The day was supposed to be over — at least, that’s what the White House communications staff told reporters Thursday evening as President Trump retired to the State Dining Room for dinner with his top military commanders.
Then, unexpectedly, the president summoned them back into action. That day’s episode was not quite over. A plot twist was ahead.
At 7:18 p.m., reporters were led into the lavish dining room where the military’s senior leaders and their spouses were lined up on either side of the president and first lady Melania Trump in preparation for a formal group photo.
“You guys know what this represents?” Trump said gesturing to the commanders surrounding him as he made looping motions with his right index finger.
He dramatically paused and then said: “Maybe it’s the calm before the storm.”
President Trump, center left, gives a thumbs up next to first lady Melania Trump, center right, during an official photograph with senior military leaders and spouses at the White House Thursday. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg)
“What’s the storm?” a reporter called out, as the officials and their spouses continued to pose, their faces frozen in toothy smiles, even as many of their eyes began to dart around the room.
“Could be the calm before the storm,” the president said.
It felt like the opening scene of an action movie — the president, stiffly rotating from side to side, surveying the country’s military leaders and providing an ominous hint that something would soon unfold. He wouldn’t say what, but it seemed clear that it wouldn’t be anything good. Maybe something involving North Korea or the Islamic State terrorist organization or Iran or who knows what else.
Or maybe not — maybe this was just the showman president grabbing the day’s narrative and providing viewers with a reason to keep tuning in, even if there was no plan for an actual storm. Media pundits spent much of the day Friday trying to guess what he meant.
“I think this is a president who is living in a constant reality TV show,” said Timothy O’Brien, a journalist who wrote “TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald” in 2005. “He loves the notion of ‘Tune in next week for the next exciting installation of ‘The White House,’ an ongoing reality show and national psychodrama.’”
For decades, Trump played popular culture’s role of the stereotypical rich guy, and he starred in the reality game show, “The Apprentice,” for more than a decade. O’Brien said that Trump is first and foremost an entertainer — and one who is always engaging in performance art.
“He believes he connects to people by keeping the mystery alive,” said O’Brien, who has been openly critical of the president, “when, in reality, what we want from our parents, our managers and our presidents are people who provide direction and clarity in a sober-minded way.”
President Trump, center left, and first lady Melania Trump, center right, stand for an official photograph with senior military leaders and spouses in the State Dining room of the White House in Washington Thursday. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg)
On Thursday evening, reporters were only in the dining room for about a minute — and they kept asking the president to explain what he meant.
“What storm, Mr. President?” an NBC News reporter called out.
“We have the world’s great military people in this room, I will tell you that,” Trump said in a loud but calm tone, flanked by his generals, whom he then thanked for coming to the White House.
Again, a reporter asked: “What storm, Mr. President?”
He responded: “You’ll find out.”
Some of the theories floating out there: Maybe Trump was referring to the international deal with Iran, as he is expected to announce next week that he will “decertify” the agreement and kick it to Congress to handle. Or maybe he is planning to intensify the attacks on the Islamic State terrorists in the Middle East. Or maybe the storm has something to do with North Korea or Syria. Or maybe he was referring to the actual storm that’s headed toward the United States this weekend, Hurricane Nate. Or maybe he didn’t mean anything by it at all.
“If something like that was said in a past presidency, you’d really worry about it,” former secretary of defense Leon Panetta said on CNN on Friday afternoon. “But this is a president who tweets, who engages now in verbal tweets as well. . . You begin to assume that it’s more about getting attention, than it is about proclaiming some kind of national policy. I don’t think it’s responsible, I don’t think presidents ought to do it, but I think in this instance, we probably all should take a deep breath and try to assume that he’s just making a play for attention.”
Trump’s spokespeople were asked again and again: What storm?
At the White House press briefing on Friday afternoon, about one quarter of the questions directed at press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders revolved around the president’s calm-before-the-storm remark. She did little to provide clarity to Americans worried that the country might be headed into war.
“We’re never going to say in advance what the president’s going to do,” Sanders said when first asked about the storm comment. “And, as he said last night. . .you’ll have to wait and see.”
A reporter pressed Sanders on how seriously the country should take the comments: “Was it a joke? Was it serious?
“I think you can take the president protecting the American people always extremely serious,” Sanders said. “He’s been very clear that that’s his No. 1 priority, and if he feels that action is necessary, he’ll take it.”
Asked a third time, Sanders said the president plans to “keep all of his options on the table” when it comes to North Korea and that the White House will continue to “put maximum economic and diplomatic pressure on countries like North Korea.”
And that prompted the question: “North Korea? That’s the storm?”
Sanders quickly clarified: “I’m just using that as an example. I think we’ve got a lot of bad actors in the world, North Korea, Iran, there’s several examples there.”
Later in the briefing, another reporter noted that the president did give advance warning that he might do something by saying that there could be a storm coming.
“He, unprompted, dangled these hints,” the reporter said.
Sanders responded: “He didn’t talk about any specific actions at all.”
When another reporter asked Sanders if reporters were properly interpreting her interpretation of what the president said, she replied: “I haven’t been specific about anything.”
