Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Trump will use election fraud claims to stay relevant through 2021
Get insights on the latest news in US politics from Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington:
The Electoral College has voted. Why is Trump still refusing to acknowledge defeat?
Well, the President has a long history of criticizing people who lose elections as losers, who quote, "choke like a dog." And I don't think the President wants to admit to himself that he is a loser who choked like a dog. In addition, he's building a pretty impressive political operation based off claims that the election was stolen from him. He's raised over $200 million in the month since the election, and that political operation is going to keep him relevant in the media and in Republican politics for at least the rest of 2021. I think that the claims of election fraud are really central to that operation. So, don't expect Trump to concede anytime soon, even after Republicans start broadly acknowledging his loss.
Why is Attorney General William Barr resigning?
Barr had been one of the President's biggest loyalists. He'd used the Department of Justice in order to advance many Trump causes. And after the election, it looked like he was moving in a different direction. Ostensibly, he's doing it to spend time with his family around Christmas, which is what President Trump said. But in recent weeks, it's come out that Barr didn't acknowledge the DOJ was investigating Hunter Biden before the election; and also, he's been disputing the President's claims of voter fraud. So, I think that relationship just wasn't tenable anymore. Barr's on his way out in the closing days of the administration.
How will the US respond to recent Russian cyber attacks?
Well first, the US has to be sure beyond a shadow of a doubt that the perpetrators of these attacks were Russian. It's possible that there's a false attribution, although it looks very likely these things were carried out by the Russian government. Second, the US is likely to respond with sanctions targeted at the people who did the deed, unless it turns out that this was more than just an intelligence gathering operation and, in fact, targeted US critical infrastructure or was an attempt to damage some US companies or the government. In that case, you may see something much, much broader than sanctions, up into and including cyber attacks back on the Russians to make sure that they pay a price for having done this. Third, a lot of this may not happen until the Biden administration. With the transition of government happening now and going til January 20th, the Biden people may want to reset their approach to Russia altogether, and you may see a much more aggressive response to Russia that goes beyond targeted sanctions starting in the new year.
Quick Take: Russian cyber attacks, the Electoral College & Dr. Jill Biden
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take:
Hey everybody, Ian Bremmer here. Yet another week of your Quick Take. What the hell is going on?
Well, first, I mean, the news that we really didn't want to hear, these massive cyber attacks, almost certainly from Russia against the Department of Treasury, Department of Commerce and other places. So what do we make of this? Well first of all, this is not about timing to hit right before Biden becomes president. These attacks have been going on for months, we only just found out about them so they've been engaged. We could have found out after the election, before. The Russians were, in this case, they didn't know if Trump was going to win or not. They did it anyway. I think what's more relevant is that there are just an enormous number of vulnerabilities that the United States has in all of its critical infrastructure.
There's all sorts of attacks and espionage that are going on at the hands of the Russians, the Chinese to a lesser degree, Iran and some other actors, and we just don't find out about many of them. And that's a problem, that's an enormous vulnerability. Now, I guess the good news is that the U.S. has offensive capabilities that are every bit as robust as what the Russians and Chinese have. So even though we don't know how to deter, and we don't really know how to defend, the presumption is we also are engaging in these attacks ourselves. So, one thing that I think is relevant, I mean, this will be a serious issue, even a crisis that will be on incoming President Elect Biden's to do list as soon as he takes over, but that doesn't mean that he's going to take very serious action, and I think there are a bunch of reasons for that. One is because historically the Americans have not had very good ideas of what to do in response to cyber attacks when they're hard to identify, when there's a lot that's going on.
And when escalation is comparatively easy, you don't necessarily want to take a large measure that could lead to a major conflict. Furthermore, if the Americans are doing same, the potential that you could end up with a serious amount of mutual exposure of massive assets on both sides, that could lead to a lot of people being outed that are working in classified situations, that could have their lives ruined, their families ruined, maybe even get killed, something that you're reluctant to do, so it's not mutually assured destruction. It's not like the nuclear balance the Americans and the Russians have, but it is important to understand that we hear about few of the Russian and Chinese acts because we don't know about them. We hear about virtually none of the American cyber attacks on Russia and China because they're authoritarian states and they don't want to tell anyone that they have those vulnerabilities. So, the fact that we only have limited news here doesn't mean that we understand the full extent of the engagement.
