The Inside Story: Elections and Consequences
Episode 171 – November 21, 2024
Show Open:
This week on The Inside Story…
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump begins to announce agency heads for his incoming administration…
See what that could mean for the Trump agenda going forward.
Now on The Inside Story: Elections and Consequences.
The Inside Story:
KATHERINE GYPSON, VOA Congressional Correspondent:
Hello and welcome to the Inside Story. I’m Katherine Gypson in Washington.
The Republican party has won a legislative Trifecta and will control the White House, the House of Representatives and the US Senate come January… And that could help President Trump enact his expansive agenda, but if history is any guide, it’s no guarantee….
KATHERINE GYPSON:
The new leader of the incoming Republican-majority U.S. Senate…
Senator John Thune, Republican:
We have a mandate from the American people, a mandate not only to clean up the mess left by the Biden-Harris-Schumer agenda, but also to deliver on President Trump’s priorities.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
Thune takes the top leadership role in the Senate after Mitch McConnell served in that position for 18 years, and he is already facing his first test. President-elect Donald Trump has proposed bypassing the Senate’s constitutional role of approving Cabinet nominees.
Senator John Thune, Republican:
The Senate has an advise-and-consent role in the Constitution, so we will do everything we can to process his noms [nominations] quickly and get them installed in their position so they can begin to implement his agenda.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
Democrats lost their majority and will hold at least 47 seats in the new Senate.
Chuck Schumer, Senate Majority Leader:
The American people have presented us with a challenge. We must learn from it.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
Trump had unified control of government during the first two years of his first term. But one analyst says that does not always mean the White House will get what it wants on Capitol Hill.
Casey Burgat, George Washington University:
Mitch McConnell had said then that he supports the president’s agenda, he’ll work with them, but then we saw — from nominations to policies — that they will provide no votes if they think the president has gone too far.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
Republicans also secured a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, earning praise from Trump…
KATHERINE GYPSON:
The president-elect endorsed Speaker of the House Mike Johnson to lead again.
Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House:
I believe it will be the most consequential Congress in the modern era, most consequential administration of the modern era, because, frankly, we have to fix almost every area of public policy.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
But Republicans hold a much narrower majority in the House with only a handful more seats than Democrats, who vowed to keep fighting.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal, Democrat:
The Congressional Progressive Caucus will continue to be ferocious defenders of the working class and poor people.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
President-elect Trump also has the task of naming new directors for the CIA and the Director of National Intelligence who oversees it. He’s turning to an old ally for the CIA and has nominated someone seen as an outsider and possible disrupter to oversee the agency when his second term begins in January. VOA National Security Correspondent Jeff Seldin has this story.
JEFF SELDIN, National Security Correspondent:
The one-time Democrat became a strong voice for Trump’s campaign, rallying crowds behind his agenda.
Tulsi Gabbard, Trump National Intelligence Director Pick:
It’s why I’m proud to stand with President Trump and why we the people must vote to send him back to the White House and make America great again.
JEFF SELDIN:
In announcing Gabbard’s nomination, Trump praised her “fearless spirit,” saying she’ll bring that to the job.
She also brings more than 20 years of experience serving with the U.S. Army National Guard.
And she brings a degree of controversy irking Republican and Democratic lawmakers with this social media video, in which critics say she mirrored Russian propaganda about U.S.-funded bioweapons labs in Ukraine — something U.S. intelligence officials say is not true.
Gabbard has also been criticized for meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad – accused of war crimes. But she defended the trip by saying you can’t be serious about peace unless you are willing to talk to your adversaries.
Trump’s choice of John Ratcliffe to lead the CIA is more conventional – Ratcliffe having served as Trump’s director of national intelligence at the end of Trump’s first term.
At times, Ratcliffe clashed with lawmakers over moves to declassify intelligence about alleged Russian election interference.
He also pushed back against meddling by Iran, Russia and China.
John Ratcliffe, Trump Pick to Lead CIA:
There is nothing more sacred in our republic than the fundamental democratic principle of one person, one vote.
