President trumps impeachment. , and thetion with iran upcoming 2020 elections. And theinternational Mccain Institute posted this as part of its state conference as part of the world. So we are going to jump right in on this panel. With me to my right is nancy, the Editorial Page Editor of the miami herald. You have been in that position since 2013. Delighted you are here. First time we have had the herald participate. On her way. She should be here any minute, National Correspondent for politico. What will be next to her is matt kamensky, her boss, global editor at politico and editor in chief of politico. He had been at the wall street journal before that. Last but not least is jonathan Foreign Policy magazine. Delighted to have all three of you here. Jonathan, welcome. Matt has been here before. Natasha will join us when she arrives. I want to start with the latest developments with this year, the situation with iran. I wanted to ask each and jonathan, i will start with you and then we will reverse the flow. How do you think the president has handled the situation . Jonathan thank you for having me and to all of you for listening. I had a funny thought which i head,expected to enter my which is if iran doesnt respond any further than it has today or yesterday, and if the United States doesnt respond beyond the extent to which it has already, this might actually like i said which was not something i would have anticipated even a few days ago. The mistakes began at the beginning. The approvalithout of congress which is problematic. The legality of the strike was problematic. The timing of the strike was highly automatic. The administration keeps insisting it was done because soleimani was involved in an imminent attack. That is problematic for two reasons. It isnt like he was a bomb planter himself. Iran is a highly institutionalized country. He was a good general but one of many in the countrys army. It is not like iran is a terrorist organization where decapitating for killing one leader decapitates the organization. That are is no evidence terrorist attack was about to occur because the administration hasnt provided us with any evidence. There is also good reason to a rapidit would lead to and worrisome cycle of escalation between iran and the United States which would quickly lead to war. And the unexpected happened, iran responded in a very restrained and moderate way, seems to have deliberately avoided casualties both american and iraqi. , donald trumptes responded in a limited and restrained way for the moment. The twoare seeing is sides of trump at war with one another. One is the side that favors belligerence and has to show he is a bigger man than anybody whoever he is confronting. The other one is conflict adverse and determined not to war ingged into a bloody the middle east which he is convinced the public would not support. We have seen a vacillation between the two. But that is the best case scenario, where we are right now, things dont get any worse. Happens, we are back where we were at the end of the Bush Administration where we had no nuclear deal, we have a hostile iran facing the United States. The prospect for negotiations areeen the two i think nonexistent. And the situation is not stable and it is not likely to remain where it is today. Part of trumps promise was he was going to start ratcheting up sanctions. That makes it likely the iranians will find ways to, under the policy of extreme resistance, the american policy of extreme pressure, to start poking the United States again. Then we are off to the races all over again. Until proven say otherwise, trump is a master of messaging and reading the public mood. End he hashe got a simple sentence here. Themselves in a difficult position to counter it. We killed a guy who is responsible for the death of thousands of americans, someone who caused a lot of trouble in iraq, saved assad, is on one side of the war in yemen. We killed a bad guy, and it will work well for him. Assuming it doesnt do any worse. I dont see a i dont see a contradiction move n his, you know, his to do what he did with soleimani, and then now step back. Public reading of the mood. Not i mean, again, soleimani is not as well known as osama bin laden, but i been the case has already made this was not something not which anyone feels any regret over. If six months from now were in a hot war in the middle east and there are american soldiers there, yes that would be lowest q war at its point but were not there, so i sitting in the white house today, youre feeling pretty good about it. Andancy, how do you see it, also, if you can give us a flavor of what your readers might be saying as well. Well, our readers come down on both sides also. From our g that letters to the editor, and i think trump has a couple of going for him. I think american ignorance. Soleimani . He was not on anyones radar. Im just talking about americans in general. He was not osama bin laden. Had done a lot of damage, but over there. Think american forgetfulness. Think selfinterest will rule as long as as matt and jonathan both said, nothing escalates here. To, can i think selfinterest d the pay the rent . Where is my healthcare insurance . All legitimate issues, and i think also forgiveness. Forgiving people also. I think the ball is in the Democrats Court now. Kind of trump has played this well when we didnt hes he was going to, played it well as hes played missteps had the temerity to c soleimani what he was, a terrorist missteps well and we see, say, and Elizabeth Warren, and a murderous terrorist, pulling back because the left is now saying you cant that sounds complementary to trump. So the democrats are going to voice, their heir backbone, their principles. Beyond. Issue, and how lets stick with the democrats on this issue. How do you see this after noting if at all the democratic the nomination race . I dont. Dont unless, y Something Big happens here. In