The Dictatorship
Trump diplomacy 2.0: A billionaire developer and a monarchy scramble longtime U.S. alliances
Nearly a year into his second term, President Donald Trump has effectively sidelined scores of diplomats and experts at the State Department and National Security Council and supplanted them with Steve Witkoff, a billionaire real estate developer who uses a private jet for diplomatic travelhas negotiated on a yacht and often works closely with the royal family of Qatar, a Persian Gulf nation smaller than Connecticut.
That reality has sent longtime U.S. allies scrambling to adjust to a new Trump 2.0 American diplomacy — a dramatic shift that extends far beyond upending the traditional alliances with Western European nations that guided the U.S. since World War II. Diplomats from around the world say it’s forcing an overhaul of their own diplomacy and foreign policies to accommodate an American president who appears to prefer working with monarchs and autocrats over leaders of democracies.
Trump administration officials say the narrow, streamlined approach is intentional, generating faster results with fewer people. Longtime diplomats say it’s a path fraught with risks — one that generates celebrated announcements but may inhibit longer-lasting outcomes.
“Compressed negotiations and centralized decisionmaking tend to sideline the broader coalition work required for a durable peace,” said David Cattler, a former senior NATO and Pentagon official. “When negotiations move faster than allied political alignment, particularly in Europe, the result is often a fragile agreement that struggles to hold over time.”
Trump administration officials dismissed the criticism and questioned the effectiveness of traditional approaches.
“It’s ironic that foreign diplomats complain more about President Trump’s efforts to end wars than Joe Biden’s inability to prevent them,” State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott said in a statement. “Wars broke out under the so-called ‘experts,’ and wars are ending now under President Trump.”
An emirate as a U.S. conduit
The Trump administration’s relationship with Qatar — a nation roughly the size of Connecticut by landmass, with an annual GDP similar to Kansas’s — perhaps best exemplifies the new American diplomatic order. The emirate has proudly taken a leading role in U.S. negotiations with Russia and Ukraine and the drafting of peace agreements between Israel and Hamas, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, and Azerbaijan and Armenia, according to a Middle Eastern diplomat who spoke with MS NOW on the condition of anonymity to more freely provide insight into the growing depths of the White House’s reliance on Qatar.
“Qatar has proven to be the closest strategic ally to the U.S,” the diplomat said.
Qatari officials have essentially turned into Witkoff’s negotiating proxy. They helped prepare an initial 28-point framework proposal with the U.S. to end Russia’s war in Ukraine in early December. That’s a draft critics derided as a Russian “wish list” for requiring Ukraine, for example, to cede land not yet taken by Russian forces.
It’s a diplomatic role once helmed by State Department officials through carefully orchestrated interactions, but now reflects the president’s desire to rely on Middle East monarchies as more flexible, faster conduits.
“We can do stuff you guys cannot,” said the aforementioned Middle East diplomat. “We can speak to people who are designated as terrorists, but you can’t. We can allocate budget and resources for negotiation.”
“We can do stuff you guys cannot,” said the Middle East diplomat. “We can speak to people who are designated as terrorists, but you can’t.”
“You can’t, cause you have to seek budgetary approval and seek congressional approval,” the diplomat added.
Democratic members of Congress have criticized the approach as overly secretive and argue that the public deserves a clear sense of the Trump administration’s activities overseas. They have questioned business deals that the Trump and Witkoff families have struck with Qatarthe United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia while conducting diplomacy with them.
This fall, Qatari officials coordinated with the intelligence chiefs of both Egypt and Turkey to push forward direct talks with Hamas. They continue to do so. Over the summer, the Qataris hosted Witkoff on a yacht in the Riviera to engage with individuals party to the Israel-Hamas talks — an atypical venue for high-stakes talks but one which, the diplomat contended, “led to a historic deal that had never been done before.”
U.S. allies in the Middle East say the developments show the failure of traditional diplomatic approaches in recent years.
“President Trump’s methods have had concrete achievements,” a foreign official in the region told MS NOW. “Europe may not have the same risk tolerance or willingness to break the mold that U.S. allies in the Middle East have.”