Okay. That's one point. Secondly, today, big day today, we've got the electoral college actually making the President Elect, certifying, if you will, closing that election. The Wall Street Journal editorial board, which has been pretty consistently very pro-Trump, has come out and said, okay, it's it. It's over. You're done. Come on, concede now, President Trump. He's not going to do that. He's not going to do that because he sees no reason. He's raising a lot of money, he has the biggest megaphone in the Republican Parties, the most powerful person, and his ability to continue to have that influence after the elections are over grows if his story is the election was stolen against me, and a majority of Republicans who voted for him actually believe it. And they do.
That's a major problem for U.S. democracy. It's a major problem for the erosion of U.S. political institutions and for the divisions inside the United States politically, and of course, socially and economically. But there's no reason politically why Trump would change a strategy that is working, I mean, unless you think that he has some broader motive that he cares about, the sustainability of U.S. democracy or the wellbeing of the citizens as a whole, and I don't think anyone really buys that. So, this is a challenge, and it's going to continue to be a challenge, even though it's very clear that come January 20th, President Elect Biden becomes President Biden. And a final point, just something that I think I felt like weighing in on. I was sort of bemused, since we're talking about the Wall Street Journal, by this op-ed that got a massive amount of attention from this guy, Joe Epstein, that was quite disparaging and pretty misogynistic saying, Jill Biden, why don't you not call yourself a doctor?
And I say that because it was disparaging to her, referred to her as kiddo. I don't know why the editorial types would allow that to go through. It only talked about; it was disparaging about what she wrote her doctorate education on as opposed to other folks that could have easily been called out on that on the Republican side. I mean, why not say it's also wrong for Dr. Kissinger? Why not say it's wrong for Dr. Sebastian Gorka, who has a pretty silly PhD and always demands that you refer to him as that? But I will also say that I do personally feel like there are a lot of people out there that use credentials in ways that are kind of off-putting and disparaging. And I see it a lot in academe, especially with folks that haven't necessarily done a lot in their field, that they want everyone to call them doctor.
And it's kind of like the guy that you see at a party who immediately has to tell you how important they are, what they've accomplished in life, real blowhard and you try to avoid those people at all means. And I kind of feel like if you can do it, you don't necessarily need to show it. Having said that, there's a real issue of gender and race that is going on, which is that, I mean, when you are in an environment, especially academe, which is largely white and male dominated, and a society in the United States that's largely white male dominated, and you have an advanced degree and a lot of people are already finding ways to disparage you and put you down, that you definitely want to use that degree to force yourself into the dialogue, make it harder for people to say that you don't necessarily matter.
So, in other words, it's very easy for me to say, you don't have to call me doctor, and I don't like it when my students do it. And Ian is just fine, because I'm a white guy with a company and a job. But if you aren't necessarily in that situation, I'm a little bit more sympathetic. In fact, a lot more sympathetic. So anyway, those are my views. I think it's a complicated topic. And it was unfortunate that Epstein wrote such a stupid piece, because it's a piece that actually deserves a broader real conversation in lots of its manifestations. What I will say is that if you have a degree, or Lord knows a peerage, or a knighthood, or some other title, and you don't really need to be using it to stuff it in people's faces all the time, maybe take a step back. I think that generally speaking, anything we can do to create a greater sense of community and kinship is probably something that makes this world slightly better right now. A little bit less crazy, we always like that.
Anyway, good to talk to everybody. Hope everyone has a good week. It's Christmas coming up, and let's be well and avoid people. Talk to you soon.
America is still a democracy post-Trump, but is it a healthy one?
Ian Bremmer and Eurasia Group's Jon Lieber, Jeffrey Wright, and Clayton Allen are taking the Red Pen to an op-ed by Eric Posner, an author and law professor at the University of Chicago. It's titled "America Passed the Trump Stress Test" and was published recently by Project Syndicate.
