Hey Marco Rubio and Glenn Greenwald, This Is the Real Problem With Milley, Trump, and Nuclear Weapons by David Corn September 18, 2021 
A huge mushroom cloud rises above Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands following an atomic test blast conducted by the US military in 1946. AP Some of us have worried about Donald Trump and nuclear weapons for years—long before this week’s dustup over the revelation in a new book by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa that Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley, believing Trump had become unhinged after the January 6 riot, took secret action to limit his ability to launch a nuclear strike. I’ve written repeatedly about the frightening prospect of having an erratic, psychologically damaged person, often driven by revenge, possessing the power to destroy the world on his own say-so. In August 2017, I asked in a headline, “Can Anyone Stop Trump From Launching Nuclear Weapons?” The answer: not without a full-scale military mutiny. Milley’s move—he told senior military officials in the Pentagon war room not to accept launch orders from Trump unless he was involved—was no mutiny. It did, though, violate the rules; he is not within the chain of command when it comes to pushing the nuclear button. If Trump—or any other president—decides it’s Armageddon time, that’s it. No questions asked. Ka-boom. Big time. Human civilization could be over. This is the true outrage, not Milley’s defiance of S.O.P.
To understand all this, I turned to Joe Cirincione, a nonproliferation expert and former president of the Ploughshares Fund (and my occasional companion to Nats games). Over texts, we had a conversation in which he explained the deeper problem to me. (I’ve edited out typos caused by Siri.)
So did Milley go too far? It seems that he was just reminding people that he was part of the procedure for launching nuclear weapons. Is that right? Is that appropriate?
But he’s not part of the process. The JCS chairman is not in the chain of command for launching nuclear weapons. He would be part of a conference call if the military were calling the president to warn of an attack. But the president orders a strike by calling the Military Command Authority directly, which then conveys the order to STRATCOM. No JCS (no SECDEF either). 
So technically and legally he exceeded his authority. But what would you have him do? Stand by and watch a madman blow up the world?
The command and control system we have puts him in an impossible position: Follow the rules and see the world destroyed or break the rules and violate his oath of office. It’s the insane procedures we have that are to blame, not Milley. We have to change them.
How did he exceed his authority?
He inserted himself into the launch process. This has profound implications for civilian control [of the military and nuclear weapons].
Cirincione pointed me to a 2017 article by Daryl Kimball and Kingston Reif of the Arms Control Association, in which they contended, “Continuing to vest such destructive power in the hands of one person is undemocratic, irresponsible, unnecessary and increasingly untenable.” They called for a change in law to require “that a decision to use nuclear weapons be made by more than one person. This could include the president, vice president, secretaries of state and defense, and perhaps one or more designated members of Congress, such as the speaker of the House or Senate majority leader.”
Noting that “defenders of the status quo argue that altering the current system would deprive the president the needed flexibility to respond quickly in a crisis...and undermine the credibility of deterrence,” they maintained that “throughout the history of the nuclear age, there have been several incidents in which false signals of an attack have prompted U.S. and Russia officials to consider, in the dead of the night and under the pressure of time, launching nuclear weapons in retaliation.” In other words, so far we’ve been damn lucky. And they added, “The reality is that this ‘launch-under-attack’ policy is unnecessary because U.S. nuclear forces and command-and-control systems could withstand even a massive attack. Given the size, accuracy, and diversity of U.S. forces, the remaining nuclear force would be more than sufficient to deliver a devastating blow to any nuclear aggressor.” That is, there is no need to rush a decision to end the world as we know it.
Back to Cirincione and me:
If Milley truly believed Trump was nuts and might launch a nuclear missile, what are the official procedures to take? Are there any? Was his only choice to speak publicly and call on Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment?
The military is required to refuse an illegal order. Milley could have reminded those in the chain of command of that responsibility. But there’s no guarantee that they would have agreed that an order from Trump to, say, launch a few nukes at Iran was crazy and therefore illegal. So other than that, we’re looking at [a Milley] resignation (defeats his purpose) or 25th Amendment (likely ineffective).
Does Milley even have a role in a 25th Amendment solution?
No. It’s the Cabinet.
What would be illegal about ordering a nuclear strike?