iowa has gues been how fascinating its been democrats play out. Between isolationists, but even biden who can play the experience card, i think, has and of hed by the strength of the ressive wing Democratic Party to take maybe hostile stance on this than he would otherwise do. If youre sitting in the white progressive wing of the party is shaping the response on soleimani, way it around the debate medicare for all and around a lot of issues, suddenly it makes trump go from being kind of a little bit off the mainstream to american the mainstream and in a strange way, the safer choice for americans, would never thought we would be here, at this point in the campaign. Jonathan, do you see it having an impact on the democratic race . Does it play, for example, to advantage of somebody like buttigieg, who served in the military . First of all, i agree, with nancy, that if things stay concept y are, the doesnt escalate then its not oing to be much of an issue going forward. And certainly not debate it, rators dont ask about they tend to shy away from Foreign Policy questions. Campaign e the spontaneously making a big issue out of it or bigger than they are. Talk re determined not to at Foreign Policy. I know this because i have eached out to every one of the campaigns to ask for interviews over the last six months, and by campaign d managers and people at virtually every one of the campaigns, look, we know that at some point have to focus on Foreign Policy, but frankly, we really not want to and so were going to even do the work to engage until something forces our hand. This, i dont think, on its own, is going to be the thing hand. Forces their biden is sort of embracing this issue. It plays to his strengths. And i ink thats right think it also plays to sanders trength because he has a very clear sort of left wing eist position, ss ts a very clear issue for biden. Buttigieg, but for others its too nuanced. It was the clarity that rattled Elizabeth Warren to walking back her original, and i point assessment. Could you also touch on the and how this is playing with floridas two senators with the congressional members as well, how are they playing this . Is it along the lines that you split . Ed of a oh, absolutely. Think they are solidly behind trump and solidly behind what he did. Rubio and rick scott. Do you see so if this it does contained and not get any worse, looking down horizon, all three of you, are there Foreign Policy issues hat could prove important, maybe not pivotal, in the election . Sually our elections are about the economy or things of that nature. Imagine that, n you know, on the Foreign Policy level, thats coming down the pike . Nationally, its not as clear. Perhaps through the lens of immigration. Yeah. To be how that continues handled or mishandled depending what we default upon. Florida, uth venezuela, and cuba, to a far its a egree haiti, but Foreign Policy issue here. Think, the pew results, china has been, is, and will the soviet be what ago, inas maybe 30 years kind of focusing on the conversation, not just about but cas role in the world also what america is. It is sort of power thats rising, trump has been very the ssful in turning narrative around china toward we were quite, you know, the business community, was always very pro china, and thats changed dramatically in three years. And its not only trump. I think youre seeing it from rising republicans, marco rubio, i think thats what will be with us in this cycle, and beyond. I mean, i think hes exactly right. Another slide on pew survey dont American Voters care about Foreign Policy, when its called Foreign Policy. About is hey do care economics and trade and terrorism, right . And so in so far as foreign in both of volved those issues, and it certainly already, trade war certainly, if the conflict with in a ways to terrorism that affects americans living within the United States, then major issueake it a in the campaign again. Can i ask the two of you, maybe, just about secretary pompeo, indications, i guess, said hes not planning to run for the senate kansas. And there was an article describing pompeo, i think it as Andrea Mitchell wrote, saying, hes the most powerful secretary of state in a long time. Would you describe Foreign Policy process under way with a randnew National Security adviser, also a pretty new secretary of defense. You can tell me if you disagree, matt, i dont permission, i u know you will do that anyway, things example of how have changed is this memo that purportedly got a few days ago, or a week or two ago, for how to e option respond to the missile strike. The Iranian Missile strike on iraqi base that included option e, take out soleimani. Think that option would not have been on the memo earlier in Trump Administration because you had adults in the room as everybody calls them. Moderates like responsible policymakers like mcmaster, like who were aking sure that options like that were not moderates like responsible getting to the president. I think many of you in this room served in government know, you dont put a crazy your on a memo to principal if you dont want your principal to take that decision. That i thinkcision pompeo very much wanted the president to take, and there was with any stature equivalent to his to take it off the memo. Second. On a this chair is not for elijah sover, its for welcome, to you, from politico. I want ask you, natasha what you think about whats been said far. I think its an interesting parallel between the obama years and later on. Likeobama came in, he felt he needed adult supervision, too. Had clinton. T the pentagon, and pin netta and he put people around him that he was comfortable with. Rump has done that sooner than obama did. I think he seems to like obrien natasha would know better a good o, he has relationship with pompeo, andes per, so for better or for worse i think hes surrounded by both that hes sees table with and eyetoeye