Connect with us

News

Firing of National Security Agency Chief Rattles Lawmakers

Published

on

Firing of National Security Agency Chief Rattles Lawmakers

As soon as word spread that President Trump had fired Gen. Timothy D. Haugh, the head of the National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command, current and former administration officials began floating theories about why he had been let go.

Had General Haugh opposed one of Mr. Trump’s initiatives, perhaps moved too slowly on purging officers who had worked on diversity issues? Or was he a casualty of the administration’s shifting priorities to counter narcotics?

Whether any of that was true, it had little, if anything, to do with why he was fired.

General Haugh was ousted because Laura Loomer, a far-right wing conspiracy theorist and Trump adviser, had accused him and his deputy of disloyalty, according to U.S. officials and Ms. Loomer’s social media post early Friday. He was one of several national security officials fired this past week on her advice.

“I predict you are going to see some nonsense statement about some policy difference or something General Haugh wasn’t doing, but we all know what happened,” said Senator Angus King, a Maine independent who is on the intelligence and armed services committees. “Laura Loomer said it. She is the one who told Trump to fire him.”

Advertisement

Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and former majority leader, lamented that the Trump White House had ousted General Haugh and was appointing people to Pentagon posts who were skeptical of America’s engagement with allies and the world.

“If decades of experience in uniform isn’t enough to lead the N.S.A. but amateur isolationists can hold senior policy jobs at the Pentagon, then what exactly are the criteria for working on this administration’s national security staff?” Mr. McConnell said. “I can’t figure it out.”

The criteria Ms. Loomer appears to be using as she looks to oust people she sees as disloyal is their connections to critics of the Trump administration.

In her social media post, Ms. Loomer said General Haugh had been chosen by Gen. Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whom she called a traitor.

Ms. Loomer said General Haugh’s deputy at the National Security Agency, Wendy Noble, was close to James Clapper, a former director of national intelligence and fierce critic of Mr. Trump.

Advertisement

As chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Milley reviewed the appointments of hundreds of officers to key positions. Mr. Clapper, the longest-serving director of national intelligence in the Obama administration and a senior defense intelligence official under George W. Bush, has ties to officials throughout the spy agencies.

Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said he had worked closely with General Haugh and never saw anything to suggest disloyalty or a lack of competence.

“I fear this is just the hourly installment in the Laura Loomer clown car aspect of this administration,” Mr. Himes said.

He said that it was important to have a detail-oriented leader at the top of the N.S.A., and that he was concerned General Haugh’s ouster could lead to policy changes.

Mr. Himes also said he was concerned that the Trump administration could try to split the jobs of N.S.A. director and head of Cyber Command.

Advertisement

Since U.S. Cyber Command was created, the director of the National Security Agency has led that organization. Some within the Trump administration, and veterans of his first term, want the two jobs separated. That would allow a military officer to lead Cyber Command but give the president or the defense secretary the license to name a civilian to lead the agency.

The two agencies work closely together, but have different roles. The National Security Agency penetrates telecom and computer networks overseas, collecting communications intercepts. Cyber Command conducts offensive and defensive operations on computer networks overseas. The command helps allied countries defend their networks and hunts for malware and breaches by Russia and other adversaries.

It also conducts offensive operations against the networks of adversaries to disrupt their ability to attack the United States.

A succession of N.S.A. directors have argued that one military officer should lead both agencies to improve coordination. But some Trump administration officials believe that it is important to have a civilian in charge one of the most important spy agencies.

Some Trump administration officials have been critical of the N.S.A.’s broad power to intercept phone calls overseas, because some Americans have been caught up in those efforts.

Advertisement

Mr. Himes said he opposed splitting the jobs. While there is an argument for separating them if done carefully, Mr. Himes said he doubted the Trump administration would proceed in such a manner. The administration was already imposing irrational cuts on the N.S.A. that were costing the agency skilled people, he said.

“Given this administration’s break-it-first-then-fix-it style of operating, I am concerned,” Mr. Himes said. “It is not the low performers or obsolete skill sets that are being fired. In many cases it is some of our most valuable people. And this very directly makes us less safe.”

Beyond the structure of the commands, some Trump administration officials want the N.S.A. to move faster on White House initiatives.

But Mr. Himes said there was no evidence the N.S.A. was slow rolling administration priorities, and he added that General Haugh was working to step up collection on drug cartels.

