"Hope, Get in here!"

[jserraglio]

The Washington Post
Hope Hicks: The quiet one in Trump’s White House suddenly feels the glare
By Mary Jordan and Josh Dawsey
February 10

In a White House full of noise, she is the quiet one. Not the TV gladiator, not press room warrior, not a general. Certainly not the Mooch.

Hope Hicks, the discreet aide always at President Trump’s side whose desk is just outside the Oval Office, is his right-hand woman. Improbably, the former model, at only 29, has worked with Trump longer than anyone he is not related to at the White House.

But now Hicks is suddenly frying under the spotlight of scandal, a central figure in two White House controversies — the Russian investigation and the departure of a senior White House aide accused of physically abusing two ex-wives.



Hicks has been dating Rob Porter, 40, who left his job Wednesday, and was involved in crafting the widely condemned initial White House defense of him. Chief of Staff John F. Kelly called him “a man of true integrity.”

After Porter began dating Hicks, an ex-girlfriend brought accusations to the White House about Porter’s abuse of his ex-wives.

In recent days, Trump has complained about Hicks — a rare occurrence for a president who rages about others but rarely about her. Her colleagues have quietly accused her of looking out for Porter and not the White House, and she has been visibly upset in recent days as her personal life becomes a national news story. West Wing aides say she has glanced at the TV screens, seen her face and quickly looked away.

Until now, it was Hicks’s quiet judgment that had been her most valuable currency in Trump’s world. She is attracting so much unwanted attention that paparazzi are even following her. But it is a sign of her influence with Trump, and her unusual role in the West Wing, that no one is seriously talking about removing Hicks even as the turmoil is threatening Kelly’s job. “Hope is absolutely fantastic. She was with the campaign from the beginning, and I could not ask for anything more,” Trump said Saturday. “Hope is smart, very talented and respected by all.”

“Trump has seen her loyalty on the campaign and during the turbulent beginning of this administration, and he relies on her,” said Christopher Ruddy, a close friend of the president and chief executive of the conservative website Newsmax.

Hicks knew that an ex-girlfriend of Porter’s had approached White House officials and told them that both of his ex-wives had said he was violent, according to a White House official who said this put Hicks on edge for weeks. Yet she continued to date him and did not tell the president about those allegations, White House officials said.

When the allegations became public earlier this week, Kelly initially said: “Rob Porter is a man of true integrity and honor, and I can’t say enough good things about him.” That response, which was partially orchestrated by Hicks, caused outrage among many. The National Organization for Women called Kelly an “enabler of domestic violence.”

Others in the White House said Kelly believes that Hicks did not tell him all the facts about Porter — and should have recused herself from the matter because she was dating him. A White House spokesman said Kelly and Trump remain confident in her performance.

A former Rhodes scholar with a Harvard law degree, Porter has called the allegations “vile” and “simply false.” Hicks has told others in the White House she is upset about the accusations but has not publicly criticized Porter, White House aides say. As White House aides scrambled to respond, Hicks has told others it would be entirely out of character for him to hit an ex-wife.

Hicks declined to comment for the story.

Porter departed the White House after the Daily Mail published a photo this week of one of the women he was married to, Colbie Holderness. She said Porter punched her in the face, and she produced a photo of her eye with a yellow and purple bruise, which she said was evidence of the violence. A second former wife, Jenni Willoughby, also said Porter was physically abusive.

Hicks, whose father is a public relations executive who worked with the National Football League, has more experience in public relations and fashion than politics. As a teen, she modeled for Ralph Lauren. After graduating from Southern Methodist University, she worked for a PR firm that counted the Trump Organization as a client. The Trumps persuaded her to work directly for the family business; among other duties, she helped publicize Ivanka Trump’s fashion and accessory line.

During the election, Hicks was romantically linked to Corey Lewandowski, Trump’s campaign manager. Trump fired Lewandowski, who at one point was accused of physically pushing a female news reporter.

