Rage by Bob Woodard

[vnatale]

Dan Coats launched the new year, 2019, with an updated National Intelligence Strategy and an old proposition: “This strategy is based on the core principle of seeking the truth and speaking the truth to our policymakers.”

The strategy warned about “weakening of the post-WWII international order and dominance of Western democratic ideals, increasingly isolationist tendencies in the West and shifts in the global economy.” It also decried “Russian efforts to increase its influence and authority” that “are likely to continue and may conflict with US goals and priorities in multiple regions.”

Coats’s “truths” were built on many of the old themes that Trump rejected.

A week after releasing the strategy, Coats gave his Worldwide Threat Assessment publicly before the Senate Intelligence Committee on January 29. He identified climate change as a security threat. Russia’s relationship with China was “closer than it has been in many decades.” North Korea was “unlikely to completely give up its nuclear weapons and production capabilities.”

Coats said intelligence officials didn’t believe Iran was developing a nuclear weapon—a direct contradiction of one of Trump’s core national security arguments.

Everything he said was based fully on intelligence, but Coats could not have more conspicuously stuck his finger in the president’s eye.

Fred Fleitz, president of the Center for Security Policy, a right-leaning Washington think tank, appeared on Fox Business and suggested that Coats ought to be fired, saying the intelligence service “has simply evolved into a monster that is basically second-guessing the president all the time.” Lou Dobbs, host of the show Fleitz appeared on and Trump’s friend and supporter, tweeted Fleitz’s quote and suggestion.

The next day the White House canceled the daily intelligence briefing, the PDB. Trump tweeted:

“The Intelligence people seem to be extremely passive and naive when it comes to the dangers of Iran. They are wrong!” He added, “Perhaps Intelligence should go back to school!”

[vnatale]

“Isn’t that great?” Trump said, now in a good mood. “Can you believe we’re doing this shit? Can you believe I’m here, president of the United States, and you’re here? Can you believe this shit? Isn’t it the greatest thing in the world?”

It was apparently his way of absorbing the reality that, after two years of Mueller, it seemed over.

Marine One flew so close to the Washington Monument it felt as though they could almost touch it.

As the helicopter approached the White House grounds, a throng of journalists waited.

“There are the animals,” Trump said. “They’re the most heartbroken people in America.”

“Yeah, be easy on them,” Graham replied. “This is a bad day for them.” Graham recommended Trump be brief in his comments to the reporters. “Here’s my two cents,” Graham said. Say something like, “America’s the greatest country on earth. Good night.” He added, “If you’ll say that and nothing else, they’ll all fall over dead.”

Marine One landed at 7:04 p.m. Trump walked onto the South Lawn, looked directly at the cameras and said: “I just want to tell you that America is the greatest place on earth. The greatest place on earth. Thank you very much. Thank you.” And he walked away.

When Graham got home, his phone was ringing.

“Did you see them?” Trump said.

“Who?” Graham replied.

“The animals,” Trump said.

“No.”

“When I said that, they all were stunned. They were speechless. The first time in my life nobody asked me 120 questions,” Trump said. “That was the perfect thing to say.”

[vnatale]

Coats said he needed some guidance. He did not have to tell Mattis that the current situation was untenable. This is not at all what I came here to do, Coats said. He felt depleted.

“I haven’t spoken out,” Mattis commiserated. He had maintained his silence since his resignation in December. “I’ve made my case before the president. He listened. In the end he just didn’t agree with me.” Trump’s disdain for the allies and decision to pull out of Syria with no warning, no consultation, had been Mattis’s red line. “I’ve buried too many boys. That was a terrible decision.”

Coats said the mounting personal tensions between him and Trump and their fundamental differences on the nature of the security threats were debilitating.

“This is not good,” Mattis said. “Maybe at some point we’re going to have to stand up and speak out. There may be a time when we have to take collective action.”

“Well, possibly,” Coats said. “Yeah, there may.”

“He’s dangerous,” Mattis said. “He’s unfit.”

Speaking out didn’t seem to work, Coats said. Admiral Bill McRaven, who had led Operation Neptune Spear, the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in 2011, had continuously mounted an aggressive, personal and public criticism of Trump. In an open letter to Trump published in The Washington Post in August 2018 after Trump revoked John Brennan’s security clearance, McRaven had written that the president had “embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.” He challenged Trump to revoke his security clearance: “I would consider it an honor.”

McRaven, a Navy SEAL, was one of the most celebrated military figures, a warrior scholar, bestselling author and now chancellor of the University of Texas system.

Trump had blasted back, calling McRaven “a Hillary Clinton fan” and suggested he should have captured bin Laden earlier. As best Coats could tell, McRaven’s gutsy stand seemed to have had no impact.

[vnatale]

Mattis said they still had to consider stepping forward.

“Jim, what would that be?” Coats asked.

“I don’t know,” Mattis replied, “but we can’t let the country keep going” on this course. He repeated, “This is dangerous.”

“Look,” Coats said, “others have tried and it’s had no impact whatsoever. They get tarred and feathered.”

“What would make a difference?” Mattis asked.

