This day in WND history: Death threats, advertisers targeted

Twin Towers on Sept. 11, 2001

Twin Towers on Sept. 11, 2001

WND gets death threats, advertisers targeted

WND-20-YearsOct. 18, 2001: In response to its reporting on Islamic terrorism, WND became the target of death threats, lawsuit threats and an ongoing campaign of intimidation against its advertisers and business partners.

In the aftermath of Sept. 11, WorldNetDaily.com and its monthly print magazine, Whistleblower, featured in-depth coverage of the militant Islamic threat to America, including the presence within the United States of radical Muslim individuals and organizations with ties to known terror groups.

Some choice comments received by the news site included:

“Maybe we could grind up your filthy, pathetic body and feed it to the pigs before we send them to the Muslims.”

“You should watch your back from now on. Maybe these ‘Islamic fundamentalists’ could come after you and your family.”

“Since you are a swine, we will cut you open and drain you of blood, and then the U.S. military can use that if they wish.”

“I’m surprised that such an anti-Muslim lives. Now you know what needs to be done to anti-Muslims. They deserve to die.”

“No Muslim would mind to kill a bastard like you.”

View the full story

To see WND highlights from every calendar date, click here.
Never miss another big story. Sign up for WND’s free email news alerts right now!


Washing machine has free trade on spin cycle


If there were ever a trade-policy case that questions the long-held beliefs of free traders, the multi-year large appliance battle between American-owned Whirlpool and South Korean-owned LG (formerly Lucky Goldstar) and Samsung is it.

Free traders have always believed that allowing consumers to have the freedom to buy whatever they want, from whomever and wherever they want, and without any government interference is the best policy. But what about when foreign companies cheat by illegally “dumping” their products in the U.S. market – meaning that they are selling their products below the cost of production (usually with the intent to steal market share from their competitors)?

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that Whirlpool is the victim of cheating by predatory foreign competitors, of which there is never a shortage.

Even the free trade-leaning Obama administration upheld Whirlpool’s petition for tariffs on Samsung and LG washing machines imported from Mexico and South Korea in January 2013, even though Whirlpool lost a similar case involving refrigerators the year before.

By July 2014, non-South Korean-based brands including Whirlpool, GE, and Electrolux (the world’s number two appliance maker behind Whirlpool) all announced sales declines. It’s interesting to note that this occurred despite a significant recovery of housing construction that spurred sales of appliances.

Check out the best of Roger Simmermaker, in “How Americans Can Buy American” and “My Company ‘Tis of Thee” in the WND Superstore.

Yet despite their sales challenges, Whirlpool moved some washing-machine production from Monterrey, Mexico, to a plant Clyde, Ohio, which is its biggest washing-machine factory. Whirlpool also laid out plans in March 2014 to spend $40 million and increase capacity by over 75 percent at its Greenville, Ohio, plant, which makes small kitchen appliances like the popular KitchenAid mixer.

South Korean-based Samsung does have production facilities in the U.S., but Whirlpool has many more, including eight American factories employing 15,000 manufacturing workers in the U.S. and 22,000 American workers overall.

But apparently, unapologetic free trade activists think job “announcements” by foreign companies like LG and Samsung are more important than protecting Whirlpool’s American workers, who have been working here and paying taxes here for decades.

According to a Wall Street Journal article in March of this year, Samsung is planning to expand its U.S. production facilities, which could generate around 500 jobs. LG has announced its intention to build a new home-appliance factory in Tennessee, which could create 600 jobs.

Samsung has said its interest in a U.S. factory has been influenced by the protectionist leanings of our current president, according to those familiar with the matter. Samsung and LG are clearly wanting to produce in the United States to avoid proposed tariffs on their imports.

The LG and Samsung stories are just more proof that tariffs on imports create American jobs by enticing foreign producers to relocate factories to America where they can be closer to consumers who make up a very lucrative market.

Memo to free traders: Only American workers pay taxes to America. Workers in foreign countries (like those who produce in South Korea like LG and Samsung) pay no taxes to America.

