Tuesday, March 13, 2018

President Trump Has Fired U.S. Secretary Of State Tillerson





Politico: Trump says Tillerson out as secretary of state

President Donald Trump said Tuesday he is replacing Rex Tillerson as secretary of state, nominating CIA Director Mike Pompeo in his place.

"Mike Pompeo, Director of the CIA, will become our new Secretary of State. He will do a fantastic job!" Trump tweeted Tuesday. "Thank you to Rex Tillerson for his service! Gina Haspel will become the new Director of the CIA, and the first woman so chosen. Congratulations to all!

Read more ....

WNU Editor: I was wrong on this one. I thought he would stay around till the end of the year. But clearly there were big differences between the two men, and the rumors and speculation that he would be gone by March .... some of which was voiced on this blog by a few commentators .... were true. Gina Haspel becomes the first woman to be nominated to be CIA Director, replacing Mike Pompeo who will now be the new US Secretary of State.

More News On President Trump Firing U.S. Secretary Of State Tillerson

Tillerson out at State, to be replaced by CIA chief Pompeo -- AP
Trump ousts Secretary of State Tillerson, taps CIA director Pompeo -- Reuters
Trump ousts Tillerson, will replace him as secretary of state with CIA chief Pompeo -- Washington Post
Rex Tillerson Out as Trump's Secretary of State, Replaced by Mike Pompeo -- New York Times
Trump to replace Tillerson with Pompeo as secretary of state -- CNN
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson ousted in favor of CIA chief, Trump announces -- USA Today
President Trump Removes Secretary of State Rex Tillerson -- TIME
Trump ousts Tillerson, taps CIA Director Pompeo for State Dept. -- Washington Times
Secretary of State Tillerson out amid clashes with Trump, to be replaced by CIA Director Pompeo -- CNBC

11 comments:

jimbrown said...

It certainly keeps the staff on their toes.

No one will last long enough to become part of the swamp.

Now he needs to take on the mid-level ones.


B.Poster said...

This surprised me as well. I find it fascinating how we can all look at the same evidence when we don't have all of the facts and formulate completely different theories.

Presumably Mr. Tillerson was selected for this position because of his experience as the CEO of a major US oil company meant that by the nature of his position he had developed close working relations with the leaders of a number of major countries. For example, he negotiated a 500 billion dollar oil deal between Exxon Mobil and Russia. This was a fabulous deal for both Americans and Russians. Unfortunately certain petty losers destroyed the whole thing with anti-Russia hysteria.

These close working relations with foreign leaders perhaps weren't translating into the needed tangible results. The problems were several fold. 1.)The state department is largely staffed by ideologues and incompetent boobs. It leaks like a sieve to try and destroy anyone the ideologues don't like. As such, anyone would have a hard time being in charge of it. 2.)When in the private sector, the CEO and the Board of Directors have pretty much free reign to set the corporate agenda. Employees wishing to remain employed and wishing to advance will get in line. In the government not so. In government, employees have free reign to undermine the agenda of their bosses and, if there positions are in line with those of the media and the far left, they can expect praise and perhaps even book deals. 3.) Mr. Tillerson, while a good man, was never able to adjust to these realities.

As stated, it would be hard for anyone to manage the state department. The best solution is probably a complete purge and start over. Those who were employed by this department NEED NOT APPLY for positions within the new State Department.

Off topic but the problems at the CIA are similar but much worse. It needs to be purged, disbanded, and start over from scratch. Those who were employed within the CIA should be barred from applying for positions within the new CIA.

I think we should have seen this coming when we learned after the brilliant diplomatic moves by team Trump regarding North Korea that Rex Tillerson was completely shut out. I assumed this was because a.)he was doing other things and there was no reason why he needed to "know." and b.)state department personnel cannot generally be trusted to not leak information.

The bottom line is he failed to get the state department in line and to get it working for the American people. As such, firing him is understandable. Who could fix this? As stated above, the only way is probably a complete and total purge. Good luck to the new person!!

While I think T-Rex is a good man, we will see in the coming weeks. Did he pout the way the Japanese did when not being informed of the North Korean diplomatic process? Will he seek to undermine POTUS by any and all means necessary? We will likely be finding out in the coming weeks/months.

fred lapides said...

sorry Poster but it is clearly much simpler:
Tillerson embraced the British claim that Russia behind the poisonings and Trump said No they were not (though later did accept it as possibility)...again, make a charge against Russia and you get in troule if you work for Trump

B.Poster said...