“If the Senate stood up,” Coats said. He knew the Senate intimately, especially the Republicans. He had served 16 years as a Republican senator. And he kept in touch with half a dozen Republican senators who were friends. None were bailing on Trump—not out of conviction, but for political survival. “The Senate’s not going to stand up.”

But Coats pursued the question with some of his old friends from the Senate.

“I bet you have some interesting conversations in closed session,” Coats said to one senator.

“Yes, we sure do,” said the senator.

Others expressed the same view, and Coats realized nobody in the Senate needed to be told what was happening. They knew. The senators just desperately wanted to get past the November 3 election. If he was still in the Senate, Coats believed the worst course of action would be not to speak up, lose the Senate majority and lose your reputation. He believed the Senate had not fulfilled its obligation under the Constitution to be a check and balance. There should be a moment to demand accountability from Trump.

Should Trump be reelected, Coats hoped one Republican senator would lead the charge and insist on a change in the way decisions were made in the interactions with the president.

[flyingpylon]

What exactly is the service you believe you are providing us with all these ‘Rage’ posts?

Copyright infringement, I guess.

[vnatale]

Three days after the call, Sunday, July 28, was golf day. Trump played 18 holes in the morning at his Trump National Club in Northern Virginia. It was a sweltering midsummer day.

After playing, he stopped in the clubhouse and ran into Dan Coats and his wife, Marsha. Members of the club, they were having lunch before a scheduled tee time later in the afternoon.

Trump seemed taken aback, although he knew they were members. Marsha, a trained psychologist, had a feeling something was going on. The look on Trump’s face was one of guilt and dismay, she thought.

Surprise, thought Dan Coats.

About an hour later, the Coatses were playing the long, straight 508-yard, par-four fourth hole, when a member of Coats’s security team came running up. Your chief of staff, Viraj Mirani, wants to talk to you.

The New York Times just released a story saying that Trump has replaced you, Mirani told Coats.

On the sixth hole—a 583-yard, par-five—Coats read Trump’s 4:45 p.m. tweet: “I am pleased to announce that highly respected Congressman John Ratcliffe of Texas will be nominated by me to be the Director of National Intelligence… Dan Coats, the current director, will be leaving office on August 15th. I would like to thank Dan for his great service to our Country.”

Coats and Trump had never set a date for his departure. Coats had hoped to stay until September to wrap up some pending decisions. Where did August 15 come from, he wondered.

Later, when it became public that a whistleblower in the intelligence community was alleging improper conduct by Trump, Marsha Coats concluded that Trump or someone around him didn’t want her husband to be the one to receive the report. She believed Trump wanted Coats out because he would have turned the whistleblower report over to Congress rather than protect the president.

Ratcliffe was an ardent Trump supporter, but was forced to drop out following news reports that he had exaggerated his role prosecuting terrorism cases as a U.S. attorney. Trump eventually renominated Ratcliffe, who was confirmed and assumed office in 2020. The whistleblower report was eventually made public.

The linkage between the withheld aid, which in the end totaled about $400 million, and Trump’s request for an investigation into the Bidens ultimately led the House of Representatives to impeach Trump.

[vnatale]

On February 27 and 28, 2019, the North Korea–United States summit was held in Hanoi, Vietnam.

The two sides had intended to hold a signing ceremony on the last day, but the meeting fell apart.

Trump and Kim spent two hours together with their respective staffs.

News reports following the abrupt ending said Kim had offered to dismantle the Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center—the nation’s major nuclear weapons facility, located in the far north—but he would not go far enough in offering to dismantle other, more active facilities as well. And while Trump was prepared to undo some economic sanctions, the reports said, he was not prepared to fully lift five rounds of sanctions that had been devastating for the North Korean economy.

Trump had his own version of events in Hanoi, as he related to me: Almost from the start, Trump said, he instinctively knew Kim wasn’t ready to get where he needed him to go.

Kim was ready to give up one of his nuclear sites, but he had five.

“Listen, one doesn’t help and two doesn’t help and three doesn’t help and four doesn’t help,” Trump said. “Five does help.”

“But it’s our biggest,” Kim said, referring to the Yongbyon center.

“Yeah, it’s also your oldest,” Trump said. “Because I know every one of the sites. I know all of them, better than any of my people I know them. You understand that.”

Kim would not budge from his position.

“Do you ever do anything other than send rockets up to the air?” Trump asked Kim. “Let’s go to a movie together. Let’s go play a round of golf.”

Finally, the reality set in.

“You’re not ready to make a deal,” Trump said to Kim. “You’re not there.”

“What do you mean?” The look on Kim’s face was utter shock.

“You’re not ready to make a deal,” Trump said. “I’ve got to leave. You’re my friend. I think you’re a wonderful guy. But we’ve got to leave, because you’re not ready to make a deal.”

Trump’s implied message, Pompeo thought, was: Don’t shoot. We’re friends. We can trust each other. We will work it out.

The summit was reported as a failure.

[vnatale]

More than a month later, August 5, Kim wrote Trump the longest letter exchanged between the two.

The tone was polite. But the message was that relations between Kim and Trump may have cooled off for good. It sounded like a disappointed friend or lover.