“I can say with certainty that the N.S.A. was reorienting its priorities,” Mr. Himes said. “In fact in some ways they were shifting in ways that made me a little concerned that the pivot to Asia and counterterrorism collection would get short-shrifted.”

Advertisement

Mr. King said it was deeply dangerous to remove General Haugh at a time when Chinese intelligence agencies were penetrating telecom networks and ransomware attacks backed by Russia on hospitals were continuing.

“Our country is under attack right now in cyberspace, and the president has just removed our top general from the field for no reason at the recommendation of someone who knows nothing about national security or even the job this general does,” Mr. King said.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

In Cabinet Meeting, Musk Seems to Drastically Lower DOGE’s Savings Goal

Published

on

In Cabinet Meeting, Musk Seems to Drastically Lower DOGE’s Savings Goal

While stumping for Donald J. Trump during the 2024 presidential campaign, Elon Musk said he could cut $2 trillion from the federal budget. After Mr. Trump took office and placed Mr. Musk in charge of the budget-slashing so-called Department of Government Efficiency, Mr. Musk lowered that projection by half, to $1 trillion in the upcoming fiscal year.

In a cabinet meeting on Thursday, Mr. Musk appeared to set his group’s goal lower still.

“I’m excited to announce that we anticipate savings in ’26 from reduction of waste and fraud by $150 billion,” Mr. Musk told Mr. Trump, referring to the fiscal year, which runs from the beginning of October 2025 to the end of September 2026.

Mr. Musk’s group has slashed budgets and fired thousands of workers around Washington, but so far the DOGE website indicates that it remains far from reaching his goal of $1 trillion in savings next year. As of Thursday, the site claimed $150 billion in savings, with an itemized list of some of the purported cuts.

It was unclear if Mr. Musk meant to say that the $150 billion was merely what his team had found so far — meaning that $1 trillion in savings was still possible — or if that $150 billion was all it expected to find.

Advertisement

A White House official said $1 trillion in savings remained “the goal.”

Unlike a previous cabinet meeting, during which Mr. Trump had Mr. Musk speak at the outset, Thursday’s meeting began with the president asking Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to speak. Mr. Musk spoke later, and briefly.

In his remarks, Mr. Musk said that he answered someone who asked how he finds fraud in government by saying, “Actually, just go in any direction — that’s how you find it.” He described it as a “target-rich environment.”

But the website that Mr. Musk’s group has used to tout its savings has been plagued by errors, including triple-counting the same cancellations and claiming credit for cutting programs that ended under President George W. Bush.

Mr. Musk’s critics outside the administration — including Stephen K. Bannon, the far-right provocateur and former senior Trump White House official — have said publicly that the cost-cutting effort is directionally correct, but that Mr. Musk is unlikely to achieve $1 trillion in cuts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Wall Street sell-off resumes as Donald Trump’s China tariffs spook investors

Published

on

Wall Street sell-off resumes as Donald Trump’s China tariffs spook investors

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

A brutal sell-off on Wall Street resumed on Thursday as banks and investors warned Donald Trump’s tariffs could tip the US into recession even as the president stepped back from a full-blown trade war.

The S&P 500 dropped 3.5 per cent in another day of turbulent trading and a sharp turnaround from the previous session’s 9.5 per cent surge. Wall Street’s benchmark share index is down 6.1 per cent for April.

The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite dropped 4.3 per cent after its best day since 2001. In currency markets, an index of the dollar against half a dozen peers tumbled 1.9 per cent, as the rush from US assets sent the Japanese yen, euro and UK pound rallying.

Advertisement

Markets had soared on Wednesday after Trump paused by 90 days the steep “reciprocal” tariffs on a swath of countries. The gains were a reprieve from the heavy selling across US markets, which had this week seeped into the $29tn Treasury market, the bedrock of the financial system.

But Wall Street banks and investors said the president’s decision to hoist duties on Chinese imports as high as 145 per cent and keep in place a 10 per cent universal tariff still presented a serious risk for the US economy.

“Combined with the ongoing policy chaos on trade and domestic fiscal matters, along with the still-large losses in equity markets and hit to confidence, it remains difficult to see the US avoiding recession,” JPMorgan said.