That’s the problem. Lots of people who defend the current system rely on the military’s obligation to refuse illegal orders. (See the discussion at a 2017 congressional hearing. The only hearing we’ve had on this in decades.) But it’s not obvious that a Trump order would be insane or illegal. If he chose any of the launch options in the “football” binders, they are pre-vetted, and therefore, presumed legal. You’re asking a military officer who could be a one-star to decide on the spot whether an order was legal. The system is set up to be rapid and decisive, not for discussion and contemplation. It is an insane system that results in impossible situations like this.
An insane system involving nuclear weapons. That’s not too reassuring.
The Milley disclosure led to plenty of harrumphing about...Milley. Capitol Hill Republicans were aghast. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) compared his actions to a “military coup.” Commentator Glenn Greenwald huffed, “It's always dangerous when unelected military leaders like Milley decide they should secretly undermine and subvert the policies of the elected President.” He called this “pure Deep State abuse.”
Rubio and Greenwald are right that Milley crossed a line and engaged in a power grab. This does lead to an obvious argument: If the US military undermines civilian control regarding this matter, it could do so in many other ways. You know, the slippery slope. Yet there are no other matters quite like the decision to engage in nuclear warfare. It’s a slope all its own. A far greater threat to the nation than a military commander (in the final days of a presidency led by a deranged fellow) implementing against-the-rules safeguards to prevent nuclear war is the ongoing threat of a system in which one man, no matter his state of mind, can annihilate the planet. There is a 25th Amendment procedure to remove an unwell and potentially dangerous president, but it is a cumbersome process that probably could not be invoked quickly during a crisis. That leaves us with what we now can call Milley’s Choice. Until we address the profound underlying problem, the nation—and the entire world—will be at greater risk. 
Dumbass Comment of the Week Did Barack Obama kill rock ’n’ roll with racial politics? That’s what Jeremy Boreing, the host of the Daily Wire Backstage said this week, as his fellow panelists, including conservative hero Ben Shapiro, appeared to agree. A onetime film producer (of movies you probably have not heard of), Boreing co-founded with Shapiro the conservative Daily Wire site, which refers to Boreing as its “god-king.”
For much of this show, these right-wing pundits, smoking cigars, blasted Joe Biden for his vaccination mandate. Shapiro suggested that Biden might next force businesses to indoctrinate their employees with critical race theory. And as the group started griping that the left does a better job than the right in deploying moral arguments, conservative commentator Matt Walsh snapped, “We’ve ceded the moral argument to insane perverts.” When a panelist made a tangential reference to rock ’n’ roll, Boreing let loose:
Rock ’n’ roll is over. You’re still talking about rock ’n’ roll as if Barack Obama didn’t happen. Honestly, it’s for another day, but Barack Obama destroyed rock ’n’ roll. There was rock ’n’ roll. Then there was Barack Obama. Now there’s no rock ’n’ roll...Rock ’n’ roll was about white male angst, white male teenage angst. And then Barack Obama came along and said young white men aren’t allowed to have angst. They’re not allowed to basically express their dissatisfaction because they’re so toxic. Then, so, truly rock ’n’ roll just stopped. 
What power Obama had! He apparently could express a thought and kill an entire musical genre. One wonders why he had so much trouble passing a health care bill. Obviously, this is wrong. When did Obama prohibit angst for white teenagers? Was there an executive order I missed? (No more Nirvana for you!) This is another example of unhinged anti-anti-racism.
And, of course, there’s this historical fact: Rock ’n’ roll was largely created by Black musicians—Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Sister Rosetta Tharpe, and others—not white kids. By the way, Obama awarded presidential medals of honor to Bob Dylan and Bruce Springsteen, two distinct voices of white male angst. And he recently did a podcast with the Boss, in which the two discussed their young-male days. Turns out they each were angsty as teens.
As for rock ’n’ roll being dead, it sure isn’t the cutting-edge musical force it once was. But it still sells. Look at the top music tours before the pandemic (according to Audacy):
TOP 10 NORTH AMERICAN TOURS OF 2019
Number One was the Stones. It’s hard to celebrate KISS’s big payday because...well, you know. But Bob Seger made out quite well giving audiences that old time rock ’n’ roll. The Mailbag In the last issue of This Land, I examined whether the new FX series Impeachment: American Crime Story would prompt a reappraisal of the Clinton-Lewinsky story. And I asked if you now think differently about the Clinton scandal than you did back in the 1990s.
