At least Trump is honest about his political assassinations
By: Rachel Marsden
US President Donald Trump has said he had wanted to assassinate Syria’s Bashar al-Assad after all, contradicting his own earlier claims. It wouldn’t be Washington’s first political killing – what’s unusual is to boast about them.
Trump admitted to his plans for an Assad assassination on Fox News this week, 
saying that he had been held back by then Defense Secretary James Mattis. “I 
would have rather taken him out. I had him all set,” Trump said of Assad. 
“Mattis didn't want to do it.” 
And when Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, Jared Kushner, was asked whether 
assassinations were a “legitimate tool of foreign policy”, Kushner replied, 
“Different terminology could be used to describe, you know, different methods 
that you're going to take to try to retaliate to somebody for an action that 
they've taken.”
Whether it’s called murder, extrajudicial killing, or assassination, it’s all 
the same thing – and it’s technically illegal. 
But illegality doesn’t mean that it’s not actually done – it just means that, 
unlike Trump and Kushner, you don’t wax lyrical about it on TV. In the rare 
instances where assassination banter emerges, it tends to be mitigated by lofty 
values like justice or freedom. Former President George W. Bush at least had 
some panache in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks on U.S. soil 
when claiming that he wanted to bring al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden to justice 
by citing “an old poster out west…that said: Wanted, dead or alive.” 
But even so, bin Laden had no official status. He was a jihadist mercenary. At 
no time did Bush actually muse aloud about assassinating foreign officials, 
unlike the Trump White House.
Trump has broken with the traditional US government approach to political 
assassinations by ordering them, then either bragging about it or shrugging it 
off. Earlier this year, he ordered the extra-judicial murder of Iranian General 
Qasem Soleimani, inside a third country (Iraq), describing the onetime U.S. 
partner in rooting out al-Qaeda and one of the most effective anti-ISIS fighters 
as a “terrorist” himself. And when Saudi officials at the highest level 
assassinated and dismembered Washington Post columnist, Jamal Khashoggi, inside 
the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Trump refused to jeopardize U.S. weapons sales 
to the Saudis by condemning it – acting as though political assassinations are 
just the cost of doing business.
But let’s not be naive, either. As Jared Kushner said this week, “We live in a 
very dangerous world ... And [Trump] knows that it’s a full-contact sport. This 
is not touch football.” Fair enough. But then why not just own it? Just admit, 
“Yeah, we murder people with whom we politically disagree, or who get in the way 
of our agenda.” Why peddle virtue to the American people when reality is much 
darker?
The US government has sold its citizens a fairy tale. Many believe that killing 
people for political reasons is exclusively the realm of authoritarian, despotic 
countries that don’t uphold America’s noble values. If they believe that America 
would never, ever commit such unspeakable acts in their name, it’s only because 
U.S. officials typically do their best to cover their tracks, both in intent and 
execution.
Undemocratic actions like political assassinations and coups are normally 
relegated to shadowy black ops perpetrated by proxies with at least some degree 
of plausible deniability from the US government. The various attempts by 
US-backed mercenaries to assassinate former Cuban leader Fidel Castro comes to 
mind. And so far this year, Venezuela has publicly announced the roll-up of at 
least two botched coup attempts targeting President Nicolas Maduro. In one such 
case, ex-Green Beret Jordan Goudreau, posted a video identifying himself as an 
organizer. Goudreau had also been spotted in Trump rally footage, acting in what 
appears to be a security capacity. Trump’s longtime personal bodyguard, Keith 
Schiller, who also served as director of Oval Office operations, admitted to 
meeting with Goudreau but denied any involvement in the attempted coup.
And that’s typically how it’s done. On the down low. No one in an official 
government role wants to be tied to the perpetrators. No one wants to have to 
explain where the US-backed faction of Venezuelan opposition members, fronted by 
Juan Guaido, could possibly have found the $212.9 million cited in their 
contract with the mercenaries to pay them if it wasn’t from an interested 
nation-state. It’s meant to be murky and difficult to tie directly to any of the 
many neoconservative establishment fixtures who have long wanted to get control 
of Venezuela and its natural resources.
The Trump administration has continued America’s longstanding tradition of 
quietly outsourcing murder and mayhem to proxies – a habit that Joe Biden has 
made no successful effort to curtail in his nearly 50 years in the Senate. But 
Trump also represents the first time that an American president has bragged 
about it. Regardless of who wins in November, the only change will be the face 
of US foreign policy. The only real choice is between Trump’s scowl or Biden’s 
smile.
COPYRIGHT 2020 RACHEL MARSDEN