Trump entrusting a familiar face…
And a rising star… to lead U.S. intelligence efforts for the next four years.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
For more on this story, I’m joined now by VOA NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT Jeff Selden, Jeff, what insights can you share about the future of the CIA under this new administration? Well,
JEFF SELDIN:
Donald Trump, as President Elect and as his previous president, has put a lot of emphasis on his global outlook, but he’s also gone with unconventional choices at times for the intelligence agencies, especially this time around with the CIA, he’s chosen John Ratcliffe, who served him, but in his previous administration as the Director of National Intelligence, the choice that is causing more controversy and more discussion and his choice is his choice for the Director of National Intelligence, the person who oversees 17 other of the US intelligence agencies, by choosing Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic Congresswoman who has experience as a National Guardsman serving overseas, but to the minds of many critics, does not have intelligence experience, right?
KATHERINE GYPSON:
So what exactly does the legislation creating that position say?
JEFF SELDIN:
What that position needs the legislation that created the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which was put into place after the 911 terror attacks in 2001 to make sure that the US intelligence agencies were all working on the same page and that information wasn’t falling through the cracks that would allow a massive attack like the US saw 911 to occur. And it says that the Director of National Intelligence is somebody who needs to be very experienced. The legislation calls for extensive intelligence experience, not just in terms of understanding intelligence and practicing intelligence, but also in terms of managing intelligence agencies. Right?
KATHERINE GYPSON:
So how has that been interpreted in the past? Has that ever been a problem in the confirmation process?
JEFF SELDIN:
Well, in the past, many of the directors of National Intelligence have been old veterans of the US intelligence community, serving in intelligence agencies like the NSA, the National Security Agency, the CIA, the nation’s premier intelligence spy agency.
But at times, though, the definition of what extensive means has been pushed specifically in his last administration, President Trump nominated John Radcliffe, now nominated to head the CIA to be the Director of National Intelligence. When he first nominated him, there was controversy. He had some experience as a prosecutor working on terrorism related cases. Some lawmakers thought that that experience was overstated, and he also served on the House Intelligence Committee. But it wasn’t enough. The first time he was nominated, he had to withdraw. He was nominated again later in the administration, and he survived confirmation by a narrow party line vote. But that establishes a precedent.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
The question now is, how will lawmakers who have to receive these confirmation hearings and who have an interest in seeing a strong US intelligence community. How are they going to look at Tulsi Gabbard nomination? How are they going to look at her experience and her views on various issues? Right?
I remember she had a trip to Syria back when she was a member of Congress that was very, very controversial. Among other things she said about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, floated some conspiracy theories that the invasion was justified because of Bio Labs. Can you. Hack some of that for us and how that might get her into trouble now, right?
JEFF SELDIN:
Tulsi Gabbard has not been somebody who’s been eyed favorably by people within the national security community. Traditionally, they look at her trip to Syria and her meeting with the Syrian President Bashar Al Assad, and that is something that they think was a mistake and upset them.
They look at this take that she had on some of the fighting between Russia and Ukraine, and the statement that you alluded to, and it was mentioned in the piece about how she, according to many, mirrored Russian propaganda about US involvement in bio weapons labs, to the point where a Republican senator, Mitt Romney essentially accused her of being a puppet for the Russian regime, and she said that, and she’s also upset people in the intelligence community, because years ago, she co sponsored legislation that would have issued that called for a pardon to Edward Snowden, a former National Security Agency contractor who leaked hundreds of 1000s of documents, which, according to intelligence officials in the US, put lives at risk, risk, the lives of assets, put other programs at risk, and then took refuge in Russia.
So that’s going to cause some consternation. But for the Trump team, in the people in Trump’s camp, they see or as somebody who’s a disrupter, somebody who’s willing to tell truth to power and shake up what they see as an intelligence infrastructure that really needs some change,
KATHERINE GYPSON:
Right. So, you’ve talked about the way Gabbard is perceived by the incoming Trump administration. How is she going to be perceived worldwide? What are our allies going to think about someone who’s facing these accusations?
JEFF SELDIN:
it’s a good question. Look, there some allies will be concerned, because they know they look at the track record that Trump had from his first term in office, and some of the information that some allies felt that he leaked out, or the way he handled intelligence, which, again, from a traditional intelligence point of view, some former officials thought it was it was careless at times, or he played fast and loose with how intelligence was used. So they may not be very favorable in terms of looking at what’s going to happen this time around, right?
But they can look at his nomination for CIA Director John Ratcliffe. They have experience dealing with him from what his time at as Director of National Intelligence at the end of Trump’s first term that may give them some comfort. Look. It’s also important to remember that a lot of the interaction, the cooperation between the US and its allies when it comes to intelligence is not at the top most level.
It’s at levels lower down, where people have been working on these programs, working on getting intelligence, gathering information, where they work together. Some of it, at this point, is even automated.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
So how are those relationships going to be changing under a Trump term this time around?
JEFF SELDIN:
That remains to be seen. But some of this stuff, some of this cooperation, is not going to be able to be walked
back, right?
KATHERINE GYPSON:
So that said, you did talk about the lower level cooperation, if she does go through, or if she does continue with this nomination, it could be a little bit dicey to get that through the US Senate. I know that from covering some of the more domestic nominees, what exactly, how could that shake out?
What answers will she have to, you know, Faith give the US Congress when she’s confirmed?
JEFF SELDIN:
Well, if she faces a confirmation hearing, there’s a good chance at least Democratic lawmakers, and there’s a good chance to lawmakers will question her on some of the stances that she’s taking, some of her actions, about Bashar Al Assad, her trip to Syria, her stance on Edward Snowden and his leak of information, and why should she feels he should be pardoned, when within the intelligence community he’s viewed as A traitor. They’re going to ask her about why she’s been willing to go public and echo sentiments expressed by Russia against against Ukraine and US involvement that lends to conspiracy theories. And she’ll have to provide some answers. The thing that it’s hard to say is, how will the law make How will she provide those answers?
What exactly will she say? And then how will lawmakers react? Remember, part of the confirmation process is there is some deference to the president elect or the president by the time these hearings happen, as to who the President wants in office, who he feels he needs in his ear to give him the best advice and the best information. How are lawmakers going to parse this out? And that remains to be seen.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
We’ll see how much the US Congress pushes back on all of that. It is a separate branch of the US government. View is NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT Jeff Selden, thank you so much for joining us today.
JEFF SELDIN:
My pleasure.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
As the Biden administration enters its final two months, President Biden is far from winding down. His administration has recently authorized Ukraine to utilize long-range weapons, allowing them to strike deeper into Russia, targeting the Kremlin’s military infrastructure. This decision follows Russia’s largest aerial assault on Ukraine in recent months. VOA’s Arash Arabasadi reports on the developing situation.
ARASH ARABASADI, VOA Correspondent:
Missiles fly overhead as Russia launches its largest air assault against Ukraine in months.
Ukraine’s air defenses intercepted some incoming fire over capital city Kyiv as air raid sirens bellowed below.
And people huddled for safety in underground metro stations.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russia launched 120 missiles and 90 drones, including Iranian-made Shaheds.
Kyiv’s air force says the military destroyed 104 missiles and 42 of the drones.
Russia says it was targeting energy facilities that power Ukraine’s military-industrial complex.
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to bring a speedy end to the conflict between the two nations.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz recently spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin and reiterated Europe’s support for Ukraine no matter what happens in Washington.
Olaf Scholz, German Chancellor:
Russia and the Russian president started this war and are prepared to risk a great deal of material and, above all, their own lives for the plan to conquer and deny Ukraine its sovereignty and democracy… It would be an illusion on Russia’s part to believe that Ukraine cannot continue to count on our firm support in the future.
ARASH ARABASADI:
Zelenskyy, however, said he welcomes the prospect of this war coming to an end.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukrainian President:
I don’t think Putin wants peace at all. But that does not mean he doesn’t want to sit down with world leaders. … I think the war will end, and not in the abstract. There is no exact date, but with the policy of the incoming White House, the war will end faster. This is their promise to their country. And for them, it is also very important.
ARASH ARABASADI:
But for now, Ukrainian first responders have their hands full removing missile debris from blown out buildings.
Ukrainian officials say at least seven people died in the attacks, which they say caused “severe damage” to the power system.
The strikes prompted emergency power cuts through several regions with area residents waiting in line at water supply stations and so-called “invincibility points.”