David Williams wrote:
The turning point for me on how I viewed Clinton's sexcapades was listening to the last episode of Season 2 of Slow Burn. The account of what purportedly happened with Juanita Broaddrick, punctuated in this episode by Lisa Myers' account of her interview with Broaddrick, made a compelling case to me for believing Juanita.
Broaddrick’s charge—that Bill Clinton raped her during his 1978 campaign for Arkansas governor—is the most serious of the allegations he has faced. Kenneth Starr’s investigation found the evidence “inconclusive.” As Broaddrick herself has acknowledged, only she and Clinton know the truth about their encounter. There are no witnesses and no physical evidence to back up her account. But in recent years, Broaddrick has picked up supporters. In 2017, Michelle Goldberg, a liberal New York Times columnist, wrote a piece headlined “I Believe Juanita.”
Judith Krieger had a different take:
One can have empathy for and support for Lewinsky as I did back then and still do, but still be horrified by the hunting of the president, as the book by Joe Conason [and Gene Lyons] called it. From the Arkansas Project forward, there was a far-right conspiracy to bring down a Democratic president. The impulse continued through the Obama presidency and now Biden. For all that Clinton’s lack of character finally provided the opportunity to end his presidency, the more salient and dangerous aspect of the scandal was not Bill Clinton’s personal flaws, (which were vivid and shared by his accusers) but the cynical and well-funded attempt to delegitimize a duly elected president of the United States. It set this country on a track that has led a major political party to see its success not in terms of making a case to the electorate for a policy agenda, but rather in destroying faith in our democratic system.
Hillary Clinton was basically correct: There was a vast right-wing conspiracy to get her and her husband. Except it wasn’t so vast. A small group of conservative activists and lawyers—including Ann Coulter—helped orchestrate a perjury trap for Bill Clinton. In a way, they framed a guilty man—and the hypocrites of the right (Newt Gingrich, Starr, and others) exploited this to try to destroy the Clinton presidency. They ultimately failed. But their plot certainly helped George W. Bush become president, a move that would lead to misguided wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that would cause the deaths of thousands of American troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan civilians.
Michael Murphy wrote in to ask an important question:
This may likely be the dumbass comment 😥. Can I post your newsletter on Facebook and Twitter? It’s such damn important information-I hate just deleting it after I read it. 💙
Thanks, Michael. Before you delete, perhaps you can forward the newsletter to all your pals and relatives and ask them to sign up. And feel free to copy and cite portions and post them on Facebook and Twitter or elsewhere. (Screenshots are a good way to do so.) But we are trying to convince readers to subscribe to This Land. So though some parts of the newsletter are free to all, it’s best not to make the whole thing easily available for non-subscribers.
Want to join in the fun? Have any thoughts, questions, or complaints to share? Send them to me at thisland@motherjones.com. MoxieCam™ Moxie has a new toy, and she really likes it. This is the only object that will cause her to brave ocean waves to retrieve. Throw a ball into the ocean where it is too deep for her to stand, and she will bark at it and watch as the ball is carried out to sea. Toss this toy into the sea, and she’ll jump in and swim like a dog rescuing a drowning human. I asked her why, and she said, “I don’t know. It just speaks to me.” 
Read Previous Issues of This Land September 14, 2021: Will the new Bill-and-Monica television series spur a reappraisal of the Clinton scandal?; a stunning new Holocaust movie you can’t see—yet; one of the best articles ever about a family and its dog; and more.
September 11, 2021: How Trump’s conspiracy theories are killing people in West Virginia and elsewhere; more 9/11 reflections; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Special Confederacy Edition); a look at HBO’s very odd White Lotus; MoxieCam™; and more.
September 8, 2021: 9/11 plus 20: a remembrance and a thank-you; the chilling climate crisis warning in HBO’s Reminiscence; and more.
September 3, 2021: Texas shows how Trumpism has become fascistic vigilantism; Dumbass Comment of the Week; Rock ’n’ Roll Flashback (how I was popped by Iggy Pop); MoxieCam™; and more.
August 31, 2021: How a 1954 analysis perfectly explains today’s Republican Party; on his new album, James McMurtry captures the spirit of Warren Zevon; and more.