Fred,

If this is the case, then this would definitely be grounds for firing Tillerson. So far a lack of evidence has been presented for the reckless claims that have been made against Russia by many in the US government. DJT perhaps understanding that we need to work constructively with such an important country as Russia wishes to be more circumspect in making such allegations.

This was discussed on another thread. I think the British perhaps working in concert with others in the "west" poisoned the Russians in order to fan the flames of a new Cold War that many in the "west" have gone out of their way to fan the flames of. D.Plowman believes it was a Putin enemy who did this. The editor commented essentially that something is amiss here. I think all three of us clearly believe something is not as the official report is telling us.

Next we have the British pm rushing out and breathlessly claiming the Russians (Putin's government) was behind this long before a thorough investigation could have possibly been conducted. IF T-Rex really did embrace the half-baked British government theory without any rational thought, then he really did need to go.

If that happened, I missed it. It certainly does not seem to fit his overall character to be that rash and essentially childish. Big business people generally cannot afford to approach the world in such a manner.

"...make a charge against Russia and you get in trouble if you work for Trump." If find no evidence to support this. After all it was Trump who did not stop and probably ordered a US attack on a military base in Syria after an accusation of the use of chemical weapons was assumed to be done by Syria, not even anything basic has been done to promote sanctions relief to Russia (surely the Administration could do SOMETHING), DJT hasn't pulled our forces out of Syria as would be easy to do in order to minimize tensions with Russia, and no change has been made with regards to our policy regarding Ukraine and, in fact, support for that chump government has been expanded, and I think I could go on. So, I find no evidence that Trump is somehow in league with Russia or making a charge against Russia will automatically get a Trump team member in trouble.

With that said, we have recently had diplomatic overtures with North Korea that, while much can still go wrong, have been very successful. Do you really believe any of this could have happened without Russian support behind the scenes perhaps? I don't!! As such, now is clearly not the time to be making reckless accusations against the Russians. If T-Rex did so or embraced such recklessness, this would be grounds for dismissal in and of itself.

Stable and focused people and countries do not do such things. right now stability and focus is much needed.

fred lapides said...

Tillerson was considered not very adept at his work. In addition, State seriously understaffed and in worse condition than it had been for years.

your notion of firing all in cia is simplistic. If felt a major overhaul needed, you put someone in charge to deal with it; you do not fire all working there...any idea how long would take to recruit, train and put an entire cia in place. world wide?
The Brits do not rush out to make unexamined claims. ps...since that post, another Russian mysteriously killed in..yes England. The Brits named the poison used and it is known to be of Russian use and readily identified.
If you have evidence that Russia was involved in overture, present it. you merely suggest that it must have been so. Perhaps it was China.
I am delighted that we may have talks with N. Korea. That said. nothing whatsoever has been arranged or taken place so I will wait till we learn what such talks might or might not accomplish. You assume many things on no basis but a feeling. I wait till there are facts, accomplishments. I won't bother to google for it but yes, Tillerson did announce that he believed the Brits accusation against Russia..ah here:
Tillerson says U.K. spy poisoning ‘clearly’ came from Russia (NBC)

fred lapides said...

Nikolai Glushkov died in southwest London on Monday night.
Police are describing his death as "unexplained."
He fled Russian in 2010 and was given political asylum in Britain.
In 2013 Gluskhov said he was one of a few people on a Russian hitlist who had not yet been killed.

B.Poster said...

Fred,

"Your notion of firing all in CIA is simplistic." Actually it isn't. Think of it like fighting cancer. The doctor understands the cancer needs to be eliminated. He/she further understands the elimination needs to be complete and some "good" cells will need be eliminated. To be more specific, fighting and beating certain blood cancers require the complete elimination of the patient's bone marrow and a replacement of the bone marrow. This is certainly not an easy process but has to be done.

After the failures of 911, again after the failure in Iraq, and the multiple failures to properly understand either Iraq or Afghanistan I had suggested a complete dismantling of CIA multiple times. At least post 911. we could have turned to allies such as the Israel, the UK, France, and Germany to help us construct new and competent intelligence services. This may not be possible now. Besides the UK has since shown themselves to not exactly to be trustworthy.

"...any idea how long would take to train, recruit, and put an entire CIA in place worldwide?" I'm not sure we need intelligence services "world wide." Australia, Canada, and New Zealand to name three very successful countries do not have intelligence services world wide. We need intelligence services that can competently safeguard American interests and provide useful information to decision makers. If something is actually needed "world wide," we could turn to allies in the regions needed to assist us. Since we would be properly focused, I think we could put together competent services, in a reasonable amount of time, at reasonable costs and while we are doing so we could seek assistance from allies.