South Korean-owned Samsung and LG are proposing to “tip-toe” into producing in the U.S. market, while American-owned Whirlpool has already jumped in with both feet over many decades. For American consumers and taxpayers, there can be little doubt which company supports American jobs, American profits, and the American tax base. The answer is easy: Whirlpool.

In December 2015, Whirlpool found it necessary to file a request with the U.S. government to impose tariffs on LG and Samsung appliances imported from China. Why? Because after tariffs were imposed on the same products from Mexico and South Korea, LG and Samsung wanted to avoid import tariffs and move production to China. In December of 2016, the U.S. Department of Commerce vowed to continue imposing constitutionally approved tariffs on Chinese-made washing machines by Samsung and LG.

According to Aaron Spira, chief legal officer for North America at Whirlpool Corp., “We believe in free trade, but it doesn’t work if people don’t obey the rules and follow the laws. We have to look for other options that will solve the issue.”

The necessary option is what was once called the “American System” of tariffs on imports to both protect U.S. industries and raise revenue for necessary government expenditures.

Samsung and LG have avoided tariffs on their imported washing machines by moving production from Mexico and South Korea to China. Then, facing the most recent tariffs on Chinese imports last year, LG and Samsung moved washer production to Thailand and Vietnam.

Does that sound like a company that is genuinely interested in investing American dollars into the U.S.? Of course not. It sounds like they are more interested in playing a game of Whack-a-mole. LG and Samsung can remain committed to playing games, but the U.S. merely needs to be committed to winning for our homegrown American companies like Whirlpool and its workers.

Foreign companies like LG and Samsung aren’t investing in America as much as they are using America to invest in themselves.

Whirlpool, on the other hand, has proven that they believe in making huge investments in American manufacturing. Nearly a decade ago, Whirlpool CEO Jeff Fettig said, “Our U.S. presence is, and always will be, the foundation of our global enterprise. We are very confident in the future of U.S. manufacturing and proud to have more U.S. manufacturing employees than all of our major competitors combined.”

Whirlpool estimates that U.S. imports from South Korea, China, Thailand, Mexico and Vietnam have doubled to about 3.2 million units in 2016, compared with 2012 levels. A huge surge in imports like that threatens good-paying Whirlpool jobs here at home.

Peter Navarro, one of the White House’ top trade advisers and director of Trade and Industrial Policy, has spoken out in support of Whirlpool’s long-running battle against its South Korean competitors. In a speech earlier this year, he blasted Samsung and LG for “precisely the kind of trade cheating that must be stopped.”

Our government works to protect and defend American companies like Whirlpool and the employment of many thousands of its U.S. workers as they should. And we as consumers can do our part, too. Every time we need to buy a new appliance, we can put Whirlpool at the top of our list. And each time we do it, we’ll be feeling the power our wallets have in supporting other Americans.

The answers to continuing American prosperity are simple and easy: Buy American (patronizing American-made products from American-owned companies) and reject free trade in favor of the “American System” of constitutionally consistent tariffs. Doing so will keep more jobs, profits, and tax revenue within our national borders.

Check out the best of Roger Simmermaker, in “How Americans Can Buy American” and “My Company ‘Tis of Thee” in the WND Superstore.


Jets-for-jihadis newest wrinkle in Iran-deal probe


When President Trump announced last week he would not recertify Barack Obama’s expensive deal with Iran to stop its nuclear-weapons program, he cited a number of “serious flaws.”

He said Iran’s “fanatic regime” repeatedly has attacked and killed Americans, violated the limits on nuclear materials, ensured there will be no effective inspections and continues to pursue a missile program.

Now a new problem with the deal is being investigated: Obama allowed Boeing to sell airliners to Iran’s domestic airline companies, which are using them to transport military personnel and weapons.

The American Center for Law and Justice revealed Tuesday it has launched a Freedom of Information Act fight to obtain documents regarding any accommodations granted by Obama that facilitate Iran’s efforts to “transport jihadist soldiers to the battlefield.”

Such practices are “a blatant violation of international law,” ACLJ said.

Mark Taylor and Mary Colbert write in “The Trump Prophecies” about the miracle of the 2016 election and what the Body of Christ should do now for the nation.