The Trump administration brushed off concerns about Doha’s outsized influence on U.S. foreign policy, calling the Qataris “a great partner.”
“It’s a good thing that people who are responsible for sustained peace in the Middle East are engaging with critical partners in the region, and that’s how it should be done,” a White House official said.
Frustration over Ukraine
Multiple senior officials in Europe said in recent interviews in London and Brussels that peace talks for Ukraine have been complicated by the small size and top-down nature of Trump’s diplomatic team, which they said sidelines traditional U.S. government experts in diplomacy and national security.
European officials expressed bafflement at Witkoff’s continued prominent role in the Ukraine talks, citing his failure to sometimes bring his own translator to meetings or take detailed notes, and his lack of diplomatic experience. They expressed confidence in Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, and in Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
One European diplomat said officials on the continent are especially alarmed by Trump administration officials at times openly embracing Russia’s view of the war in Ukraine.
“You are in a situation where you are sitting with high American officials, and the speaking points you get are from Russia,” said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity with MS NOW in order to convey their frustrations candidly.
European diplomats said they believe only two members of Trump’s inner circle — Witkoff and Kushner — can accurately convey Trump’s thinking and, most importantly to them, potentially influence it.
A White House official praised that approach. “This is not a top-down foreign policy apparatus,” the official told MS NOW. “It’s a feature, not a bug, that all foreign policy actions come from the President of the United States, who was elected, among other reasons, on the basis of his America First foreign policy agenda.”
Trump is “leaning on people who understand his thinking, who share his untraditional background, and the results at this point have been successful,” the official added.
A White House official said that after each meeting, Witkoff “briefs necessary national security officials” as well as the president, receives briefings from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence prior to diplomatic trips, and brings note-takers and translators into almost every meeting.
Rubio and Vice President JD Vance also provided feedback to Witkoff on the revised 20-point Ukraine peace plan prior to sharing it with Trump, the official said.
During a press conference on Friday, Rubio pushed back on the idea that Trump’s reliance on special envoys has sidelined State Department officials and diminished his own power as America’s top diplomat. He praised Witkoff, whom he described as “a phenomenal person, very smart, very talented.”
“Steve doesn’t do anything independently; he relies on the interagency” process, Rubio said, adding Witkoff is staffed by State employees “especially as we get to the technical parts of these agreements.”
“The synergy there is very tight across the board,” he said.
Talks with Iran
Trump’s reliance on Witkoff carries risks, critics say. A Persian Gulf diplomat not from Iran accused Witkoff of presenting a “bogus misrepresentation of himself as a ‘man of peace’” in negotiations last summer before Israel and the U.S. carried out airstrikes on Iran.
“Mr. Witkoff conducted himself in a manner not befitting the office he represented,” said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
A second person who has knowledge of the talks and is not from Iran said Iranian officials now believe they were misled by the U.S. Iranians say the talks with Witkoff were a ruse designed to keep Iran from expecting and preparing for the strikes.
“It’s seen by the Iranians as an insult,” said the person with direct knowledge of the talks.
Iranian officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The White House defended Witkoff and denied the allegations.
“The special envoy is a good-faith actor in everything he does,” a White House official told MS NOW, adding Witkoff was actively working towards a deal and was “transparent with everyone.”
Witkoff’s continued role
The Middle Eastern diplomat who spoke with MS NOW predicted Trump and Witkoff will continue to rely heavily on America’s partners in the Middle East, saying Witkoff “respects us” and “trusts us.”
“We have proven we can deliver stuff to him,” the diplomat said.
The diplomat acknowledged Witkoff’s lack of traditional foreign policy experience, but said his close relationship with Trump gave him something invaluable: power.
“He doesn’t have the experience in diplomacy. He has zero. But he’s an excellent negotiator,” said the Middle Eastern diplomat. “Witkoff is powerful, and he can achieve these agreements.”

David Rohde
David Rohde is the senior national security reporter for MS NOW. Previously he was the senior executive editor for national security and law for NBC News.
Vaughn Hillyard is a senior White House reporter for MS NOW.
Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C.
Ian Sherwood is the director of international newsgathering for MS NOW, a former executive editor for NBC News and a former deputy Washington bureau chief for the BBC.