Kim thanked Trump for the pictures of their meeting at the border. “I’m delighted to receive each and every single picture you specifically chose from that day, which holds special meaning and will remain an eternal memory from that momentous and historic day,” he wrote. “Those photographs now hang in my office. I express my appreciation to you, and I will remember that moment forever.”

But Kim was upset, he said, because military exercises by the U.S.–South Korea alliance had not fully stopped.

“My belief was that the provocative combined military exercises would either be cancelled or postponed ahead of our two countries’ working-level negotiations where we would continue to discuss important matters,” Kim wrote. “Against whom is the combined military exercises taking place in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula, who are they trying to block, and who are they intended to defeat and attack?”

He continued: “Conceptually and hypothetically, the main target of the war preparatory exercises is our own military. This is not our misunderstanding…

“As if to support our view, a few days ago the person who they call the minister of national defense of South Korea said that the modernization of our conventional commercial weapons was deemed a ‘provocation’ and a ‘threat’ and that if we continue to ‘provoke’ and ‘threaten’ they will classify my administration and military as an ‘enemy.’ Now and in the future, South Korean military cannot be my enemy. As you mentioned at some point, we have a strong military without the need of special means, and the truth is that South Korean military is no match against my military.”

Kim said he did not like the U.S. military’s role. “The thing I like even less is that the US military is engaged in these paranoid and hypersensitive actions with the South Korean people.

“I am clearly offended and I do not want to hide this feeling from you. I am really, very offended,” the letter continued. “Your Excellency, I am immensely proud and honored that we have a relationship where I can send and receive such candid thoughts with you.”

In remarks on the South Lawn of the White House on August 9, Trump spontaneously brought up Kim’s latest letter when answering a reporter’s question on a different topic. While Kim’s letter warned Trump had offended him, the president turned it on its head.

“I got a very beautiful letter from Kim Jong Un yesterday,” Trump said. “It was a very positive letter.”

“What did it say?” a reporter asked.

“I’d love to give it to you,” Trump said. “I really would. Maybe—maybe sometime I will.”

The CIA never figured out conclusively who wrote and crafted Kim’s letters to Trump. They were masterpieces. The analysts marveled at the skill someone brought to finding the exact mixture of flattery while appealing to Trump’s sense of grandiosity and being center stage in history.

[vnatale]

“But it’s still a dangerous relationship,” I said. “Would you agree?”

“Yeah,” Trump said, “but it’s less dangerous than it was. Because he likes me. I like him. We get along. That doesn’t mean I’m naive. That doesn’t mean that I think, oh, it’s going to be wonderful. He’s a very tough cookie. And he is smart, very smart.”

“You’re convinced he’s smart?”

“Beyond smart. Look, he took over, when he was 27 years old, a volatile place where the people are very smart. Same as South Korea. They’re the same. Okay? Same people. Very smart.”

Trump did not dispute that Kim was also violent and vicious. He said that Kim “tells me everything. Told me everything. I know everything about him. He killed his uncle and he put the body right in the steps where the senators walked out. And the head was cut, sitting on the chest. Think that’s tough? You know, they think politics in this country’s tough.”

The president continued, “Nancy Pelosi said, oh, let’s impeach him. You think that’s tough? This is tough. These are great pictures.” He pointed at one of the pictures. “Look, did you ever see him smile? Did you ever see him smile before?”


“So, hard question, President Trump,” I said. “I understand we really came close to war with North Korea.”

“Right. Much closer than anyone would know. Much closer. You know. He knows it better than anybody,” he said, referring to Kim.

“Did you tell him?”

“I don’t want to tell you that. But he knows. I have a great relationship, let me just put it that way. But we’ll see what happens.” He noted that for two years North Korea had not conducted nuclear or intercontinental ballistic missile tests. The last ICBM test by North Korea had been in November 2017.

“I can’t tell you what the end is going to be yet, how it’s going to end,” Trump said. “He’s tested short-range missiles. Which, by the way, every country has short-range missiles. There’s no country that doesn’t have them. Okay? It’s not a big deal. That doesn’t mean after January he’s not going to be doing some things. We’ll see what it is. But I have a great relationship.”

Many foreign policy figures had said that Trump gave Kim too much by agreeing to meet without formal, written conditions. “So have you given Kim too much power?” I asked. Kim had said he wouldn’t shoot more ICBMs. “Because if he’s defiant, if he shoots one of those ICBMs, what are you going to do, sir?”

“If he shoots, he shoots,” Trump said. “And then he’s got big problems, let me put it that way. Big, big problems. Bigger than anybody’s ever had before.”

Then Trump digressed to reveal something extraordinary—a secret new weapons system. “I have built a nuclear—a weapons system that nobody’s ever had in this country before. We have stuff that you haven’t even seen or heard about. We have stuff that Putin and Xi have never heard about before. There’s nobody—what we have is incredible.”

Later I found sources who confirmed the U.S. military had a secret new weapons system but no one wanted to provide details and were surprised Trump had disclosed it. Trump had asked for and received massive funding increases for the National Nuclear Security Administration, which maintains the nuclear weapons stockpile, since taking office.