And another reporter asked Sanders if perhaps the president was “just being mischievous, that he was messing with the press a little bit, when he made that comment.”
“I wouldn’t say that he’s messing with the press,” Sanders replied. “I think we have some serious world issues here. I think that North Korea, Iran both continue to be bad actors, and the president is somebody who’s going to always look for ways to protect Americans, and he’s not going to dictate what those actions may look like.”
She added: “I don’t think there’s anything beyond that, that I can add on that front.”
The Trump administration loosened Obama-era birth control requirements on Friday, saying most providers of health insurance could refuse to pay for an employee’s birth control if the provider shows “sincerely held” religious or moral objections.
The new regulations, which take effect immediately, protect groups such as the Little Sisters of the Poor from litigation if they refuse to provide contraceptive coverage, but widen the pool of those shielded to include nonprofits, for-profit companies, other nongovernmental employers, and schools and universities.
“These rules will not affect over 99.9 percent of the 165 million women in the United States,” the Health and Human Services Department said in a statement.
“No American should be forced to violate his or her own conscience in order to abide by the laws and regulations governing our health care system,” HHS spokeswoman Caitlin Oakley said. “Today’s actions affirm the Trump administration’s commitment to upholding the freedoms afforded all Americans under our constitution.”
One of the most controversial — and most welcomed — requirements of the 2010 Affordable Care Act was a regulation for health insurance plans to provide birth control coverage free to patients.
The thinking behind it was to lower costs and improve health by helping more women get contraception, because pregnancy is much more expensive and dangerous to a woman’s health than using birth control, and because upward of 40 percent of pregnancies in the U.S. are unplanned.
Some religious groups objected and sued. The Roman Catholic Church opposes most methods of birth control, and some other religious groups object to certain forms of birth control.
The move fulfills a promise made by President Donald Trump in a Rose Garden ceremony in May when he signed an executive order that he said restored religious freedoms, said Roger Severino, director of the Office for Civil Rights at the Health and Human Services Department.
“That was a promise made, and this was a promise kept,” Severino told reporters. The new rule, he said, provides “relief to those who have been under the thumb of the federal government.”
Medical and legal groups immediately objected.
“By taking away women’s access to no-cost birth control coverage, the rules give employers a license to discriminate against women,” said Fatima Goss Graves, president of the National Women’s Law Center. “This will leave countless women without the critical birth control coverage they need to protect their health and economic security. We will take immediate legal steps to block these unfair and discriminatory rules.”
The American Civil Liberties Union said it would file suit immediately.
“No woman should ever be denied health care because her employer or university’s religious views are prioritized over her serious medical needs,” said Kate Rochat, an ACLU member and law student at the University of Notre Dame who says she stands to lose access to contraceptive health care because of the rule. Notre Dame is run by the Catholic Church.
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey also sued.
“Among other things, many women are likely to turn to MassHealth – the state’s Medicaid plan – for coverage, which will place a financial burden on the state,” Healey’s office said in a statement.
“Today’s complaint alleges that the new rule is unconstitutional by allowing the federal government to endorse certain religious beliefs over a woman’s right to make choices about her own health care.”
Most U.S. women use birth control at some point.
“Contraception is a medical necessity for women during approximately 30 years of their lives,” said Dr. Haywood Brown, president of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
“It improves the health of women, children and families as well as communities overall; reduces maternal mortality; and enhances economic stability for women and their families. All Americans deserve the ability to make personal health care decisions without intrusion from their employers or the government.”
HHS said it calculated that only organizations that had already sued would take advantage of the new rule.
“The regulation leaves in place preventive services coverage guidelines where no religious or moral objection exists — meaning that out of millions of employers in the U.S., these exemptions may impact only about 200 entities, the number that that filed lawsuits based on religious or moral objections,” HHS said.
But Gretchen Borchelt, vice president for reproductive rights and health at the NWLC, disputed this.
“We don’t know how many employers are going to try and get out of the benefit once they know they are allowed to do it,” she said.
It works against their interest, Borchelt added, but some employers may incorrectly believe they are saving money. “We know from the past that insurance plans will do whatever they can if they think they can save money,” Borchelt said.
“Birth control coverage saves money in the long run because employers don’t have to pay for pregnancy and related costs,” she added. “We know that when birth control was added to insurance plans, it didn’t change the premiums. There shouldn’t be cost concerns.”
The new rule is part of a broader package changing the federal approach to religious liberty. “Except in the narrowest circumstances, no one should be forced to choose between living out his or her faith and complying with the law,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a memorandum sent government wide.
Birth control allows people to decide when and whether to have children and is a fundamental right, said Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
“The Trump administration just took direct aim at birth control coverage for 62 million women. This is an unacceptable attack on basic health care that the vast majority of women rely on. With this rule in place, any employer could decide that their employees no longer have health insurance coverage for birth control,” Richards said.
“Birth control is not controversial — it’s health care the vast majority of women will use in the course of their lifetime.”
Most Americans get their health insurance through an employer, and most employers voluntarily provide contraceptive coverage, HHS officials noted. “These rules do not alter multiple other federal programs that provide free or subsidized contraceptives for women at risk of unintended pregnancy,” the rule, published in the Federal Register, adds.