Professor Posner's argument is basically this: sure, President Trump has violated norms and challenged legitimate election results, but in the end, no real harm done to American institutions, or America's democracy itself. Now it's certainly true that Trump's behavior hasn't led to meaningful policy change, but Posner is blowing the whole thing off as a, "Nothing to see here, no big deal," moment. And we think it's a bit more serious than that.First, Posner writes, "While many Republican voters tell pollsters that the election was stolen, hardly any of them have taken to the streets or pursued tactics that one would expect from people who truly believe that democracy has been subverted. There has been no Hong Kong style uprising. Trump's attacks on American institutions are largely a form of political performance art."
Okay. For starters, it is obvious that the US democracy has withstood Trump's challenge of the election results, and refusal to concede. Heck, that's my whole, "Don't panic," shtick, but that's a low bar. Trump has also in the process, reshaped the Republican party and accelerated the deep partisanship that has nearly destroyed the possibility of compromise in Washington. You do actually need legislation to get done in a country. Further, Trump isn't going anywhere. I mean, we'll see how Twitter treats him in his days, post Pennsylvania Avenue, when we all know he's still going to be tweeting, and he's still going to be talking to his base.
Next, on the matter of civic discourse and participation throughout the election, Posner writes, "Despite the hardships and constraints of the worst health crisis in a century, people donated money to candidates, argued with each other online, organized on a massive scale, notwithstanding the conspiracy theorizing, polarization, and persistent sense of turmoil. These are signs of a healthy democracy."
May I remind you, Eric, that a majority of Trump voters don't think that Biden legitimately won, and the voting system was seriously stretched; hours long waits, mail-in ballot hiccups and the like. Look, America is surely a democracy, but saying that the American democracy is healthy? Most Americans don't think so, most foreigners too. That's a problem. I'd also point out that Trump's attacks on the legitimacy of the election have reinforced distrust in the system, particularly among his own 70 plus million supporters. That isn't the sign of a healthy democracy either.
Finally, Posner writes of Trump's hope of overturning the election results, "Perhaps," he says, "If enough voters took to the streets and enough officials calculated that a grateful Trump would award them with future Senate cures, these officials would have delivered for him, but that didn't happen."
Trump's chances of proving election interference are over
Jon Lieber, who leads Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, offers insights on US politics:
Is Trump out of options now that William Barr said the DOJ found no election interference?
Trump's problem isn't William Barr not finding election interference, it's that he lost the election and he lost it by millions of votes, and he lost it in the most important key states by tens of thousands of votes. Now, this was a very close election. The three closest states, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Arizona, Trump only lost by 44,000 votes so far, and if he'd ended up winning those three, we'd have an Electoral College tie. But the election was not close enough that Trump's strategy of trying to kick this to the courts and then getting it to go all the way to the Congress, with an alternate slate of electors, it just wasn't possible. Had the election been a little closer, he might've had a shot. But as it is, his chances are over. Joe Biden's going to be inaugurated on January 20th.
Will Biden's new economic team be able to make progress on a COVID stimulus plan?
This is really out of the hands of Biden's economic team, and it's all about what Congress wants to do. We've seen a lot of progress this week, starting with a bipartisan proposal that came out of the Senate, that a bunch of House members quickly signed up for that forced Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer to come down from their $2 trillion number much closer to the compromised $900 billion number. Now the ball is in President Trump's court. If he wants to get a deal, he can send signals to Senate Republicans that he wants to move closer to that $900 billion number. And if no deal gets done, they always have the fallback position of simply extending some of the expiring provisions of the Cares Act into January or February of next year so they can come back and fight another day.
Reports that Trump discussed pardons with his three eldest children begs for an important question, what about Tiffany?
Well, poor Tiffany has always been the forgotten daughter, but I think the reality is these reports are pretty ridiculous. There's no clear crimes that any of the children have been accused of, and where this came from was a conspiracy theory by Sean Hannity that the Biden administration would retaliate against President Trump once he was out of office by going after his adult children. Unfortunately, in order to pardon them in advance, which the President could certainly do, he would need to be pardoning them of an accusation of a specific crime, and in the absence of that, there is no pardon that's available. What probably is going to happen though between now and the end of Donald Trump's term is that the President's going to use his very broad power to commute sentences and part of people to forgive high profile accused criminals, people in his political orbit, and people that are being pushed to him by lawyers like Alan Dershowitz, who's representing a known accused criminal, trying to get a pardon. The President could also commute or pardon people who are in jail for low-level drug offenses, which is something that he did over the summer and he used it to his political benefit. Watch for this to happen if the President truly wants to run again in 2024. He may think there's a new base of voters of convicted felons who are free who love Donald Trump now.