Trump told me all he gave Kim was a meeting. “You look, look at the good picture. He’s having a good time. You know? Nobody’s ever seen him smile. Look. Look at him smiling. He’s happy. He feels happy.”

“Did you think it’s kind of Nixon to China,” I asked, referring to President Nixon’s opening to China in 1972.

“No, I don’t want to even talk about Nixon to China. I think Nixon to China—I think China’s been a horrible thing for this country. Horrible because we’ve allowed them” to become an economic powerhouse.

The military always tells you the alliances with NATO and South Korea are the best bargain the United States makes, I noted, a great investment in joint defense.

“The military people are wrong,” Trump said. “I wouldn’t say they were stupid, because I would never say that about our military people. But if they said that, they—whoever said that was stupid. It’s a horrible bargain. We’re protecting South Korea from North Korea, and they’re making a fortune with televisions and ships and everything else. Right? They make so much money. Costs us $10 billion. We’re suckers.”

It costs the United States approximately $4.5 billion annually to station troops in South Korea, $920 million of which is paid by the South Korean government.

[vnatale]

“There is anger out there” in the country, I said. “And the question is, you’re sitting here in the Oval Office. Why? Why all that anger?”

“Okay,” the president said, “I think it’s for a number of reasons. But before I agree to even answer that question, okay? I have to say this: There’s also many Democrats that silently will vote for me. And it happened last time. The Obama Democrats that came out—I was going to say Barack Hussein, but I figured I wouldn’t say that today, because I want to keep this very nice. The Obama Democrats who came out and they voted for me, and it was a tremendous percentage. And the Bernie Sanders Democrats, they voted for me.”

Exit polls showed about 9 percent of those who identified as Democrats voted for Trump in 2016, and about 7 percent of those who identified as Republicans voted for Clinton.

I raised former President Obama and said that many thought he was smart.

“I don’t know. I don’t think Obama’s smart,” Trump said. “See? I think he’s highly overrated. And I don’t think he’s a great speaker. Oh, he’s so—hey look. I went to the best schools. I did great. I had an uncle who was a professor at MIT for 40 years, one of the most respected in the history of the school. For 40 years. My father’s brother. And my father was smarter than he was. It’s good stock. You know they talk about the elite. Really, the elite. Ah, they have nice houses. No. I have much better than them. I have better everything than them, including education.”

“This is an important moment in history,” I said, “where they’re going to impeach you, the House is going to impeach you.”

“Yeah.”

“And we’re sitting in the Oval Office here. And you are content, happy, proud.”

“Yeah.”

“Any angst?”

“No.”

The deputy press secretary interrupted, saying, “We’ve got about five minutes, gentlemen.” The treasury secretary was waiting.

“Oh, that’s okay,” Trump said. “Go ahead. I find it interesting. I love this guy. Even though he writes shit about me. That’s okay.”

“What’s the Trump-Pence strategy to win over, in the next 11 months, the persuadable voter?” I asked.

“I don’t know,” Trump said. “You know what? I’ll tell you what the Trump-Pence strategy is: To do a good job. That’s all it is. It’s very simple. It’s not a—I don’t have a strategy. I do a good job.”

“Why don’t you give me your taxes?” I asked. “No, seriously.”

He cited his standard argument that his tax returns were being audited by the IRS, although I knew that would not stop him from releasing his taxes if he wanted.

“Do you know what I made last year?” Trump asked. “Four hundred and eighty-eight million or something like that. I made four hundred and eighty-eight—and that’s because I’m not there. Meaning I would have done much better. Four eighty-eight.”

Trump reported at least $434 million in income in 2018, according to his financial disclosure form filed with the Office of Government Ethics in May 2019.

I noted the split-screen effect of the impeachment debate in the House and this discussion in the Oval Office. I knew it was a big show. He had all his props on the Resolute Desk: the parchment appointment orders of the judges stacked in the middle of the desk, the large rolls of pictures of him and Kim, and a binder with letters from Kim. I had interviewed Presidents Carter, Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama in the Oval Office. All sat in the standard presidential seat by the fireplace and did not have props.

“It’s as if you had won the biggest lottery ever,” I said.

“I did. Every day I won it. Nancy Pelosi has driven my poll numbers through the roof. And she comes out with, I pray for our president. She never prayed for me in her life.”

“Okay. In a sentence, what’s the job of the president? What is your job as you see it?

“I have many jobs.”

I offered my standard definition. “I think it’s figuring out what the next stage of good is for a majority of people in the country—”

“That’s good,” Trump said.

“—and then saying,” I continued, “this is where we’re going, and this is the plan to get there.”

“Correct,” Trump said. “But sometimes that road changes. You know, a lot of people are inflexible. Sometimes a road has to change, you know? You have a wall in front and you have to go around it instead of trying to go through it—it’s much easier. But really the job of a president is to keep our country safe, to keep it prosperous. Okay? Prosperous is a big thing. But sometimes you have so much prosperity that people want to use that in a bad way, and you have to be careful with it.”