Goldman Sachs said it was “too early for the ‘all clear’” and warned that “while some immediate tail risks have been reduced, policy uncertainty remains very high and is likely to weigh on consumer and business activity”.

US Treasuries faced a burst of selling on Thursday, with the yield on the benchmark 10-year note up 0.11 percentage points at 4.41 per cent, leaving it roughly 0.1 percentage points below the week’s highs.

Advertisement

Krishna Guha, vice-chair of Evercore ISI, said: “Today’s trading has seen a rare, ugly and worrying combination of market moves with the dollar, bonds and equities lower amid renewed volatility and stress cross-asset markets.”

Markets remained under heavy pressure as Trump held a televised cabinet meeting in the White House. Treasury secretary Scott Bessent, answering a reporter who asked about the slide in markets, said, “I don’t see anything unusual today.” He answered the question after Trump said he had not seen the markets on Thursday.

Trump said about China: “We would love to be able to work a deal. They’ve really taken advantage of our country for a long period of time.” He also said he was prepared to bring back the broad reciprocal tariffs if other countries declined to forge new trade deals with Washington.

China on Thursday imposed its additional 84 per cent tit-for-tat tariffs against the US as planned, bringing its total levy on American imports to more than 100 per cent. President Xi Jinping signalled he would not back down from the escalating trade war, but Beijing made no immediate move to match Trump’s even higher rate.

“If you want to talk, the door is open, but the dialogue must be conducted on an equal footing on the basis of mutual respect,” said China’s commerce ministry. “If you want to fight, China will fight to the end. Pressure, threats and blackmail are not the right way to deal with China.”

Advertisement

The renminbi weakened to its lowest level since 2007 in the latest sign Beijing is willing to tolerate gradual depreciation in response to US tariffs.

Fears of the widening trade war between the world’s two biggest economies also drove oil prices lower again on Thursday, with international benchmark Brent settling down 3 per cent at $62.33 a barrel. West Texas Intermediate settled at $60.07 — a price that will threaten the country’s prolific shale sector, analysts have said.

The trade dispute with China, the world’s biggest exporter, has boosted the average US tariff on imports from the Asian country to 134.7 per cent, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

A separate analysis from the Yale Budget Lab said American consumers now face a tariff rate of 27 per cent, the highest level since 1903, when taking into account US tariffs and those imposed against America.

Uncertainty over Trump’s trade policies and objectives was likely to “beset markets and macroeconomic outlooks in the months and quarters ahead”, added Bill Campbell, global bond portfolio manager at DoubleLine.

Advertisement

“Overhanging uncertainty on tariffs will complicate business decision-making with respect to strategic issues such as where to maintain or relocate production facilities; cyclical issues such as the management of payrolls and lay-offs; and [capital spending].”

Reporting by Kate Duguid, Will Schmitt, Harriet Clarfelt and George Steer in New York and Steff Chávez and Aime Williams in Washington

Continue Reading

News

New York City’s tragically long history of helicopter crashes

Published

on

New York City’s tragically long history of helicopter crashes

Thursday’s horrifying tourist helicopter crash into the Hudson River that killed six people was one of several deadly tragedies involving the aircraft in recent years. At least 32 people have died in helicopter accidents in NYC since 1977, according to The Associated Press.

In 1977, the landing gear on a Sikorsky S-61L malfunctioned as passengers waited to board from the roof of the Pan Am Building. The chopper tipped on its side, and its spinning rotor blades killed four people — including film director Michael Findlay — and injured a fifth. A broken piece of blade fell down to the streets below and killed a pedestrian and injured another.

In 2009, nine people were killed when a Eurocopter AS350 tourist helicopter with five Italian tourists on board collided with a small private plane over the Hudson River near Frank Sinatra Park in Hoboken. The flight was operated by Liberty Helicopter Sightseeing Tours.

In 2018, a Liberty Helicopters flight operated for FlyNyon, also a Eurocopter AS350, went down in the East River, killing five people. Two passengers died at the scene and three others were pronounced dead at the hospital. A jury later awarded the family of the victims $116 million in a lawsuit.

In 2019, an Agusta A109E helicopter crash-landed on the roof of a 54-story building in Midtown Manhattan, killing the pilot, later identified as Tim McCormack. McCormack was the only person on board and known as a well-respected pilot. It was speculated by airport officials that he suffered a mechanical failure while in flight.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending