Fear: Trump in the White House(104)
“These military guys, they don’t get business. They know how to be soldiers and they know how to fight. They don’t understand how much it’s costing.”
On Afghanistan, Trump told Porter, “It’s a disaster there. It’s never going to be a functioning democracy. We ought to just exit completely.”
CHAPTER
39
Trump and Senator Graham played golf at the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach two weeks before Christmas, December 10, 2017. In a tweet Graham said the golf course was “spectacular,” a comment sure to please Trump. It was nothing compared to the praise Graham lavished on Trump during their round.
“You’re a very good commander in chief,” he told Trump. The president was listening to his military commanders and the changes in the rules of engagement in the Middle East and Afghanistan were paying off.
This was Graham’s pitch to Trump: “You can do something nobody else did. You’re cleaning up the mess that Obama left you. You’re doing a damn good job of cleaning it up. You’re rebuilding the military. You’re taking a wet blanket off the economy. You’re really unshackling the military and the economy. God bless you for undoing the damage done in the last eight years. Where do you want to go? What do you want to be your legacy? Your legacy is not just undoing what he did, but it’s putting your stamp on history.”
Trump seemed to love the adulation but said to Graham, “You’re a middle-of-the-road guy. I want you to be 100 percent for Trump.”
This resembled the loyalty pledge that then FBI director James Comey said that Trump had asked of him. According to Comey, Trump had said, “I need loyalty. I expect loyalty,” during their now famous one-on-one Green Room dinner in the White House during the first week of the Trump presidency.
“Okay, what’s the issue?” Graham asked, “and I’ll tell you whether I’m 100 percent for you or not.”
“You’re like 82 percent,” Trump said.
“Well, some days I’m 100 percent. Some days I may be zero.”
“I want you to be a 100 percent guy.”
“Why would you want me to tell you you’re right when I think you’re wrong? What good does that do for you or me?” Graham asked. “Presidents need people that can tell them the truth as they see it. It’s up to you to see if I’m full of shit.”
* * *
On December 29, 2017, Trump’s tweet had summarized his position on DACA: “The Democrats have been told, and fully understand, that there can be no DACA without the desperately needed WALL at the Southern Border and an END to the horrible Chain Migration . . . We must protect our Country at all cost!”
The president called a meeting in the Cabinet Room with 20 senators and House members to discuss an immigration plan for the Dreamers. Trump directed that the Tuesday, January 9, meeting be televised, all 55 minutes. He was in full performance mode, promising legislation. “Truly, it should be a bill of love, and we can do that.”
The president was engaging and fun. Graham was astounded at Trump’s apparent shift on one of the most polarizing issues before them. The anti-immigration hard-liners would be aghast. Trump had once been their leader. Graham hoped this was the president at his deal-making best.
Graham had never felt better about Trump’s ability to get an immigration deal done. He had worked on immigration for years, attempting to broker compromises with Democrats like Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin. With Trump, he saw the potential to finally succeed. In a statement, he was exuberant, saying, “Most fascinating meeting I’ve been involved with in twenty plus years in politics.”
The headlines reinforced Graham’s optimism. The New York Times: “Trump Appears to Endorse Path to Citizenship for Millions of Immigrants.” The Washington Post: “At the table: Trump tried to negotiate and prove stability.”
The next day Trump phoned Graham.
“I thought you were masterful,” Graham said. “Don’t let all these people”—Republican hard-liners—“scare you away. You’re on track here. This is the guy that I try to tell people about when we play golf. This is the Donald Trump that I’m all-in for. Only you can do it. Bush tried. Obama couldn’t do it. You can do this.”
To Graham’s surprise, Trump put Melania, the first lady, on the phone. “I just wanted to tell you I like what you said,” the first lady said in her soft accent. “And the way you handled yourself, and the way you speak. I thought it was very nice.”
“Well, thank you, ma’am, you made my day,” Graham replied. He was impressed with her grace. It was the first time he had ever really talked to her. It was pretty clear she, an immigrant herself, was sympathetic to the DACA children.
“Can we change the libel laws?” Trump asked, rapidly shifting the tenor of the conversation to one of his pet peeves.
“No,” Graham, the lawyer, said.
“Why?”
We are not England, Graham said, where the libel laws were stricter.
People were writing “bullshit,” Trump said.
“I don’t doubt it,” Graham agreed. “But no, we can’t change the libel laws and don’t worry about it.” In the landmark 1964 decision New York Times v. Sullivan, the U.S. Supreme Court had set the libel bar about as high as possible: Something was libelous only if published or said knowing that it was false and with reckless disregard for the truth.