The Dictatorship
Trump threatens to fire Powell if the Fed Chair remains with central bank after his term ends
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors made an unannounced visit this week to a construction site at Federal Reserve headquarters that is the focus of an investigation into a $2.5 billion renovation projectaccording to two people familiar with the visit.
Two prosecutors and an investigator from U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office were turned away on Tuesday by a building contractor and referred to Fed attorneys, one of the people said. The two people familiar with the visit spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to publicly discuss an ongoing investigation.
The visit underscores that the Trump administration is not backing down from its investigation of the Fed and its chair, Jerome Powell, even though the probe has delayed the confirmation of a new chair nominated by President Donald Trump. The investigation is focused on cost overruns and brief testimony about the project last summer by Powell. Trump confirmed in an interview that aired Wednesday on Fox Business that he wants to continue the probe.
Last month, during a closed-door hearing before a federal judge, a top deputy from Pirro’s office conceded that they hadn’t found any evidence of a crime in their investigation of the headquarters project.
Robert Hur, an attorney for the Federal Reserve board of governors, sent an email to Pirro’s prosecutors about their visit and their request for a “tour” to “check on progress” at the construction site. Hur’s email, which The Associated Press has viewed, noted that U.S. District Judge James Boasberg concluded that their interest in the Federal Reserve’s renovation project was “pretextual.”
AP AUDIO: Prosecutors sought access to Federal Reserve building as Trump threatens to fire Powell
AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports on more drama surrounding a federal probe of a massive construction project at the Federal Reserve’s headquarters.
“Should you wish to challenge that finding, the courts provide an avenue for you; it is not appropriate for you to try to circumvent it,” Hur wrote.
Republican Tillis is key vote
Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who is a key member of the Senate Banking Committee, has vowed to vote against Kevin WarshTrump’s nominee to replace Powell as Fed chair, until the investigation is dropped. With the committee closely divided on partisan lines, Tillis’ opposition is enough to block Warsh from receiving the committee’s approval.
Tillis on Wednesday criticized the investigation as “bogus, ill-timed, ill-informed” and repeated that seven Republican members of the banking panel have said they do not believe Powell committed a crime when he testified last June.
Tillis also said there aren’t enough votes on the committee or in the broader Senate to do an end-run around the committee and get Warsh confirmed some other way.
“There really is no path,” he told reporters, adding that Pirro and her aides were “asleep at the switch” because the investigation has essentially delayed Powell’s departure from the Fed, despite Trump’s obsessive criticism of the Fed chair. Powell has now said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved.
Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.
Tillis suggested Pirro blindsided the White House with her investigation. “They should have consulted with the White House, because I’m sure if they would have, (the White House) would have said, ‘no, we can wait,’” until Powell steps down.
But Kevin Hassett, the Trump administration’s top economist, said Wednesday that the Justice Department got involved because “the president wanted to investigate the cost overrun,” Axios reported.
The Banking panel said Tuesday that it will hold a hearing on Warsh’s nomination April 21. Powell’s term as Fed chair ends May 15, but Powell said last month he would remain as chair until a replacement is named.
Powell is serving a separate term as a member of the Fed’s governing board that lasts until January 2028. Chairs typically leave the board when their terms as chair end, but they can remain on the board if they choose. Powell has said he won’t leave until the investigation is resolved. If he remains it would deny Trump the opportunity to appoint someone else to the seven-member board.
Late Tuesday Tillis posted a link on social media to The Wall Street Journal’s article on the visit below an image of the Three Stooges and wrote, “The U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C. at the crime scene.”
Investigation centers on building renovations
The investigation centers on an appearance by Powell before the Banking Committee last June, when he was asked about cost overruns on the renovations. The most recent estimates from the Fed suggest the current estimated cost of $2.5 billion is about $600 million higher than a 2022 estimate of $1.9 billion.
“It is probably corrupt, but what it really is, is incompetent,” Trump said. “Don’t you think we have to find out what happened there?”
The president’s support for the investigation threatens a timeframe set out by Sen. Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican who chairs the Banking Committee. Scott said Tuesday on Fox Business that he believed the investigation would be “wrapped up in the next few weeks,” allowing Warsh to be confirmed soon after.
Threat to fire Powell
News of the unannounced visit by prosecutors comes as Trump has again threatened to fire Powell, if the Federal Reserve Chair decides to stay on the central bank’s governing board after his term as chair expires next month.
“Well then I’ll have to fire him, OK?” Trump said.
Trump has for months wanted to remove Powell, saying he has been too slow in orchestrating interest rate cuts that would give the U.S. economy a quick boost. Powell has said the investigation is a pretext to undermine the Fed’s independence to set rates.
Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, said Trump can only fire Powell “for cause,” meaning some kind of misconduct, “so that’s a pretty tall order.”
Supreme Court weighing another Trump removal
Trump’s threat to fire Powell comes as the Supreme Court is weighing the president’s effort to remove another central bank governor, Lisa Cook. Lower courts have so far allowed Cook to remain in her job while her legal challenge to the firing continues. The Supreme Court also seemed likely to keep her on the Fed when the court heard arguments in January. A decision could come any time.
The issue in Cook’s case is whether allegations of mortgage fraud, which she has denied, is a sufficient reason to fire her or a mere pretext masking Trump’s desire to exert more control over U.S. interest rate policy.
The Supreme Court has allowed the firings of the heads of other governmental agencies at the president’s discretion, with no claim that they did anything wrong, while also signaling that it is approaching the independence of the nation’s central bank more cautiouslycalling the Fed “a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity.”
___
AP Writers Seung Min Kim, Mark Sherman, Paul Wiseman, Alanna Durkin Richer, and video journalist Nathan Ellgren contributed to this report.
The Dictatorship
The Latest: US blockade of Iranian ports ‘fully implemented’ as Trump says war is near end
SnoCountry Mountain Reports
Sports Betting Line
Pacific Northwest Sportswatch Daily Listings
Gulf States Sportswatch Daily Listings
The Dictatorship
It’s Tulsi Gabbard’s turn to target Trump’s enemies
President Donald Trump was impeached in December 2019, charged by the House of Representatives with abusing his office to gain leverage over Joe Biden in the upcoming presidential election. This week, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard rebooted that scandal with the release of a handful of newly declassified documents that question the beginning of the impeachment investigation — in hopes of discrediting everything that followed.
MS NOW confirmed Wednesday that Gabbard’s office has sent criminal referrals to the Justice Department for the whistleblower whose concern over a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy launched the impeachment inquiry and the former inspector general who fielded their complaint. The referrals were first reported by Fox News.
Gabbard’s new disclosures mirror a well-worn playbook used by Trump’s loyalists to investigate his investigators. But in every instance, including this latest endeavor, the evidence gathered of wrongdoing on Trump’s part has far outweighed proof of misconduct from his investigators.
In every instance, the evidence gathered of wrongdoing on Trump’s part has far outweighed proof of misconduct from his investigators.
In Gabbard’s telling, as she posted on Xthe process was an inherently corrupt conspiracy where “deep state actors within the Intelligence Community concocted a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people.” Michael Atkinson, former inspector general for the Intelligence Community, is painted in a press release accompanying the new materials as a rogue actor who spun a secondhand tale into an attempted coup.
Newly-declassified records expose how deep state actors within the Intelligence Community concocted a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people and impeach duly-elected President @realDonaldTrump in 2019.
Today, we reveal the truth 👇… pic.twitter.com/oLXW5nqi2n
— DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) April 13, 2026
The materials posted Monday do provide an interesting window into the chain of events eventually leading to Trump’s first impeachment. Among them are official records from the preliminary 14-day investigation Atkinson undertook to determine that the whistleblower’s initial complaint was of “urgent concern” and needed to be reported to Congress. Also included are transcripts from Atkinson’s two closed-door interviews with the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, one before the White House released the transcript of the Zelenskyy call and one after the impeachment inquiry was underway.