with. Dont want to question my competitors reporting on this but there have been other reporters that the soleimani option did not just sort of come outofthebox in the middle of december and is something that talked about for several months. Pompeo and pence had bending his ear on this. You can disagree with the decision but it seems in a way there is a more functional process. Whenever you use the word to the trumpregard administration you should pause because it doesnt really apply often but it seems to be sort of a semblance of a functional process around Foreign Policy have had ay not before, when you had that kind f committee of rivals around him. Yes, but its a highly process, right . That leads in really one direction. Certain kind of process. And certainly it is a process in tune with the president s instincts and desires. Best guably its not the process because its not presenting him with as many i think did it before. Natasha, do you want to jump n on sort of a Foreign Policy decisionmaking process, obrien role versus versus esper. Its already been said that pompeo is probably the most powerful secretary of state kissinger. And the chiefofstaff all wrapped in one. Es a person the president really trusts the most. Es pesce esper is beholden to pompeo and the c. I. A. Director. Thats what were told on idea of any kind of check his worst impulses is mute at this point. A yes mankind n of through and through. Hes not challenging him in a john kelly used to, for example, so i think thats why people are kind of worried he gets reelected in 2020, really the only check going to be on the president is congress, and as really hasnt t worked out so well. He was impeached but how is that going to turn out in the senate . Acquitted ing to be rather quickly. So the amount of constraints on him at this moment i feel likeeak, and the people that are surrounding him more and more obviously are to him and are more pro trump than they ever have been. I would say that it took him a while to get to this point. You know, the flip side is, i to say s a little odd aside, t what you set there is suddenly some stability. A s not fighting with tillerson. Kelly. Ot fighting with a the revolving door of his inner slowed. Seems to have its not stopped. There is a flip side here. Remains , what worrisome. You touched, nancy, a little ago on the issues of cuba and venezuela obviously being thisimportant to people in community. Could you maybe talk a little bit about how the administration those issues and how you think hes seen here as well. You think that one reason, know, we wrote an editorial last called h the headline marco rubio [inaudible] ut i think that for all the antipathy between them during rubio paign, as long as has trumps ear on venezuela, cuba, that relationship that reluctance for rubio to actually better isten to his angels here, if he still has them, will remain. Remain. But yes, venezuela remains a here, as does cuba. The lack of tps, being offered venezuelans who are here really does stick in their crawl but i think they will also stick with trump. Based on venezuela were this backdoor diplomacy happening. It just came out in the Washington Post that Rudy Giuliani was trying to make some maduro. Deal with this is fundamentally the issue policy that foreign he has people around him that he really trusts that arent that arily in government, dont have any experience and hes going policy that he has to rely on them more than he does his advisers who have, you know, have left of them experience. Do you have insight into the becauseiuliani dynamics there were phone calls concerning ukraine between the two, it appears. Given that giuliani does number be playing on a of issues that really would be the responsibility of the secretary of state, do you have their dynamics . Yes. Pompeo used giuliani as a thorn and he views him as deal e who he just has to with, because the president views giuliani as kind of a security blanket. Blanket. They have known each other for decades. They go back, you know, a long time, to their new york days, giuliani is that his most loyal soldier. O when giuliani asks the state department to look into allegations of corruption, you now, regarding joe biden or, you know, tell the state department, look, you really look at what shes doing, pompeo looks at that and ays, okay, i guess we have to because hes the president s personal lawyer and this is someone who he trusts. Crossed the t president and doesnt really plan to. Weve touched on a player who is has a central impeachment controversy, and that is Rudy Giuliani. Impeachment e the process playing out . Could iran, even if its ontained have an impact on at least the timing of the process . Can you tease out for us how you this might unfold . Again, i have yet to meet a Single Person in this country whose mind has changed about onald trump as a result of the impeachment process. Nd thats the fundamental problem for the democrats. I think pelosi had to do what so much because she had pressure and shes got a unified picking up a lot of buyers regret on impeachment. You know, the candidates just to move on from the impeachment conversation. As a win for it them. Congress, too, i think, ust look at the trump fundraising numbers during the impeachment saga. Him, has been a winner for with his base, and hasnt really been a winner with the democratic base. Terms of the way it turns out, i mean, you know, wake me 10 months and it will be exactly the way i think it will out unless something crazy things happen and crazy things happen all the time. Pretty ar its been a dull show because its so predictable. Johnson, take us a little impeachment e issue. Looking at how its playing on the broader International Stage . You have to make a distinction in answering the question between what other impeachmentel about and how its affecting their behavior. Their could affect behavior. I think that there is such fear of and d