As I listened, I was struck by the vague, directionless nature of Trump’s comments. He had been president for just under three years, but couldn’t seem to articulate a strategy or plan for the country. I was surprised he would go into 2020, the year he hoped to win reelection, without more clarity to his message.

“By the way, could I ask you a question?” Trump inquired. He wanted to know who I thought would get the Democratic nomination for president.

I had a terrible track record on such predictions and took a pass. “Who do you think is going to be your opponent?” I asked.

“I’ll be honest with you, I think it’s a terrible group of candidates,” Trump said. “It’s an embarrassment. I’m embarrassed by the Democrat candidates. I may have to run against one, and who knows? It’s an election. And I’m looking pretty good right now.”

[vnatale]

Trump said he told Kim when it came to denuclearization, “I know every one of your sites better than any of my people.” He reminded me again of his late uncle, Dr. John Trump, a physicist who taught electrical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was awarded the National Medal of Science in 1983. “He was at MIT for 42 years or something. He was a great—so I understand that stuff. You know, genetically.”

Trump continued, “The top person at MIT came to the office about a year ago. Brought me a whole package on Dr. John Trump. He said he was one of the greatest men. He was brilliant. I get that stuff.”

[vnatale]

We ping-ponged between a few more subjects and landed on Afghanistan. Trump’s generals had resisted his desire to withdraw U.S. troops from the 19-year war. “So the first thing the generals tell you when you want to pull out, they say, Sir, I’d rather fight them over there than fight them over here. And if you’re sitting behind this beautiful desk, the Resolute Desk, and you have four guys that look like they’re right out of Hollywood saying, yes, sir—they’ll do whatever you say. I say, what’s your opinion, General? Sir, I’d rather fight them over there than fight them over here. I’ve had four generals say almost the exact same words. That’s a hard line if you’re sitting here and you have to make that decision, when you have guys that you respect making that statement.”

Trump continued, “But I then say, well, does this mean we’re going to be there for the next 100 years?”

[vnatale]

Redfield was beyond frustration. Each day counted. On January 6 he converted his January 4 email word-for-word to a formal letter to Gao on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services letterhead. Redfield figured the formal letter would give Gao some ammunition with his superiors. The Chinese sat on it.

Redfield pinged Gao through the U.S. embassy in Beijing asking if there was a response. Can we come to China? The answer came back: Thanks again for the offer.

What’s going on? Redfield complained to Fauci. They weren’t getting a yes and they weren’t getting a no. From his past relationship with Gao, he did not expect this. He tried everything to get an affirmative invitation. Nothing.

They were at the most critical stage. He needed on-the-ground data.

One explanation, Redfield and Fauci agreed, was that the Chinese are proud, with sophisticated medical doctors and equipment, and probably felt they didn’t need help from anybody else. Fauci threw up his hands. Here we go again. China being China—remote, aloof
and secretive. Since they knew of no cases of the strange pneumonia in the United States, it would be hard to press much harder.

[vnatale]

The CDC Situational Report for January 13 alerted readers that “Thailand reported a confirmed case of nCoV in a traveler from Wuhan City to Thailand. This is the first infection with novel coronavirus 2019 detected outside China.”

That report hit Redfield hard. It told him, almost for sure, that there was human-to-human spread and the disease was being carried outside China.

Meanwhile, Redfield had another phone conversation with Gao. You can’t believe what’s going on over here, Gao said. It’s much, much worse than you’re hearing.

Holy shit, Fauci said. They haven’t been telling us the truth. It is really transmitting efficiently.

The CDC began developing a diagnostic test and issuing warnings for airports and ports of entry to the U.S. about travelers from Wuhan. It held a call with over 300 attendees from state and local health departments in the U.S.

On January 15, the CDC Situational Report hedged, saying:

“Some limited human-to-human spread may have occurred.… The possibility of limited human-to-human transmission cannot be ruled out, but the risk of sustained human-to-human transmission is low.”

[vnatale]

Pottinger, who had begun making his own calls to sources from his days as a Wall Street Journal reporter on SARS, told Redfield he was gathering evidence not only of human-to-human spread but also asymptomatic spread, meaning a person without symptoms could be a carrier and infect others. Was it possible that a former journalist would get to the bottom of the new virus faster than the doctors? Redfield wondered. They would have to wait and see.

On January 17, Redfield activated the entire CDC and assigned thousands of his staff to work on the new virus. Screening of travelers from Wuhan began at airports in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles. He feared the greatest health crisis since 1918 might be upon them.

Pottinger also calculated the death rate for Hubei province, whose capital was Wuhan, could be six times normal. He based his estimate not on information from the intel community or reported death rates out of China, but from Chinese social media and phone conversations with people on the ground. He determined this could translate into thousands more deaths in Wuhan in one month.

[vnatale]

I asked Trump about his decision making in foreign policy. He told me he was working with the Turkish leader on the war in Syria.

“I get along very well with Erdogan, even though you’re not supposed to because everyone says ‘What a horrible guy,’ ” Trump said. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is a repressive leader with a terrible record on human rights. “But for me it works out good. It’s funny, the relationships I have, the tougher and meaner they are, the better I get along with them. You know? Explain that to me someday, okay?”