“We are demanding that four key agencies involved with the Iran deal – the State Department, the Department of the Treasury, the National Security Agency (NSA), and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) – give us the records that will show what they knew about Iran Air’s use of civilian airliners to transport military personnel and equipment. What they knew matters because, in the Iran deal, they agreed to let Boeing and other plane manufacturers sell airplanes to Iranian airliners like Iran Air,” the ACLJ explained.

The organization explained it previously obtained evidence that “the Obama administration concealed information that Iran – the Number One state sponsor of terror – has made it a practice of shipping jihadists on commercial aircraft to Syria in violation of the international laws governing the Iran nuclear deal.”

It’s not the only instance in the Obama administration went rogue.

“Remember, last year, we took the Obama State Department to federal court to expose one of the key lies advanced by the Obama administration,” ACLJ said. “The State Department lied about when the secret bilateral talks with the Iranian regime actually began, and then deleted press briefing video footage where their spokesperson admitted as much.

“Our lawsuit uncovered the ‘sensitive’ internal memo containing ‘pieces of purposeful editing’ – that a video technician recalled receiving a telephone call from within the State Department directing him to cut the segment in connection to a Fox News reporter’s inquiry.”

The new FOIA actions aim to uncover more of “those Obama-era flaws.”

In a blog posting, ACLJ Executive Director Jordan Sekulow said his group is seeking details regarding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and any licenses issued to Boeing or Airbus allowing the sale of jets to Iran.

ACLJ wants documents regarding U.S. government knowledge “of Iran’s past use or intended or possible future use of Iran Air jets to transport military personnel and/or equipment, and any discussions prior to the JCPOA concerning Iran Air’s use or possible use of jets for those purposes.”

“Shipping jihadists on commercial aircraft constitutes an outrageous pattern of behavior. This conduct has apparently helped to fuel Bashar al-Assad’s atrocities in Syria,” ACLJ said. “Photographic evidence provided to Congress shows Iran using its state run airline, Iran Air, to ferry militants between 2016 and 2017.

“During this period, the Obama administration removed sanctions on Iran Air in an apparent attempt to promote multi-billion-dollar sales between Iran and aircraft manufacturer Boeing. Going forward, this means that Iran would have more aircraft available to ferry militants not just to war-torn Syria, but to anywhere in the world.”

The group quoted Rep. Peter Roskam’s bill, the Terror-Free Skies Act, in which he says Iran, through its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), “provides material and financial support to Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO), including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Kata’ib Hezbollah, as well as to the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria which is responsible for over 400,000 civilian deaths.”

“Iran has systematically employed its national air carrier, Iran Air, as well as numerous private and publicly owned Iranian and Syrian airliners, including Mahan Air, to ferry weapons, troops, and military equipment on behalf of the IRGC and Iran’s Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (MODAFL) to FTOs and rogue regimes around the world.”

ACLJ said that while there is “still much that we do not yet know, here is one thing we do know: The Iran deal is a calamity.”

“The Obama administration had to lie to the American people to get it through. We will keep pushing until the United States completely withdraws from the disastrous agreement.”

The FOIA request states: “[T]he number of requests contained herein seek any and all records concerning the connection between the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, OFAC licenses issued to Boeing and Airbus allowing agreements for well over 200 jets, U.S. government knowledge of Iran’s past use or intended or possible future use of Iran Air jets to transport military personnel and/or equipment, and any discussions prior to the JCPOA concerning Iran Air’s use or possible use of jets for those purposes.”

Trump’s decision not to recertify doesn’t mean the deal collapses immediately. Under a 2015 law, the president must inform Congress every 90 days if Iran is complying. A determination that Iran is not in compliance triggers a 60-day process for lawmakers to decide whether or not to reimpose sanctions.

Trump does have the authority, as president, to simply remove the U.S. from the agreement, a move that undoubtedly would send shockwaves through Iran and the other world powers that are parties to the deal.



Russian officials say they believe Iran would walk away from the deal – with the $1.7 billion in American cash they’ve already taken – if the U.S. leaves it.

The administration specifically wants to renegotiate the provisions on inspections.

A report in Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin explained the deal actually allows no provisions for genuine inspections.

