President Trump Orders Cruise Missile Strike Against Syrian Regime Airbase Used To Carry Out Chemical Attack

CNN: On Trump’s Order, “The United States Launched A Military Strike … On A Syrian Government Airbase” Following Chemical Weapons Attack. President Donald Trump ordered a cruise missile strike “on a Syrian government airbase in response to a chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians earlier in the week,” CNN reported. According to the news outlet, “The strike is the first direct military action taken by the US against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad,” and “represents a substantial escalation of the US military campaign in the region.” From the April 7 report:

The United States launched a military strike Thursday on a Syrian government airbase in response to a chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians earlier in the week.

On President Donald Trump's orders, US warships launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the airbase that was home to the warplanes that carried out the chemical attacks, US officials said.

The strike is the first direct military action taken by the US against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the country's six-year civil war. It represents a substantial escalation of the US military campaign in the region, and could be interpreted by the Syrian government as an act of war. [CNN.com, 4/7/17]

Right-Wing Media Argue Strike Is “Undercutting Allegations” That Trump Is Tied To Russia

Fox’s Shannon Bream: Trump’s Missile Launch “May Be Undercutting Allegations Of His Ties To” Putin. Fox host Shannon Bream argued that Trump’s “decision to launch an airstrike against Russia’s ally, Syria, may be undercutting allegations of his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.” Bream suggested there have been various “tensions” between the U.S. and Russia since Trump took office, adding that Trump and Putin do not “seem like” they “are BFF’s.” From the April 11 edition of Fox News’ America’s Newsroom:

SHANNON BREAM (CO-HOST): You may remember that moment from the final presidential debate, but now, President Trump's decision to launch an airstrike against Russia’s ally, Syria, may be undercutting allegations of his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

[...]

We know there have been tensions since President Trump was sworn in. There have been fly-bys, there have been the Russian ships that are close to the U.S. shores, and there have been people who’ve looked to say there have been some provocations, it looks like, by the Russians. It wouldn't seem like these two are BFF’s, but that is what we've been told so far.

DAVID AVELLA: President Trump has never been a puppet of Vladimir Putin. Julie and her team are going to need a new talking point as to why they lost the election, because everything is ultimately always about Russia had the great influence over the election, and that’s why Trump won. And that’s just factually not true. But most importantly on this, any message that Vladimir Putin got out of these airstrikes is really just cherry on the pie to the message it sends to rogue states that we are, as a country, not going to tolerate your chemicals of mass destruction. We’re not going to tolerate weapons programs that can do harm, not only to your own people, but ultimately to America. [Fox News, America’s Newsroom, 4/11/17]

CNN’s Jeffrey Lord: “So Much For The Idea That Vladimir Putin Was Believed To Give Donald Trump The Presidency.” CNN political commentator Jeffrey Lord reacted to the strike by saying, “So much for the idea that Vladimir Putin was believed to give Donald Trump the presidency.” From the April 11 edition of CNN’s CNN Newsroom:

JOHN BERMAN (CO-HOST): During the campaign, candidate Donald Trump essentially said would it be such a bad thing to have a friendlier relationship with Vladimir Putin in Russia? Well, now the Russian leader is accusing the Trump administration of a war tantamount to a false invasion and suggesting that Syria is being framed here.



JEFFREY LORD: Well, so much for the idea that Vladimir Putin was believed to give Donald Trump the presidency. I don't think this worked out the way the critics have suggested. Look, I have said all along from day one, it's not possible that Vladimir Putin preferred Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump is going to take, I think, Vladimir Putin and every other world leader at face value until they do something that crosses the line. And this clearly was a very disturbing incident. Very, very disturbing. And he acted. He took action. And we’ve seen what it's like when a president does not act. So, we're just going to have to go on from here and play it as it goes. [CNN, CNN Newsroom, 4/11/17]

Wash. Examiner: The Strike Has “Complicated The Democrats’ Argument That President Trump Is Too Close To Russia.” Washington Examiner Politics Editor W. James Antle III claimed in an April 11 article that the strike has “complicated” the assertion “that President Trump is too close to Russia,” adding the strike “cannot help but have at least some effect on public perceptions about Trump's alleged coziness with Moscow.” From the article:

Increasing tensions with Moscow over U.S. strikes on Syria have complicated the Democrats' argument that President Trump is too close to Russia, even as congressional committees continue to investigate Russian interference in the presidential election and any collusion with the Trump campaign.



[...]

Nevertheless, the Tomahawk missile attack against an actual Russian client, Syrian President Bashar Assad, launched with bipartisan support, cannot help but have at least some effect on public perceptions about Trump's alleged coziness with Moscow.



The use of force has been accompanied by escalating rhetoric from the Trump administration that is critical of Russia.

[...]

Syria could change the debate yet again. While a real, live confrontation between Trump and Russia won't affect the substance of the investigation, it will make it harder to mount a political case the president is Putin's friend in the White House. [Washington Examiner, 4/11/17]

Fox’s Eric Bolling: “You Can Eliminate This ‘Trump In Bed With Putin’ Type Of Thing.” Fox host Eric Bolling claimed that, because Trump authorized cruise missile strikes on a Syrian regime airbase, “you can eliminate this ‘Trump in bed with Putin’ type of thing.” From the April 10 edition of Fox News’ The Five:

ERIC BOLLING (HOST): By the way, for all the political on the left -- the people on the left, and also the anti-Trump people who said, “Oh, Trump’s in bed with Putin and Russia.” He bombed an airspace with Russians in the airspace. Yes, he gave them a heads up -- the airbase, yes he gave them a heads up, but this is against everything that they wanted, the Russians, and they’ve come back with very, very stern warnings, “Don’t do it again.” So, you can eliminate this “Trump in bed with Putin” type of thing. [Fox News, The Five, 4/10/17]

Infowars: “The Mainstream Media Can No Longer Claim Trump Is ‘Putin’s Puppet.’” Hours after Trump authorized the cruise missile strike, Infowars’s social commentator Kit Daniels argued that, as a result, “The mainstream media can no longer claim Trump is ‘Putin’s puppet.’” From the April 7 article:

• The mainstream media can no longer claim Trump is “Putin’s puppet.”
• Likewise, leftists are cucked even more because this is more than what Obama ever did, despite Obama actually wanting a war in Syria complete with “regime change.” Remember his “red line” meant to trigger Iraq 2.0. [Infowars, 4/7/17]

The US Intelligence Community Found That The Russian Government Had A “Clear Preference” For Trump In The 2016 Election

Intelligence Community Assessment: Putin And Russia “Developed A Clear Preference” For Trump. According to a declassified intelligence community assessment, “Putin and the Russian government developed a clear preference for … Trump” and “aspired to help [his] election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.” From the January 6 report (emphasis original):

Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations.

We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments.

We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence. [Assessing Russian Activities And Intentions In Recent US Elections, 1/6/17]

Right-Wing Media Have Previously Tried To Run Defense For Trump On His Alleged Ties To Russia

Right-Wing Media Have Previously Attempted To Absolve Trump’s Alleged Ties To Russia By Attacking A Cybersecurity Firm. Right-wing and “alt-right” media figures attacked CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity firm that in June 2016 “was the first to link last year’s hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors,” in an attempt to discredit the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to aid Trump. But CrowdStrike’s apparently erroneous findings were in reference to a different example of Russian hacking, and have no bearing on the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusions that independently “identified Russian officials who fed material hacked from the Democratic National Committee and party leaders to WikiLeaks.” [Media Matters, 4/7/17]