That might not be difficult, I thought, but I didn’t say anything.

“But maybe it’s not a bad thing,” he continued. “The easy ones are the ones I maybe don’t like as much or don’t get along with as much.”

[vnatale]

Trump told me about a dinner he’d hosted. Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon who purchased The Washington Post in 2013, had attended. He said he’d pulled Bezos aside, or possibly called him the next day, and said, “Jeff, you don’t have to treat me good. But just treat me fairly. When I do something great, say it’s great. When I do something good, say it’s good. And when I do something bad, knock the hell out of me.”

Oh, I never get involved, Bezos had said, according to Trump. He played no role in The Washington Post’s news coverage of Trump or anything else.

“What do you mean you don’t get involved?” Trump said. You’re losing millions a year on the newspaper. “Of course you get involved.”

The Post was not losing money and has apparently been a profitable business under Bezos’s ownership.

Bezos had insisted he never got involved.

I had known Bezos for more than 20 years and worked at the Post for 49 years. I told Trump that I believed that was true. There was an iron curtain between the newsroom and ownership.

“Hard to believe,” Trump said. “If I really knew it was true, I’d treat him much differently. Because I haven’t been very nice to him, you know.” The Washington Post’s strong independence from Bezos seemed to genuinely strain credulity for Trump. “It’s just hard for me. Maybe it’s a different personality. But it’s hard for me to believe.”




“Well, I hope so, but it’s going to be the case,” Trump said. He wondered aloud which paper was “more dishonest,” The Washington Post or The New York Times. “Hard to believe that Jeff Bezos is not controlling what’s happening.” It was clear that if Trump had owned a newspaper, he would be actively involved.

[vnatale]

The virus now appeared to be spreading like crazy. On January 24, Chinese scientists finally published a report in The Lancet, perhaps the world’s most respected medical journal, stating “evidence so far indicates human transmission” of the coronavirus.

Alex Azar, the secretary of Health and Human Services, called his counterpart, Ma Xiaowei, the Chinese health minister the morning of January 27. Pottinger was on the call. Nearly a month had passed since the first reports from China.

Can we send our guys in? Azar asked. Let us do it. We’ve got experts. We can provide support. We can help. Let’s share samples. World Health Organization rules required that samples be shared. Just you say it, they’re ready to go. Their bags are packed.

Thank you very much, said Ma. It’s great to hear from you. We’ll look at it.

No answer followed. Azar was angry, but avoided any open disagreement and tweeted that he “conveyed our appreciation for China’s efforts.”

[vnatale]

Azar, Redfield and Fauci were recommending strong travel restrictions on China.

Mick Mulvaney, a 52-year-old conservative former congressman with a gentle style who had been acting White House chief of staff for a year, said he thought they might consider some unintended consequences.

What’s going to happen to the stock market? Mulvaney asked. What’s going to happen with the tenuous trade relationship? The overall relationship with China? Would the Chinese retaliate? There would be things that might happen that we are not anticipating.

The consensus from the three health officials was that if there was an outbreak in the United States, the consequences of not restricting travel from China might be worse.

“Are you guys comfortable with this?” Trump asked.

They were.

Do you feel confident that this is the way to go?

Yes.

“Tony, are you sure, now?” he asked of Fauci.

“Yes, Mr. President,” Fauci said. “I think this is the only way we’ve got to go right now.”

Almost speaking in one voice the three reiterated that we have to prevent American citizens returning from China from causing infections here. So the Americans would have to be quarantined for 14 days so if they are infected they would pass the incubation period.

“Okay,” Trump said. “That’s fine.” He looked at O’Brien and Pottinger, who were in the back in the Oval Office away from the desk. “Are you guys okay with this?”

O’Brien said he was.

“Absolutely,” said Pottinger, the hawk. “This is the only way to go.”

Trump gave his final approval, and Azar, Redfield and Fauci went out to announce the Chinese travel restrictions in the White House press room.

Redfield spoke first. “This is a serious health situation in China, but I want to emphasize that the risk to the American public currently is low.” He repeated himself for emphasis. “We have confirmed six cases of this novel virus in the United States. The most recent case had no travel history to China.”

China was reporting 9,700 cases and more than 200 deaths.

Fauci twice said there were lots of unknowns. “We still have a low risk to the American public.”

Finally, Azar spoke. “Today President Trump took decisive action to minimize the risk of the spread of novel coronavirus in the United States,” he announced. “I have today declared
Fauci knew from a report from Germany that asymptomatic spread “is absolutely the case.” The German report, printed as a letter to the editor on the New England Journal of Medicine’s website on January 30, stated, “The fact that asymptomatic persons are potential sources of 2019-NCoV infection may warrant a reassessment of transmission dynamics of the current outbreak.” The language was technical and understated, but the message about the dangers posed by asymptomatic spread was clear.

Azar, Redfield and Fauci were recommending strong travel restrictions on China.

Mick Mulvaney, a 52-year-old conservative former congressman with a gentle style who had been acting White House chief of staff for a year, said he thought they might consider some unintended consequences.