The Middle East Media Research Institute reported it’s because “the inspection procedure takes place only at sites where Iran has agreed to allow inspection, that is, sites Iran itself has declared as nuclear sites, but not at any other sites in Iran, including military sites.”

“The Obama administration and the countries party to the JCPOA designed the JCPOA in a way that on the one hand they can claim that a robust inspection is being applied while on the other hand they allowed Iran to evade inspection in all other sites,” the report explained.

Mark Taylor and Mary Colbert write in “The Trump Prophecies” about the miracle of the 2016 election and what the Body of Christ should do now for the nation.


Mega-wildfires caused by bad government management?


Have major changes in forest-management practices over the past century had anything to do with the historic, devastating wildfires in Northern California?

Many successful methods of mitigating wildfires employed by U.S. Forest Service in the early 20th century were abandoned largely because of efforts by environmental activists, argued Rep. Tom Clintock on the House floor Oct. 3.

McClintock, the Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal reported, contends 1970s laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act in particular have led to poor forest management.

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.

The congressman said the laws “have resulted in endlessly time-consuming and cost-prohibitive restrictions and requirements that have made the scientific management of our forests virtually impossible.”

More than a dozen wildfires in Northern California’s wine country have burned hundreds of thousands of acres, killing dozens of people with hundreds more missing. In addition, thousands of homes and businesses have been destroyed.

In a May congressional hearing, McClintock argued that 45 years ago, the U.S. began “imposing laws that have made the management of our forests all but impossible.”

Private landowners clearly have done a better job of managing forests, he insisted.

“Time and again, we see vivid boundaries between the young, healthy, growing forests managed by state, local, and private landholders, and the choked, dying, or burned federal forests,” McClintock said.

“The laws of the past 45 years have not only failed to protect the forest environment — they have done immeasurable harm to our forests.”

The Daily Signal pointed to a study by the Reason Foundation finding that in the past three decades, the area burned by wildfires in the U.S. each year has grown dramatically, while the number of fires has remained roughly constant, having peaked in the 1970s.

The study, concluding climatic factors alone cannot explain the pattern of fires observed over the past century, pointed out that the practice of small, prescribed burns — imitating what Native Americans had done —gave way to fire suppression, eventually leading to large-scale fires.

The editorial board of the San Diego Union-Tribune newspaper agreed that the Forest Service should end “attempts to try to snuff out every wildfire.”

“Small blazes that aren’t a threat to public safety are healthy for the wilderness ecology,” the paper said. “Suppressing them all makes mega-fires more likely because there is more underbrush and debris to burn.”

The editorial board also called for “revising laws to limit lawsuits — filed by environmentalists who loathe logging — that make it difficult to thin forests on federal land.”

“The evidence is strong that private forests that are thinned are less vulnerable to wildfires, which is why The Nature Conservancy is using the tactic in Washington state,” the paper said.

Private forests?

Randal O’Toole, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute, found that the Forest Service’s work became more costly and less effective as it increasingly “rewarded forest managers for losing money on environmentally questionable practices.”

He noted fire expenditures have grown from less than 15 percent of the Forest Service budget in the early 1990s to about 50 percent today.

The Daily Signal reported Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is calling for a more aggressive approach to reduce the excess vegetation that has made the fires worse.

In Congress, members of the Western Caucus have proposed legislation designed to give power back to local authorities and allow for more aggressive forest thinning.

The Daily Signal said one idea, borrowed from the playbook of the school choice movement, is to created charter forests that are publicly owned but privately managed.

The move would decentralize forest management, professor Robert H. Nelson wrote for The Wall Street Journal, exempting certain forests from current requirements for public land-use planning and the writing of environmental impact statements.

“These requirements long ago ceased to perform their ostensible function of improving public land decision making,” he wrote.

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.


Trump promises ‘chance to unleash a middle-class miracle’


President Trump visited the Heritage Foundation Monday night to promote his tax reform plan, promising Americans, “This is our chance to unleash a middle-class miracle.”

“Let’s give our country the best Christmas present of all: Massive tax relief,” he said, encouraging listeners to call their senators, their members of the U.S. House, and asked for their support for the president’s plan.

He outlined the key components: the first $24,000 for married couples tax-exempt, a simplified tax filing process so “families will be able to file their taxes on a single sheet of paper,” a reduction in business taxes, and policies that will encourage the repatriation of what he estimated at more than $3 trillion that’s now sitting overseas.

“So this money can come back home to America,” he said. “Believe me, we can use it in this country.”

Trump, and the GOP, have made overhauling the tax code one of their highest priorities for the rest of this year.

He’s already delivered a series of speeches on the plan, and repeatedly has focused on points that he believes will get the attention of the middle class.

Mark Taylor and Mary Colbert write in “The Trump Prophecies” about the miracle of the 2016 election, and what the Body of Christ should do – now – for the nation.

Critics allege that his benefits will actually go to businesses, but economists point out that it is those businesses that create jobs for Americans.

The exact impact isn’t known, as the outline still is only a proposal, not law.

Ed Feulner, chief of the foundation, commented earlier, “Congress has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to deliver sweeping, pro-growth tax reform for the American people.”

Trump explain his bullet points will double the zero bracket, raise the child tax credit for working families, and remove the “self-inflicted wound” of very high tax rates for business.

His plan would set the corporate tax rate at “not more than 20 percent,” far below the current 35 percent.

He’d also “allow our companies to expense the full cost of new equipment in the year they buy it” and end “the horrible and very unfair estate tax as also known as the death tax.”

Overall, he said, estimates are that the tax changes could give “the typical American family” the equivalent of a $4,000 annual raise.

For those who want to call their members of Congress, he said, “Don’t give ’em a hard time.”

But he said he needs help to give the nation tax relief for Christmas.

He cited the issues he’s already been addressing, the border wars, chain migration, cooperation with other nations, a military that is effective against ISIS, pulling out of “one-sided deals” that don’t benefit America, the fight against terrorism, the need for Constitution-faithful judges, and more.

“We’re going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again,” he said.

Marc Short, the president’s legislative affairs director, is urging for the work to be done by the end of the year.

“We need to turn this economy around,” he told “Fox & Friends.” “It’s begun to turn under the president’s leadership and rolling back the regulatory state.”

Mark Taylor and Mary Colbert write in “The Trump Prophecies” about the miracle of the 2016 election, and what the Body of Christ should do – now – for the nation.



Bolton warns Trump: Just scrap whole Iran deal


Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton says President Trump took a good first step in decertifying the Iran nuclear deal, but he warned the whole thing must be scrapped to remove the smokescreen that Iran is an honest player and end the financial windfall for the the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism.

Bolton is also cheering the collapse of ISIS and commending President Trump for policy changes that expedited that outcome. However, he is deeply concerned about the fate of the Kurds as Iranian-backed militias and even the official Iraqi forces look to force Kurdish fidelity to the regime in Baghdad.

And he is also urging Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to get on the same page quickly for the sake of American foreign policy.

On Thursday, Trump announced he was decertifying the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, negotiated among the Obama administration, Iran and five other nations in 2015. Decertifying the agreement does not kill it but gives Congress 60 days to act on it. If Congress cannot reach a consensus on how to move forward, Trump could then decide to abandon the deal.

Get the hottest, most important news stories on the Internet – delivered FREE to your inbox as soon as they break! Take just 30 seconds and sign up for WND’s Email News Alerts!

Bolton has long called for a complete withdrawal from the JCPOA, but he is encouraged by Trump’s decision to declare Iran non-compliant.

“It’s certainly much better than recertifying that the deal is in America’s national interest,” Bolton told WND and Radio America. “What he did is to at least serve notice that it’s not. Nobody should be under any illusions that we’re still in the Obama administration.”

But he said it’s vital for Trump to kill the deal once and for all in the next couple of months.

“The reason that United States needs to withdraw entirely is to create a new reality, to strip away the camouflage that Iran is provided by this deal, where it gains resources from trade and investment deals from all over the world but basically continues to pursue its nuclear weapons program without adequate inspection or verification,” he explained.

Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton:



And Bolton is confident that Trump will have the chance to kill it because he has no confidence in Congress.

“This basically gives Congress 60 days to see if they can come up with some kind of comprehensive strategy. I have no faith whatever that Congress will be able to do that,” he said.