"The Brits do not rush out and make unexamined claims." Clearly they have here. There has not been sufficient time to actually conduct a proper investigation. As others pointed out elsewhere something is amiss. I tend to agree. Furthermore someone was way to hasty in running to make an assumption that there is no possible way enough time could have been spent to properly analyze the situation. Furthermore the Brits like us haven't exactly had a good track record of late. Furthermore the poison while perhaps used by Russia in the past could have been obtained by anyone who is a "state actor" or affiliated with one. This would be insufficient evidence to pin it on the Russian government. With an election cycle, there is much to lose and little to gain. As such, I tend to discount official Russian involvement in this or the other person "mysteriously killed."

The "evidence" I use to infer a Russian overture is twofold. 1.) Russia agreed to sanctions on North Korea. This in and of itself is a huge overture. 2.)Recently Putin spoke publically where he rightly criticized the US government but did not single out DJT and appeared to even not blame him for the current situation. This would appear to indicate he still might view Trump as a reasonable person that can be worked with. Admittedly we cannot "know," as we don't have all the facts. As I point out elsewhere, I find it interesting how different people can look at the same information while not having all the facts and come to formulate a different theory on what happened or is happening. I think China has had a large role in this.

B.Poster said...

Fred,

I will post more on this, time permitting. My initial reply to you exceeded the maximum character limit. I had to truncate it.

fred lapides said...

you seem to believe anything out of Russia...try this

At least eight North Korean ships traveled to their home ports this year after leaving Russia with a cargo of fuel, despite declaring other destinations, Reuters reported. The vessels tracked by Reuters registered China or South Korea as their final destinations, but were all tracked back to North Korean ports after leaving Russia’s eastern ports in Vladivostok and Nakhodk. While it is unclear whether the ships unloaded fuel in North Korea, U.S. officials allege that having ships change destinations mid-trip is often used by Pyongyang to undermine sanctions.

fred lapides said...

As someone who has had cancer and someone who knows a number of different people with cancer, all cancers are hardly the same. You cut out, if possible, the malignancy, not the entire body. so too, with CIA, if that is a problem: cut out the malginant and not the benign...do not compare our intel with that of small nations.

B.Poster said...

Fred,

Again, I will respond to the previous most more fully time permitting. I was forced to truncate it previously. As a Certified Public Accountant I am very, very busy right now at work.

Your last two posts are very easy to respond to. Had you read my posts you would realize that I have acknowledged that the sanctions are not as tight or as well enforced as we would like. Essentially Russia and China have been asked to sanction one of their best friends. This is going to be very difficult and not everyone within the countries are going to immediately go along. This is a very difficult situation and much can still go wrong.

As the editor has pointed out, the sanctions are having a significant effect. If you lost 25% of your business and could see over the horizon realizing unless you change behavior your prospects are going to get progressively worse, you are likely going to look at ways to change your behavior. This appears to be the case with North Korea. If the NK leader moves to quickly to negotiate, he runs the risk of being assainated. If Russia and China rush to quickly to be accommodating, their leaders run the risk of a coup. As such, we are seeing things working as they are. The fact that are some ships are violating the sanctions is something I have addressed plenty of times. While we do not like this and would prefer things to move faster, the noose does appear to be ever tightening on Kim and the North Korean leadership.

"You seem to believe anything out of Russia..." Where you said "try this" I've already addressed this issues many times here as I just did. As I have told a number of anonymous posters here, TRY READING THE POSTS, READ THE ARTICLES THE EDITOR POSTS, REREAD THE POSTS, THINK CAREFULLY, AND THEN COMMENT!!

To express this in the opposite direction, "you seem to blindly believe anything that supports the anti-Russian narrative regardless how illogical or ill concieved it may be. This would seem to be true.

Regarding the cancer analogy I have a number of friends and relatives who had it. I have not. I am glad you recovered from yours. From observation, I know this is very devastating. You are correct that they are not all the same. Some can be "cut out." It is my considered opinion that the cancer of CIA is not one of these. This one has metastasized to the point that it is like certain blood cancers. The tissue must be destroyed entirely. Once this is done, we can begin to think about how we start over.

"...do not compare our intel with that of all nations." Why not? The nations I mention have achieved a level of prosperity and security that we are nowhere close to achieving at this time. When one wants to improve, one generally looks at those who are doing better than they are and tries to learn from them and emulate what they are doing to the best of their ability. In saying "do not," very respectfully your tone almost sounds insulting to me and to those great nations. While I can understand your need to insult me, there was no need to insult Aussies, New Zealanders, and Canadians.