Last week was the best of Donald Trump’s presidency so far.
Amidst all the eruptions by and about James Comey, Michael Cohen, and Stormy Daniels, the president (or his administration) did four important things last week that old-style fusionist conservatives should applaud. The man is morally and temperamentally unfit for his office, but at least the default options of his administration tend wisely rightward rather than hard-left like President Barack Obama’s did.
The most important of Trump’s actions last week was the attack, coordinated with France and Great Britain and verbally supported by Germany, against chemical weapons facilities in Syria. Some say the bombings were not forceful enough, while others (partisan Democrats and right-wing isolationists) scream that it was a warmongering betrayal of principle or of the Constitution.
But Trump needed to act, and the allied powers threaded the needle nicely. If a regime is using chemical weapons, and we can safely degrade the regime’s ability to do so, we should. Period. We should do so because it saves lives; we should do so because international edicts against chemical warfare must be shown to have some teeth; we should do so because, except in extreme circumstances, we should enforce our own “red lines” once we have announced them.
In this case, Trump gave important evidence that he can indeed act against Russia’s will; that he can work in coordination with allies and with enough subtlety to achieve key aims without instigating a broader conflict; and that even realpolitik involves elements of morality — namely (in part) that America’s international standing depends in important ways on our moral stand against atrocities.
The administration’s second important action was an executive order emphasizing work and marriage in a host of welfare-related programs. Drawing on the lessons of the hugely successful 1996 law that added work requirements and other reforms to the former Aid to Families with Dependent Children program, Trump’s order directs eight federal departments to find ways, within existing law, to apply successful, conservative, anti-poverty principles within some 80 other federal programs.
Granted, an executive order like this only operates at the margins because federal agencies have only limited discretion as to how to implement federal laws. An act of Congress would have far more effect. Nonetheless, at least one analyst, Kristina Rasmussen of the Foundation for Government Accountability, said Trump’s order could help fill “millions of open jobs” and achieve “billions of dollars in federal and state budget savings.”
The third key administration move was the creation, within the Department of Health and Human Services, of a new Conscience and Religious Freedom Division to protect doctors and other medical personnel from being forced to violate deeply held religious beliefs by participating in abortions, assisted suicides, or other controversial procedures. This is a necessary and welcome change in emphasis from the coercive, faith-trampling activism of the Obama era.
Trump appointee Roger Severino correctly averred “that religious freedom is a primary freedom, [and] a civil right.”
Finally, and most emotionally satisfying, Trump’s pardon of former vice presidential chief of staff Scooter Libby was a long-overdue act of justice, removing a stain from the record of an innocent man. As I have argued in numerous outlets (including right here at the Washington Examiner) for 11 years, Libby did not lie under oath about his discussions concerning the CIA status of agent Valerie Plame, and may not even have misremembered anything.
There were three key witnesses in the Libby trial. One, Judith Miller, has recanted, and says he was wrongly prosecuted. The second, the late Tim Russert, at first told investigators he wasn’t sure about a conversation with Libby but only later, after prompting, became certain about it — and, while an honest man, Russert already had a proven history of misremembering otherwise memorable events. The third, famed Watergate reporter Bob Woodward, testified that his notes and recollections made it possible he had been the one who gave Plame’s name to Libby (so Libby might have just confused his conversation with Russert with the near-contemporaneous one with Woodward).
Trump’s explanation of the pardon was, typically, shallow: “For years I have heard that he has been treated unfairly.” He probably is using the pardon to shoot the finger at James Comey, rather than because he knows much about Libby’s case. Still, even if for wrong reasons, the pardon of an innocent man is a good result.
Trump did four good things last week. Maybe he’ll use that as an excuse to “exit on a high note.” We can only hope.
Quin Hillyer (@QuinHillyer) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is a former associate editorial page editor for the Washington Examiner, and is the author of Mad Jones, Heretic, a satirical literary novel published in the fall of 2017.