What’s going to happen to the stock market? Mulvaney asked. What’s going to happen with the tenuous trade relationship? The overall relationship with China? Would the Chinese retaliate? There would be things that might happen that we are not anticipating.

The consensus from the three health officials was that if there was an outbreak in the United States, the consequences of not restricting travel from China might be worse.

“Are you guys comfortable with this?” Trump asked.

They were.

Do you feel confident that this is the way to go?

Yes.

“Tony, are you sure, now?” he asked of Fauci.

“Yes, Mr. President,” Fauci said. “I think this is the only way we’ve got to go right now.”

Almost speaking in one voice the three reiterated that we have to prevent American citizens returning from China from causing infections here. So the Americans would have to be quarantined for 14 days so if they are infected they would pass the incubation period.

“Okay,” Trump said. “That’s fine.” He looked at O’Brien and Pottinger, who were in the back in the Oval Office away from the desk. “Are you guys okay with this?”

O’Brien said he was.

“Absolutely,” said Pottinger, the hawk. “This is the only way to go.”

Trump gave his final approval, and Azar, Redfield and Fauci went out to announce the Chinese travel restrictions in the White House press room.

Redfield spoke first. “This is a serious health situation in China, but I want to emphasize that the risk to the American public currently is low.” He repeated himself for emphasis. “We have confirmed six cases of this novel virus in the United States. The most recent case had no travel history to China.”

China was reporting 9,700 cases and more than 200 deaths.

Fauci twice said there were lots of unknowns. “We still have a low risk to the American public.”

Finally, Azar spoke. “Today President Trump took decisive action to minimize the risk of the spread of novel coronavirus in the United States,” he announced. “I have today declared that the coronavirus presents a public health emergency in the United States.” He said that U.S. citizens returning from China would undergo 14 days of mandatory quarantine, and that Trump had signed a presidential proclamation “temporarily suspending the entry into the United States of foreign nationals who pose a risk of transmitting the 2019 novel coronavirus”—namely foreign nationals who had traveled in China within the last 14 days. Azar called the measure “prudent, targeted and temporary” and stressed once more that “the risk of infection for Americans remains low.”

“Administration Elevates Response to Coronavirus, Quarantines, Travel Restrictions” ran the headline of the lead story in The Washington Post the next day, pushing impeachment aside. In The New York Times the news appeared below the fold, headlined, “Declaring Health Emergency, U.S. Restricts Travel from China.”

Despite the conclusive evidence that at least five people wanted the restrictions—Fauci, Azar, Redfield, O’Brien and Pottinger—in an interview March 19, President Trump told me he deserved exclusive credit for the travel restrictions from China. “I had 21 people in my office, in the Oval Office, and of the 21 there was one person that said we have to close it down. That was me. Nobody wanted to because it was too early.”

On May 6, he told me, “And let me tell you, I had a room of 20 to 21 people and everyone in that room except me did not want to have that ban.”

At least seven times, including a press briefing, a televised town hall, interviews on Fox News and ABC and in meetings with industry executives and Republican lawmakers, he has repeated versions of this story.

Even when he made what appears to have been a tough and sound decision on the advice of his top national security and medical experts, he wanted—and took—all the credit for himself.

[vnatale]

In total, 10 Republican senators who voted to acquit said in statements or interviews Trump’s actions were wrong, improper or inappropriate. “Let me be clear, Lamar speaks for lots and lots of us,” Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska, said. “I believe that delaying the aid was inappropriate and wrong.”

The president had won the votes of these Republicans, but not their approval.

Former DNI and senator Dan Coats, out of the administration for five months, watched Trump’s impeachment with few illusions. He felt he understood the Senate far better than the intelligence world or the White House. He was sure every senator up there, including the Republicans, knew what had transpired. Trump obviously had pushed for an investigation of the Bidens and had delayed or stymied the aid to Ukraine. Was this sufficient to remove Trump from office? It was possible to argue either way. But to remove a president with a such a strong base in their party was pretty much unthinkable. A shrinking minority of Republicans genuinely supported Trump. The others had made a political survival decision.

With all the “formers” attached to his name, Coats did not want to be the person to speak out and say, “Hey, you guys got to stand up.” So he remained silent.

[vnatale]

That weekend, on February 9, Fauci, Redfield and other members of the Coronavirus Task Force took their seats at a table in a large conference room in Washington. Over 25 state governors, in town for a National Governors Association meeting and scheduled to attend a black-tie dinner with Trump later that night, had asked for a briefing on the coronavirus. Sitting at three long tables in a U-shaped layout, the governors wanted guidance and seemed to be looking for the inside story.

The coronavirus outbreak is going to get much, much worse before it gets better, Redfield warned.

We have not even seen the beginning of the worst, Redfield said, letting his words sink in. There is no reason to believe that what’s happening in China is not going to happen here, he said. There were nearly 40,000 cases in China then, with more than 800 deaths, barely five weeks after announcing the first cases.

I agree completely, Fauci told the governors. This is very serious business. You need to be prepared for problems in your cities and your states. Fauci could see the alarm on the governors’ faces.

“I think we scared the shit out of them,” Fauci said after the meeting.