August 20, 2021: Yes, there are laws Trump may have broken while trying to overturn the election; Dumbass Comment of the Week (special Afghanistan edition); the Mailbag (should we report on Trump’s inane remarks?); MoxieCam™; and more.
August 16, 2021: The Afghanistan debacle: How Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden bamboozled the American public; the “Banana King” of Wellfleet, Massachusetts; and more.
August 13, 2021: Hey lefties, stop telling me not to report on Trump’s dangerous comments; Dumbass Comment of the Week; rock ’n’ roll flashback: Sting abuse at a Police show; MoxieCam™; and more.
August 10, 2021: Look who’s organizing a pro-January 6 rally at the Capitol; an inspiring tale from the Myanmar jungle; the best album of the year so far; and more.
August 7, 2021: Are non-vaxxers and anti-maskers just too damn selfish?; Dumbass Comment of the Week; Mailbag (can you still watch your favorite old movies if they now make you cringe?); MoxieCam™; and more.
August 3, 2021: When “worse than Watergate” is really worse than Watergate; Apple TV+’s “comedy” Physical is no comedy, but it’s worth watching; This Land in Photos (West Virginia); and more.
July 31, 2021: Can you still watch your favorite movies?; Dumbass Comment of the Week; Mailbag (more on Lennon versus McCartney); MoxieCam™; and more.
July 29, 2021: Is a country music star encouraging more January 6-like violence?; a civil rights hero more people should know; and more.
July 27, 2021: Are Republicans going to sabotage police reform that doesn’t even go far enough?; how to put a senseless murder to good use; how sober is Liz Phair?; and more.
July 24, 2021: Has Paul McCartney finally won me over?; Dumbass Comment of the Week; Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.
July 22, 2021: My bizarre encounter with Rep. Jim Jordan—and why Speaker Pelosi was right to bounce him from the 1/6 committee; celebrating and grieving with musician Steve Earle; and more.
July 20, 2021: The time a Republican president did the right thing to stop an epidemic; Trump’s big narcissism fail; Nelson Algren and Norman Podhoretz; a new psychedelic Beatles-esque tune; and more.
July 17, 2021: Why the Guardian’s Trump-Russia bombshell—dud or not—doesn’t fully matter; Dumbass Comment of the Week; why Bosch works in spite of Bosch; MoxieCam™; and more.
July 15, 2021: Does President Joe Biden really stand with the Cuban people?; the time I really pissed off the Cuban regime; J. Edgar Hoover vs. MLK; one of the best movie reviews of all time; and more.
July 13, 2021: A coming referendum on Donald Trump; a suggestion for Hunter Biden; a new book on how the super-rich screw us all; and more.
July 10, 2021: Why the Republicans are right to be terrified of the new House committee investigating the 1/6 attack; Dumbass Comment of the Week; Joni Mitchell’s Blue 50; and more.
July 7, 2021: How The Summer of Soul counters the GOP’s season of hate; a debate on the recent UFO report; Garry Trudeau, American Dostoyevsky; MoxieCam™; and more.
July 3, 2021: Donald Rumsfeld, Christopher Hitchens, the Iraq War, and me; the perils of taking a home DNA test; Dumbass Comment of the Week; a Springsteen story; and more.
July 1, 2021: Ivanka Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and perjury; Adam Serwer’s new book; Cézanne’s crime scene; and more.
June 29, 2021: How the new UFO report is bad news for UFO believers; my own UFO tale; HBO Max’s Hacks; an anti-racist anthem; and more.
June 26, 2021: Is Josh Hawley dumb or evil? (The answer is not both); Dumbassery that encourages mass “executions” in the United States; renowned guitarist and songwriter Richard Thompson’s new tour and new book (and his claim regarding the best strings arrangement ever on a popular song); MoxieCam™ (before and after photos!); and more.
June 24, 2021: How an alleged 1/6 conspirator who called for executing Trump’s foes hooked up with a prominent Republican Party official; new Los Lobos; and more.
June 22, 2021: Why the GOP is pushing “political apartheid”; Ted Cruz wins Dumbass Comment of the Week; recommendations for an Apple TV+ series and a book on the curious origins of the universe; the first Clash tour of the United States (and being trapped in a van driven by a punk on acid); MoxieCam™; and more.
Got suggestions, comments, complaints, tips related to any of the above, or anything else? Email me at thisland@motherjones.com.
|
