Of all the post-Syrian bombing PR cringe to be experienced by Trump supporters this week, this is the one I most certainly hope is false. I want this to be a leftist ruse enacted to create the image of a President so helpless and weak that he would structure international military strategy around the capricious whims of his pretty daughter. A ruse only. The media tool of choice.
Say it ain’t so, Donald.
DONALD Trump’s decision to rain down 59 Tomahawk missiles on a Syrian air base was sparked by his daughter Ivanka’s “heartbroken” response to Assad’s chemical attack, insiders have claimed.
But the Republican firebrand is believed to have made his dramatic U-turn after being convinced by his daughter Ivanka’s impassioned response to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons on Tuesday.
A source close to the first family said: “Increasingly, Ivanka is having more and more influence over her father.
“She often counsels her father and was very clear that action needed to be taken against Assad in some form.”
“Ivanka was infuriated over the lack of a direct response in the immediate aftermath of the Syrian attack.”
Responding the morning after Assad’s attack, The President’s eldest daughter tweeted: “Heartbroken and outraged by the images coming out of Syria following the atrocious chemical attack today.
Following her comments, the President’s stance on a military response began to shift, quickly claiming the attack was an “affront to humanity” and blasting Assad’s “heinous” actions.
And the following day, hours before launching a flurry of 2,900lb missiles into the country, the President had shifted from isolation to intervention.
He said: “I think what Assad did is terrible.
“I think what happened in Syria is a disgrace to humanity and he’s there, and I guess he’s running things, so something should happen.”
After the missile strike, Ivanka wrote on Twitter: “The times we are living in call for difficult decisions. Proud of my father for refusing to accept these horrendous crimes against humanity.”
The insider added: “Ivanka has her own mind.
“While her dad is driven by his ego and political point-scoring, Ivanka could not be more opposite.
“She has genuine concerns for others and wants to do what is right.
“As she was feeding her kids on Wednesday morning, she thought enough was enough and tweeted her thoughts for everyone to see.
“The response was quite immediate and clearly helped changed her father’s views on the issue of Syria.”
Much of this story is constructed around inference, and unfortunately, this is where the writer makes his best case.
Still, I’d prefer to believe President Trump’s actions in Syria were purely the result of adult forethought and planning, and that the strategy was maturely and cooly formulated minus the glib, sentimental meddling of a charming young woman.
I’ve seen a lot of reporting surrounding Donald Trump that sinks to this sort of third-party implied hypothesizing whose primary motivation appears to be the implanting of unfavorable and embarrassing perceptions in the public mind’s appraisal of Trump. It’s a “tabloidization” of anti-Trump reporting and it is fueled by implication, unnamed sources, and emboldened by the usage of verbs like “claim” and “believe.”
It is certainly not completely shocking that Ivanka might play an uncomfortably predominant role in her father’s agenda; it’s a stereotype as old as dirt, the dualistic comedy of a powerful, boisterous male power player reduced to simpering manchild by his daughter’s capricious demands.
Except most fathers sooth the beast by coughing up a few dollars or a slight nod of approval, not by bombing foreign nations as part of a triangulated strategy to help a geographically strategic ally.