Caught Like A Fat Little Orange Rat, Trump Throws Extremist Advisor Peter Navarro Under The Bus

Lambchop by Nancy Ohanian

Yesterday, the Washington Post published, without comment, that "the White House moved to distance itself from an extraordinary op-ed in USA Today in which Peter Navarro, President Trump’s trade adviser, heavily criticized Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s top infectious-disease expert, for his handling of the pandemic." Even a toady like Moscow Mitch decided to signal Senate Republicans that it would be safe for them to break with the Trumpist Regime on this. When asked by a reporter, he said that his level faith in Dr. Fauci is "total."

Does anyone imagine that Navarro would have attacked Fauci-- and so viciously-- without an OK from Trump? In fact, L.A. Times reporters Eli Stokols and Noah Bierman wrote yesterday that the regime was forced to spend time and energy dealing with the fallout from Navarro's smear tactic and the Regime campaign against Fauci. "White House officials," they reported, "tried to distance the president from the column. Deputy press secretary Alyssa Farah tweeted that it 'didn’t go through normal White House clearance processes and is the opinion of Peter alone.' Trump, she continued, 'values the expertise of the medical professionals advising his Administration.' But there’s little doubt that Navarro’s broadside reflected-- and appealed to-- the president’s own frustration with Fauci, who has not been invited to the Oval Office to brief Trump since early June and whose proposed television appearances often have been blocked by the White House. According to one administration official, who was not authorized to speak on the record, Navarro had the president’s permission to write the column. 'Not only was he authorized by Trump, he was encouraged,' the official said."




During an interview with The Atlantic Fauci called the attack, part of a campaign by Trump's inner circle, "bizarre." ABCNews.com reported that the White House knows they're in a bad position here and are trying to distance Trump from the mess.

The latest extraordinary escalation in the attacks on Fauci began in earnest, when, in a remarkable broadside against Fauci, who polls show the American public broadly trusts for information on the novel coronavirus, Navarro wrote in the op-ed for USA Today Tuesday that "Fauci has a good bedside manner with the public, but he has been wrong about everything I have interacted with him on."

Navarro, who has no known medical expertise, went on to contrast his own response to the coronavirus pandemic with misleading characterizations of Fauci's own comments on the virus. A portion of what he wrote was also included as a statement from him in a Washington Post article published Saturday.

"So when you ask me whether I listen to Dr. Fauci’s advice, my answer is: only with skepticism and caution," Navarro wrote.

Asked on Wednesday if he was OK with Navarro's op-ed, Trump did not take issue with its content.

"Well, that's Peter Navarro, but I have a very good relationship with Dr. Fauci," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.

Later, as he departed the White House en route to Atlanta, Trump said Navarro should not have written an opinion piece "representing himself."

"Well, he made a statement representing himself," Trump said. "He shouldn't be doing that."

Asked about Navarro's attack and the White House campaign to discredit him during a streaming question-and-answer session with The Atlantic, Fauci responded, "It is a bit bizarre. I don't really fully understand it. You know, I think that would happen with that list that came out I think if you sit down and talk to the people who are involved in that. They are really, I think taken aback by what a big mistake that was, and I think if you talk to reasonable people in the White House they realize that was a major mistake on their part because it doesn't do anything but reflect poorly on them.

"And I don't think that that was their intention. I don't know-- I cannot figure out in my wildest dreams why they would want to do that, but, I mean, I think they realize now that that was not a prudent thing to do because it's only reflecting negatively on them. I can't explain Peter Navarro-- he's in a world by himself. So, I don't even want to go there,” Fauci said.

Among Navarro's qualms with Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is over the efficacy of the antimalarial medication hydroxychloroquine. Long touted by President Donald Trump and Navarro as a promising treatment for COVID-19, Fauci for months disagreed, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration determined it was "unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19."

The latest criticism fit a pattern of the Trump administration minimizing public health experts and prioritizing an economic recovery, which the president sees as key to his reelection chances.

Earlier Wednesday, a senior White House official, director of strategic communications Alyssa Farah, tweeted that Navarro's op-ed "didn’t go through normal White House clearance processes and is the opinion of Peter alone."