The official press release from the Department of Health and Human Services describing the meeting read: “The panel reiterated that while this is a serious public health matter, the risk to the American public remains low at this time, and that the federal government will continue working in close coordination with state and local governments to keep it that way.”

The next day, President Trump said publicly three times—once at the White House, once on TV and once at a New Hampshire rally—that the virus would go away on its own. “When it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away,” he said at the packed rally. “I think it’s going to work out good. We only have 11 cases and they’re all getting better.”

[vnatale]

Fauci attended a public conference in Aspen, Colorado, on February 11. The moderator, Helen Branswell of STAT News, a well-respected science news outlet, said, “You’ve been quite vocal about wanting more information out of China. What would you like to get your hands on?”

“We really need to know the scope of this,” Fauci said. “The degree of asymptomatic transmission” would be the crucial piece of information. “That has a real impact on how you make certain policy decisions.” If people who didn’t show symptoms were giving others the disease, it would be much harder to contain.

Fauci repeated several times that the virus was low-risk. Clearly skeptical, Branswell said, “Explain to me why the risk is low. Because to me, when I look at this virus, it’s spreading very efficiently.”

“It’s the message,” Fauci said frankly. Americans didn’t need to be frightened. “Right now we have 13 people.” But again he hedged: “Is there a risk that this is going to turn into a global pandemic? Absolutely, yes.”

Branswell asked about the danger of possibly downplaying the risk the virus posed to the U.S.

Fauci said, “The risk is really relatively low.” He posed a hypothetical: How would it be, he asked, if he got up and said, “ ‘I’m telling you we’ve really, really got a big risk of getting completely wiped out,’ and then nothing happens?” Then, he said, “your credibility is gone.”

Fauci knew he was walking the finest of lines. The U.S. would never shut down with so few cases. If he proposed extreme remedies too soon, not only would he lose his credibility, but no one would listen or take action.

He didn’t say it, but he thought, “Take a look at what’s happening in China.” The outbreak was severe.

During this period, from February 11 to 14, Trump repeatedly said the U.S. had only about 12 cases.

At an event a week later at the Council on Foreign Relations, Fauci was again the voice of reassurance. “To our knowledge, there aren’t individuals in society in the United States that are infected” who aren’t travel-related, he said. “We don’t think so.” But he added, “We don’t know 100 percent, because they could have kind of come in under the radar screen.”

Asked by another panel member to reiterate that the public should not be buying respirator masks needed by health care workers, Fauci laughed. “I don’t want to denigrate people who walk around wearing masks” but masks, he said, should be worn by sick people. “Put a mask on them, not yourself.” He later added, to laughter from the audience, “I don’t want to be pejorative against cruise ships, but if there’s one thing you don’t want to do right now, it’s to take a cruise in Asia.”

[vnatale]

Anyone who has watched Trump’s press conferences knows how he avoids issues, splits hairs and won’t deal with hard questions. This is only amplified in a one-on-one setting—that maddening, convoluted dodging that drove Mattis, Tillerson, Coats and others crazy

[vnatale]

In late February, China finally allowed World Health Organization scientists to enter the country to investigate. Redfield had wanted to send his team of investigators but only one CDC official was allowed in the group. Fauci’s deputy director, Dr. Clifford Lane, was the only other American allowed to join the delegation to China from February 16 to February 24. The report released by the group indicated that asymptomatic infection was “relatively rare and does not appear to be a major driver of transmission” and praised China for “perhaps the most ambitious, agile and aggressive disease containment effort in history.”

Lane, who had never before been to China and had no experience with Chinese handlers, reported personally to Fauci that there was a lot of disease there and it was spreading rapidly. But he said the Chinese seemed to be doing everything they could to contain the virus. Everything was locked down. No one was allowed out of their apartment except for food. Sick and healthy people alike were locked in their homes. If they decided to go out for something other than food, their neighbors would report them to the police, who would then come and question them. It was absolute, with almost no concern for human rights.

Lane also said he’d been impressed with the high-tech capabilities of the hospitals in Beijing. But neither American on the delegation had been allowed into Wuhan, the epicenter of the disease.

The WHO report contained a stark warning: “Much of the global community is not yet ready, in mindset and materially, to implement the measures that have been employed to contain Covid-19 in China. These are the only measures that are currently proven to interrupt or minimize” the spread of the coronavirus. Those measures included surveillance, public engagement, cancellation of mass gatherings, traffic controls, rapid diagnosis, immediate case isolation, and “rigorous tracking and quarantine of close contacts.”

[vnatale]

Fauci, who was fast becoming the most recognizable face of U.S. government’s coronavirus response, appeared on the Today show on February 29.

NBC reporter Peter Alexander asked the question on many people’s minds: “So, Dr. Fauci, it’s Saturday morning in America. People are waking up right now with real concerns about this. They want to go to malls and movies, maybe the gym as well. Should we be changing our habits and, if so, how?”

“No,” Fauci said. “Right now, at this moment, there’s no need to change anything that you’re doing on a day-by-day basis. Right now the risk is still low, but this could change.”

He was later glad he had added “but this could change.” Yet as a practical matter, America’s Doctor had given the green light to proceed with the weekend routine.