“So at 60 days, it’ll be back to the president. I’m hoping then that having given the supporters of the deal and the people who think the deal can be improved time to play out their option and failing, that he’ll then take the next step and get out of the deal entirely,” Bolton said.

Bolton said “camouflage” of a compliant, responsible Iran is nonsense.

“The argument to stay in the deal is that somehow the deal is constraining them, and I believe that it’s not. They gave up temporary, easily reversible concessions in exchange for hundreds of billions of dollars of trade and investment and assets being unfrozen,” he said.

Furthermore, Bolton said Iran’s supposed transparency is also a farce.

“Every time that the Iranians have made a disclosure about their nuclear program for the last 20 years, it’s only been after U.S. intelligence uncovered it or Iranian opposition groups made it public,” Bolton said.

He said Iran did have one brief moment of honesty that also reveals the futility of the JCPOA.

“Just about two months ago now, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran said that if they made the decision themselves to withdraw from the deal, they could get back to pre-deal levels of uranium enrichment in five days.

“Now, you take everything the Iranian leadership says with a big grain of salt. But in that case, they happen to be right. And it’s an indication of just how minimal their concessions were,” Bolton said.

Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.

But if the JCPOA is not an effective nuclear deterrent for Iran, what would be? First, he said it’s time for the U.S. to see Iran and North Korea as part of the same nuclear threat instead of separate challenges. He said the following step is to make sure neither rogue actor has nukes.

“I know people don’t like to hear it, but you can’t leave the military option off the table because if you believe – as Trump said in his U.N. speech just about a months ago – that the only way forward with North Korea is denuclearization – and I think the same is true with Iran – that means we can’t leave the current scenario with them still in possession of nuclear weapons.

“Otherwise, they’re available to extort and blackmail the United States as far as the eye can see,” Bolton explained.

In neighboring Iraq, the news is better at least for the moment. On Tuesday, U.S.-backed militias said they had routed ISIS in its home base of Raqqa, Syria. U.S. officials indicated there is still work to do but that the vast majority of Raqqa had fallen.

Bolton said the speed of military success against ISIS is a big change from the previous administration.

“The president is right to say that he significantly sped up the end of the ISIS caliphate. I think we are at the point where there may still be resistance here and there, but functionally the caliphate is over,” he said, while being quick to point out many ISIS figures fled to other hostile nations, so the ISIS threat itself lives on.

However, Bolton is worried that the Iraqi forces and the Shiite militias backed by the U.S. and Iran are now taking aim at the Kurdish forces in the north, already wresting control of Kirkuk away from the Kurds, who saved the city from ISIS.

Bolton said the Iraqis and militias are now moving on the Kurdish capital of Irbil, and they’re doing it with American weapons. He said the Trump administration ought to respond in two ways: Help the Kurds now and depose the Iranian government in the long term.

“The safety of the United States depends upon the ayatollahs being overthrown. I’ve believed that ever since the Ayatollah Khomeini took over in 1979,” he said.

“In the near term, I think we need to provide the Kurds with the armor and the artillery that, ironically, we’ve provided the forces of the Baghdad Iraqi government and the Shiite militias. The Kurds are now being attacked with American weapons,” said Bolton, noting the Kurds have not been given such weapons.

Finally, Bolton said only President Trump and Secretary of State Tillerson know the true state of their relationship, but he said it is vital that they get on the same page fast, as these two men are at the center of executing American foreign policy.

“It’s not something you can let drift on and paralyze our decision-making,” he said. “It’s just too important of a combination not to have both ends of it working effectively.”

Bolton has some criticism of Trump on the personnel front. Unlike Trump, he believes it is vital for Trump to nominate good people to fill a myriad of vacancies at the assistant and deputy level in the State Department. He said Trump can’t bring about the change in bureaucracy and policy he’s promised without putting the right people in critical positions.

“The bureaucracy is like a big aircraft carrier,” Bolton explained. “The way it was sailing when the president took office on Jan. 20 is the direction it’s going to sail in until somebody says to turn it around. If you don’t have people around, your ability to turn it around is greatly reduced. I think that harms the president, ultimately.”