While she added that the president "values the expertise of the medical professionals advising his Administration," she did not disavow anything Navarro wrote.

Separately, a senior White House official said Navarro "went rogue, and put out his personal opinion without any approvals." The official, who would speak only on the condition of anonymity, said "the White House does not stand by these unauthorized opinions and Mr. Navarro owes Dr. Fauci an apology.”

Navarro did not respond to a request for comment on whether he got approval from the president or any other White House official before publishing the op-ed; the White House also did not respond when asked if he got permission from any official outside the communications office.

Asked if Navarro would be punished for writing the op-ed, a White House official said, “We do not comment on internal personnel matters, but [White House] Chief of Staff Mark Meadows is fully engaged.”

A second, senior White House official confirmed Meadows’ involvement but would not elaborate.

Navarro's attack came as the White House sought to discredit Fauci, who has provided a more blunt and sobering assessment of the state of the epidemic than the president and his top aides have sought to project-- one they see as politically inconvenient as Trump campaigns for re-election.

Over the weekend, the White House provided several media outlets with a misleading list of comments made by Fauci, in an effort to undercut him.

Over a week ago, I had noted that Trump was beginning the inevitable attack against Fauci, something Trump was already doing himself by July 9. On Monday the White House was pretending Trump had nothing to do with it while denying to the very people who they were leaking oppo-research on Fauci to that any oppo-research was being leaked.

It must drive Trump bonkers that every poll that has asked people who they trust more, Trump or Fauci comes up with the same answer: Fauci. ABC News continued that "despite the denial of a privately waged smear campaign, one of the president’s top aides made no effort to hide his disdain, airing criticism of Fauci in plain view on social media. The White House's deputy chief of staff for communications, Dan Scavino, who has been by the president’s side since the 2016 campaign, on Sunday posted a cartoon on Facebook depicting Fauci as a running faucet washing the U.S. economy down the drain. 'Sorry, Dr. Faucet! At least you know if I’m going to disagree with a colleague, such as yourself, it’s done publicly-- and not cowardly, behind journalists with leaks. See you tomorrow!' Scavino wrote in a caption accompanying the cartoon.

On Monday, Trump himself shared a tweet disparaging Fauci-- misconstruing a months-old comment Fauci had made-- before telling reporters later in the day that he liked Fauci "personally," had "a very good relationship" with him, and considered him "a very nice person."

But, he added, "I don't always agree with him."

While the president and White House have sought to downplay the appearance of conflict that they have directly stoked, Fauci has been increasingly sidelined within the White House's coronavirus task force.

He is no longer a regular presence at task force briefings with the media led by the vice president, he was not a participant on the vice president’s weekly call with governors on Monday, and it’s been two months since Fauci says he has personally briefed the president.

That's right... Pence prefers to consult Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma instead. Peter Nicholas noted atThe Atlantic "Targeting Fauci seems like a tragic misuse of White House time and energy if officials’ aim is to defeat the coronavirus. But Trump appears more concerned with discrediting Fauci... The attempt to discredit Fauci’s public-health expertise is a political move, and one with disastrous implications. As much as Trump wants and needs Americans to see the virus as a nuisance that’s soon to be overcome, Fauci is a recurring reminder that the crisis remains a grave and enduring threat, and that Trump has mishandled the pandemic. The Americans who believe the White House’s anti-science campaign risk cutting themselves off from potentially life-saving information."

Peter Navarro-- LOL

One step ahead of the police, I left New York for Europe at the end of my senior year at college in 1969 and 2 years later I was living, placidly, in Afghanistan. Yesterday, another alum from Stony Brook University, Mitchel Cohen, noted that one of our fellow students, Larry Remer-- today a political operative in San Diego usually referred to as "take-no-prisoners" or "scorched-earth" campaign consultant-- is in the news. Cohen noted that the last time he had seen Remer, "he was in one of the Red Balloon affinity groups driving Mike Zweig's van in 1971 back from the protests on MayDay in D.C. We were rear-ended in Wilmington Delaware by a Hertz Truck filled with Stony Brookers and driven by Fred Friedman (who claimed the brakes failed). I was flown to the hospital by police helicopter." He isn't sure if he and Remer ever saw each other after that.