Two key dates before Inauguration Day; Biden's first moves
Get insights on the latest news in US politics from Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington:
With the transition of power formally beginning now, what can we expect between now and inauguration day?
Well, there's a couple of important deadlines between now and Inauguration Day. The first is the December 14th meeting of the Electoral College, which will make the state certifications official and will make Joe Biden officially president-elect in the eyes of the US government. Another really important date is going to be January 5th, which is when Georgia has its runoff for the two Senate seats that will determine majority control in the Senate. If the Republicans win one of those seats, they'll maintain their majority, although very slim. If the Democrats win both of the seats, they'll have a 50/50 Senate with Kamala Harris as the tie-breaking vote and slightly more ability to enact Joe Biden's agenda next year. Also, between now and Inauguration Day, we're going to see Joe Biden announce his cabinet and senior staff. Most of whom will probably get confirmed fairly easily early, earlier ... Excuse me, later in January or early in February. And of course, we're going to see what President Trump is going to do next. I think that it's still a little bit up in the air what his post-presidency plans are. He has yet to concede the election. So, anything is possible from him, including a lot of new executive orders that could try to box Biden in and limit his options when it comes to economic policy, foreign policy, and social policy.
What can we expect out of the Biden administration's first 100 days?
Well, the biggest priority of the Biden administration first is going to be to confirm all of their cabinet appointees, and that should be pretty easy at the cabinet head level for the most part, even with a Republican controlled Senate. It's going to be a little more difficult once you get below the cabinet head, because then you're going to start to see some more ideological tests and some more policy concerns be flushed out by Republicans in the Senate. The second thing you're going to see is Biden start to undo as much of the Trump legacy as he can, and his primary vehicle for doing this is going to be executive orders, which is a lot of what president Trump used in order to enact policy. Expect Biden to reenter the Paris Climate Accord on day one and expect him to start undoing things like Trump's immigration orders and perhaps reversing some of his decisions on trade. Yet to be determined is if Congress is going to have fully funded the government for the entire year in December in the lame-duck session, and if they haven't, Biden's going to have to work out a deal probably in March or so to do that.
Evan Osnos: Joe Biden still has the ability to surprise people
Joe Biden is well known as the kind of guy who will talk your ear off, whether you're a head of state or an Average Joe on the campaign trail. But Evan Osnos, New Yorker staff writer and author of "Joe Biden: The Life, The Run and What Matters Now," thinks that reputation may be outdated. "Here he is in his eighth decade when a lot of people are, frankly, in more of a broadcasting mode than a listening mode, he's actually become a more attentive listener." Despite one of the longest political careers in modern American history, there remains more to Joe Biden than may meet the eye. Osnos spoke with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
Watch the GZERO World episode: What you still may not know about Joe
Biden's biographer explains: why did “Sleepy Joe” stick?
For much of the 2020 Presidential race, it seemed like Donald Trump wished he was running against Bernie Sanders instead of Joe Biden. Try as he and his party would, the "socialist" attacks just didn't seem to stick on Biden. But one nickname, "Sleepy Joe" did pack a punch. Biden Biographer and New Yorker staff writer Evan Osnos thinks he may know why it landed more effectively than the other missives, and why it may not exactly be an insult. He spoke with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
Watch the GZERO World episode: What you still may not know about Joe
What you still may not know about Joe
Joe Biden has been a public figure for decades but he's far from an open book. For a man who has been in national politics since the age of 29 and has made multiple attempts at the presidency (third time's a charm) it's remarkable how much he has been willing to change. In a conversation with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World, Biden biographer and New Yorker staff writer Evan Osnos provides a deep dive into the life, legacy and potential presidency of the next leader of the free world.