But despite Gabbard’s breathless claims of a “coordinated effort … to manufacture a conspiracy,” nothing among the materials contradicts anything uncovered later. If anything, the initial interviews with the whistleblower, conducted in late August 2019, line up neatly with the fuller story that would be revealed over the coming weeks in the press and during the House’s impeachment inquiry. Both the whistleblower and a corroborating witness were extremely forthcoming about exactly what they did and did not know about the call, and why they were deeply concerned by Trump’s repeating conspiracy theories and pressing Zelenskyy to resume an investigation into Biden.

Gabbard’s cries of “politicization” from Atkinson are likewise overblown. Her claim is based on a section in the IG’s interview process where subjects were asked if they have anything in their background that might reveal any biases that could be used against them. The responses given suggest a certain hesitation to speak out for fear their words would be spun into right-wing attacks but was overridden by the necessity to speak out. Atkinson transparently mentioned in a letter to then-acting DNI Joseph Maguire that there was an “indicia of an arguable political bias” from the complainant, but that it didn’t alter his determination that their information was credible.
Maguire initially prevented Atkinson from providing the complaint to Congress, claiming that the Justice Department ruled it was outside of the IG’s remit. Atkinson disagreed and told lawmakers an “urgent concern” existed, as he believed the law required him, but did not provide the whistleblower’s complaint. Instead, it was only after media reports of the investigation and the White House’s subsequent release of the so-called perfect call with Zelenskyy that Atkinson was able to speak to Congress about the complaint directly.
All of this, in Gabbard’s telling, amounted to a “weaponization” of the process.
Several things stand out at this point. First is how ill-equipped Gabbard is to be leading America’s intelligence community. Her emphasis on how the first people to come forward about Trump’s scheme didn’t have firsthand knowledge of the call would be laughable if it weren’t so inept. It is literally the job of the intelligence community to consume partial information as it is received and work that raw data into a complete analysis. What Gabbard is essentially saying is that someone who only saw a single piece of the puzzle, at first, cannot be trusted to put together a picture in their head once more pieces have come together.
It is literally the job of the intelligence community to consume partial information as it is received and work that raw data into a complete analysis.
Second is how blatantly she has copied the failed formula of the GOP’s efforts to discredit the Russia investigation during Trump’s first term. For years now, through numerous investigations from the House and an independent counsel alike, Republicans have tried to claim wrongdoing from the FBI and other supposed “deep state” figures when first investigating hints of Russian interference in the 2016 election. But John Durham’s four-year-long probe came up empty, and despite Trump’s demands for revenge, there have been no criminal charges filed against anyone involved in the case.
Finally, it’s worth remembering Gabbard’s position when she was serving as a U.S. representative from Hawaii during Trump’s first impeachment. By the time the House voted on the articles of impeachment, she was already running a longshot bid for president. Accordingly, she was attempting to position herself as not beholden to the left wing, but still a viable candidate to be the Democratic nominee.
Gabbard was the only Democrat in the House to vote “present” on the articles. But she made clear in a statement afterward that she believed “President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing.” Her vote, or nonvote rather, was cast because, in her view, “removal of a sitting President must not be the culmination of a partisan process, fueled by tribal animosities that have so gravely divided our country.” The centrism by way of cowardice branding that brought her to prominence has fully given way — she now simply yields to the rightward pressures she finds herself under as part of Trump’s cabinet.
In his first interview with the House Permanent Select Committee on IntelligenceAtkinson described himself as a first responder, one who may not have had the full picture, but who had heard a fire alarm ringing and chose to act. “I don’t know whether it is just smoke, don’t know whether it is a small fire,” he told lawmakers as he refused to reveal what he’d learned from his preliminary findings. “All I know is that there was a time when … another first responder was not getting information about an alleged fire.”
Atkinson did what he thought was right and in accordance with the law by telling Congress that a complaint existed. The whistleblower did the same, despite the potential reprisals they’d face from a vengeful White House. Gabbard is now targeting them specifically for doing so, even as it is her job to be the early warning system against the nation’s greatest threats. It’s disturbing then to think what alarm bells she would prefer to silence, what risks she would take with America’s safety, rather than risk upsetting Trump.
Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He focuses on politics and policymaking at the federal level, including Congress and the White House.
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Dictatorship7 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show1 year agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?