Remer, who is usually associated with conservative Democrats-- like now-Congressman Juan Vargas and now Trump crackpot trade advisor Peter Navarro. (Navarro, a former Republican turned Democrat and environmentalist was a fringe economist who ran for office, unsuccessfully, 5 times in San Diego-- for mayor, city council, board of supervisors and Congress. Remer ran two of Navarro’s campaigns, and now describes him as "the biggest asshole I’ve ever known." Go Stony Brook!

Always superficial and generally unreliable Politico reporter Carla Marinucci, wrote that "Today, Remer says he’s not surprised that Navarro has wedged his way into Trump’s inner circle ­ or that he has stubbornly defended his credentials (a Ph.D in economics) on the issue of prescribing hydroxychloroquine, even though it’s put him in conflict with Fauci, the government’s leading infectious disease expert and the longtime director of the National Institute Of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. 'He totally had a sense of his own righteousness ...and it may have been ultimately his undoing, because he was so totally arrogant about it,' Remer said. 'I can totally see him taking on Fauci....it fits, because he really believes that he alone knows the truth.'"

Former California Republican Party chair Ron Nehring, who also served as San Diego County GOP chair, tweeted about Navarro Monday, saying he would rely on Fauci’s comments on medical expertise over Navarro's every time. He later deleted his Twitter comments.

“We all know Peter Navarro in San Diego,” Nehring said in the deleted tweet. “He ran for office four times as a Democrat, each time moving around the county. He was defeated every time.”

San Diego Republicans say Navarro’s unfailing belief in his own intellect ­ coupled with his repeated efforts to win elected office ­ were at times the source of astonishment.

“He was a hothead who wasn’t quite sure when to bend, and when to back off...He was a guy who kept running against Republicans...with all the typical rhetoric you would expect from a Democrat,’’ said one GOP insider, who declined to be named for publication.

Navarro made so many bids for public office that it became an inside joke to some party regulars. "You know that game, ‘Where in the world is Carmen San Diego?’," the insider said, recalling that one GOP operative “had a map on his office wall that was called, “Where in San Diego is Peter Navarro?” which featured “all the places he moved to, in order to keep running for office.”

More than one of those campaigns were dogged by headlines related to Navarro’s past troubles.

In his 1992 campaign for San Diego mayor, Navarro paid $4,000 in fines and court costs for violating city and state election laws in connection with loans received from his mother. The San Diego Union Tribune reported that then-Deputy City Attorney Richard Ostrow, who headed the city’s DA’s public integrity division, said the fines were leveraged because of “a pattern of disdain for the reporting laws that we’ve seen in the past from Peter Navarro.”

The Union Tribune also reported that, in a separate action, the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission also fined Navarro for improperly reporting loans.

Navarro also “defaulted on a federally funded student loan” as a student at Tufts University, and was sued in 1979 in Boston Municipal Court by university trustees for his failure to replay the $1,652.83 loan, the paper said.

Navarro’s temperament and penchant for over-the-top political comments were his undoing in the often-fractious campaigns, says Remer.

At one point in his mayoral campaign, Navarro accused Republican Susan Golding of having a male prostitute on her campaign finance committee, a remark for which he later apologized. Golding had accused Navarro of accepting campaign funds from pornographers; Navarro said he was not aware the funds had come from owners of local adult book stores, the Union Tribune reported.

Golding won that race and became mayor of San Diego. Last night, Navarro-- crazy as ever-- was a pointlessly obnoxious guest on 60 Minutes where he issued a bravado-laden challenge: "I challenge you: Show me the 60 Minutes episode a year ago, two years ago, or during the Obama administration, during the Bush administration, that said, 'Hey, global pandemic's coming, you gotta do X, Y, and Z, and by the way, we would shut down the entire global economy to fight it.' Show me that episode, then you’ll have some credence in terms of attacking the Trump administration for not being prepared." Well... it looks like they do have some credence in terms of attacking the Trumpist regime for not being prepared-- and for making all the wrong decisions since then.