s autocratic President, Nicolas Maduro, after securing the release of six American hostages and winning an agreement to accept US deportees, many who fled from Maduro but who no longer have US protection.
The back story, I’m told, is that Rubio had already lost an in-person debate with Grenell, in front of Trump, as to how to handle Maduro. If it were up to Rubio, who has long supported maximum pressure on Venezuela, there would not have been any glad-handing with the country’s strong-man. But Trump went with Grenell’s suggestion instead. (I do note that at least Rubio got to seize Maduro’s second plane yesterday in the Dominican Republic, citing sanctions).
Even so, my sources say, Rubio is not going to rock the boat with Trump. I’m told he wants to hang in there so he’s a viable candidate for President in four years. I am told he believes he’s competing with JD Vance for Trump’s affection.
That will be an interesting tussle to watch.
Lastly, because it’s a Friday evening and we are all tired, I am going to give you a Broadway review/recommendation.
Do NOT under any circumstances go and see the new Idina Menzel musical, Redwood which I saw in previews this week and opens next week.
Context: I am a big fan of musicals - and of sap. I could see “Wicked” and “Frozen” many times and my sons will tell you I spend an embarrassing amount of time listening to the same corny tracks from each. We may - may - have even have performed some “re-enactments” at home when they were small.
So I went off to Redwood without thinking too much ahead of time.
“Do you know what it’s about?” my companion asked me. “Well, it’s about the Redwoods,” I said. I’d read something positive about the show’s iteration in Los Angeles.
“OK,” he said, adding: “The only shows I will not see are ones about dead kids.”
Who writes musicals about dead kids? I thought. Other than Evan Hansen. Surely that’s not a thing.
Suffice it to say we were five minutes into Redwood and he turned to me: “It’s about a dead kid.”
Forty minutes into it he said “you can tell why there’s no interval.”
He was right.
Leaving aside the very thin plot, the show did not have even ONE song you’d want to hold onto and sing in the bath.
Good news for my sons: There will definitely be no re-enactments at home.
Happy Weekend!
Hi Vicki,
I heard or read someone saying that Kushner is behind the Gaza Strip idea put forth by Trump.
And, gee whiz, that “play”/musical sounds dreadful. I would have got up and left.
What happened to Steve Hilbert,Tommie Sue ,JB Carlson ?