Marina Martynenko, Odesa Region State Emergency Service:
We opened 45 invincibility points at fire stations in the Odesa region. People can charge electronic devices, drink hot tea, and receive basic food. There are also kids’ corners where children can draw and read.
ARASH ARABASADI:
Russia’s war on Ukraine will reach the one-thousand day mark this week.
Arash Arabasadi, VOA News.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
The incoming Trump administration also appears to be taking a different approach to Israel and the Palestinians living in the West Bank. Trump named former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee as U.S. Ambassador to Israel. And as VOA’s Linda Gradstein reports from the West Bank, that could mark a major shift in U.S. policy for the region.
LINDA GRADSTEIN, VOA Correspondent:
Kedumim is a comfortable bedroom community in the northern West Bank built in the mid-1970s. Daniella Weiss, a fiery settler leader, and her children were one of the first Jewish families to settle here, living in tents with no running water.
Today, she hopes President-elect Donald Trump will accept total sovereignty and annexation of the West Bank settlements, without provisions for a Palestinian state.
Daniella Weiss, Jewish Settler Leader:
The president of the United States who says ‘I’m going to give you a present. I will give you sovereignty, but you’ll have to leave something aside.’ No, it’s all ours. The ability to say it is all ours, why? Because it is the promise of God to Abraham.
LINDA GRADSTEIN:
Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also lives here. He predicted that in 2025, Israel will annex what’s known as Area C, the 60 percent of the West Bank that contains the Jewish settlements and is home to more than 500,000 settlers. The 2.5 million Palestinians live mostly in what’s designated Areas A and B of the West Bank that are under the partial or full control of the Palestinian Authority.
Israeli annexation of disputed territory was a feature of the first Trump administration’s Middle East policy, which recognized Israeli control over the Golan Heights. Trump-appointed Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, has long been a staunch proponent of Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Like the Israeli settlers, he refers to the territories by their Biblical name Judea and Samaria.
Mike Huckabee, US Ambassador to Israel Nominee:
I recognize Judea and Samaria as part of Israel. And I believe that it’s most
important that we realize that there are more Jews living in Judea and Samaria than most people ever realize, and that those numbers are significant. It’s an important part of the security of Israel.
LINDA GRADSTEIN:
Some analysts, including those who live in the West Bank, say that Israel should be careful about annexing the lands unilaterally.
Hodaya Karish-Hazony, Makor Rishon:
If you really think that, and I think that, sovereignty is one of the things that can make Israel really safe and ensure her future, you have to do it wisely and you have to do it hand-in-hand with the American administration.
LINDA GRADSTEIN:
Other settlers worry that a decision to annex part of the West Bank could cause further unrest.
Hanan Moses, Herzog College:
I personally support annexation, but I just don’t want it to tear the society apart again. There already is a strong settlement movement here. But the left is against it. The division among us weakens us.
LINDA GRADSTEIN:
Some settler leaders, including Daniella Weiss, want to go even further than annexing the West Bank. They say they are already preparing to re-build Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip which were evacuated in 2005.
Linda Gradstein, VOA News, Kedumim in the West Bank.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
President Donald Trump carries with him the dubious distinction of being the only convicted felon ever to assume the Presidency. In fact, Trump has spent a good deal of time in courtrooms in the four years since his previous term.
VOA’s Tina Trinh examines how the status of those cases changed now that he’s president elect.
TINA TRINH, VOA Correspondent:
Will President-elect Donald Trump be sentenced for his crimes?
It’s a question that remains to be answered, as New York state judge Juan Merchan considers the extraordinary circumstances of a former U.S. president and convicted felon who also happens to be the incoming president.
In May, Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels to suppress a sex scandal ahead of his 2016 election.
Trump’s sentencing in the so-called “hush money” case has been delayed multiple times, and his election victory earlier this month casts further doubt on legal proceedings.
Anna Cominsky, New York Law School:
Really, the core of this is to find out whether or not Trump’s sentencing is going to move forward at all. And that includes whether it will happen before he takes office, whether it will happen after he takes office, or whether his case will just be dismissed.
TINA TRINH:
Trump’s defense team is arguing that a landmark Supreme Court ruling in July grants him presidential immunity and that the case should be dismissed entirely.
But Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is arguing that the jury arrived at a guilty verdict prior to the Supreme Court ruling, and that Trump was not president at the time.
In a letter to the judge, he indicated that prosecutors would oppose attempts to dismiss the case but were open to delaying sentencing until after Trump’s term in office.
Claire Finkelstein, University of Pennsylvania:
If Juan Marshan decides that he agrees with the prosecutors’ suggestion as a possibility, then he would engage in what might be termed an equitable stay of proceedings in light of the extraordinary circumstances of the defendant becoming
president of the United States, and he would effectively stay the case until 2029, after Donald Trump steps down from the presidency.
TINA TRINH:
The hush money case isn’t the only one the president-elect must contend with.
Two federal cases brought forth by special counsel Jack Smith, one alleging
mishandling of classified documents and another election interference, are reportedly being brought to a close, as a long-standing Department of Justice policy cites that sitting presidents cannot be charged with a crime.
However, an election interference case in Georgia does not fall under federal jurisdiction.
Claire Finkelstein, University of Pennsylvania:
Technically, the state of Georgia is free to proceed unencumbered by the DOJ policy. But can they? Is there, is it even possible to expect that they would be able to proceed and expect the cooperation of Donald Trump, which would really require the cooperation of the White House to proceed with a trial while the defendant is serving as president of the United States?
TINA TRINH:
Unprecedented circumstances have made for uncharted legal territory.
Tina Trinh, VOA News, New York.
KATHERINE GYPSON:
Some State governors in the U.S. are already preparing for potential Trump administration policies that they anticipate may conflict with their state laws. Democratic governors, in particular, assert their readiness to defend their states’ progressive policies. Matt Dibble reports from California, where the governor has called an emergency session of the state assembly.
MATT DIBBLE, VOA Correspondent:
As President-Elect Donald Trump prepares to take power with Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, some Democratic governors want to limit his impact on their states.
Kathy Hochul, Governor of New York:
If you try to harm New Yorkers, or roll back their rights, I will fight you every step of the way.
MATT DIBBLE:
New York Governor Kathy Hochul and the governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker, were quick to react.
JB Pritzker, Governor of Illinois:
You come for my people, you come through me.
Gavin Newsom, Governor of California:
We are calling, and have called, for an emergency special session of our state legislature firmly focused on the values we hold dear that I think are universal values, that are American values.
MATT DIBBLE:
That’s California Governor Gavin Newsom calling a special session of the state assembly to prepare for what his office says is, quote, “an incoming federal administration that has threatened the state on multiple fronts.”
Following his win, Trump posted on his Truth Social that Newsom is, quote, “trying to KILL our Nation’s beautiful California.
Donald Trump, President-Elect:
The state of California is a mess.
MATT DIBBLE:
Trump frequently says the state’s progressive policies contribute to crime, homelessness and unauthorized immigration.
Unidentified:
The great state of California will be filing a lawsuit…
MATT DIBBLE:
During the first Trump presidency, California sued the administration over 100 times, successfully defending state immigration policies, vehicle emission standards, and access to health care.
Speaking last week near San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge, California Attorney General Rob Bonta said his team plans to begin filing litigation as soon as Trump takes office.
Rob Bonta, California Attorney General:
Mr. Trump repeatedly overstepped his authority between 2016 and 2020. There’s no reason to think he won’t do it again. We checked him, and we stopped him, and we pushed him back into his box when he tried to step out of it.
MATT DIBBLE:
On a Los Angeles campaign stop in September, Trump bashed California’s leaders and their management of state resources.
Donald Trump, President-Elect:
I’m going to give you safety. I’m going to give you a great border, and I’m going to give you more water than almost anybody has.
MATT DIBBLE:
California spent over $41 million defending laws and policies during the first Trump presidency, according to the nonprofit CalMatters.
When state legislators convene in December, Democratic leaders say they will be voting on emergency funding to block the incoming Trump administration from deporting immigrants, limiting reproductive and civil rights, and rolling back environmental regulations in America’s most-populous state.
Matt Dibble, VOA News, Oakland, California
KATHERINE GYPSON:
I’m Katherine Gypson. We will see you next week, for The Inside Story.
###