In his campaign memoir “Let Trump Be Trump,” Lewandowski described the unusual breadth of Hicks’s responsibilities.

“When we landed, it was Hope’s job to steam him. ‘Get the machine!’ he’d yell,” Lewandowski wrote. “And Hope would take out the steamer and start steaming Mr. Trump’s suit, while he was wearing it! She’d steam the jacket first and then sit in a chair in front of him and steam his pants.”

Lewandowski also described her as having a photographic memory, and others praised her savvy. Ruddy said Hicks’s good looks causes some to overlook her ability. “She’s really quite talented and able,” he said.

Hicks wields considerable power as Trump’s gatekeeper and is often the last to see him every day as she walks him back to his residence.

Last summer, Trump tapped her to succeed Anthony Scaramucci, “The Mooch,” who was fired after only 10 days. By all accounts, she was communications director anyway — dealing with the most sensitive stories about Trump, the special counsel probe and his family.

Hicks has little experience in Washington and is quick to admit it.

During meetings, she has asked basic questions about the health-care law or how Congress might work on any given issue, according to two people at the White House. “Most people in Washington aren’t going to ask a question in front of their peers in a large meeting. They are going to wait, keep quiet, go look it up and go learn about it,” one aide said. “I actually respect her for it because she got answers.”

Trump has been known to turn to Hicks while he is talking to reporters and ask her which poll showed him with high favorable ratings. He analyzes TV coverage and individual pundits with her. In a move that shows his trust in her, Trump will even occasionally preview one of his tweets with Hicks — although she does not tweet herself.

Trump often shouts for Hicks to come immediately to the Oval Office. She rarely leaves the West Wing during the day, aware he could want her to come in the office at a moment’s notice.

“He’ll say, ‘Hope, remember when we did this? Tell the guy over here what it was like when we won New Hampshire,’ ” another official said. “ ‘Hope, get in here!’ ”

Recently, Hicks’s name has surfaced relating to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into whether Trump sought to obstruct a federal investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. She helped draft a news statement on Air Force One, partly at the direction of the president, that misrepresented the purpose of Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with a Russian lawyer during the campaign, according to multiple administration officials.

Hicks has been interviewed by Mueller’s investigators.

She has also raged against those who leak to the news media and has defended Trump even in situations where other aides rolled their eyes. She has frequently told others that Trump is charming and that she wishes others saw him as she does.

“To the public, she remains in the background,” said Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president. ‘To the president, she is front and center.”

Carol D. Leonnig contributed to this report.

[jbuck919]

In recent days, Trump has complained about Hicks — a rare occurrence for a president who rages about others but rarely about her.

Does one have to paint a picture here? Obviously, she turned him down after a pass. Doesn't anyone understand the depth of his venility?

[jserraglio]

Does one have to paint a picture here?

Apparently, yes.

In his campaign memoir Let Trump Be Trump, [Corey] Lewandowski described the unusual breadth of Hicks’s responsibilities.

“When we landed, it was Hope’s job to steam him [Trump]. ‘Get the machine!’ he’d yell. And Hope would take out the steamer and start steaming Mr. Trump’s suit, while he was wearing it! She’d steam the jacket first and then sit in a chair in front of him and steam his pants.”

[lennygoran]

Well here's HOPEing she tells all and helps Mueller! What Trump has done with the Dem's memo is outrageous. Glad I can forget about alot of this while down here in the sun-only bad thing is at breakfast the TV is set on FOX News. Len

[jbuck919]

Well here's HOPEing she tells all and helps Mueller! What Trump has done with the Dem's memo is outrageous. Glad I can forget about alot of this while down here in the sun-only bad thing is at breakfast the TV is set on FOX News. Len

I gave up my barber because she only ever had on Fox News I understand that it's gotten even worse. I have another at the other end of the road, but she's just as bad. There is no TV, but her customers are still constantly complaining about Hillary and the Democrats. They don't understand the concept of "We haven't died yet, either." So if we can have a March meet-up in NYC, don't be surprised if I show up looking like the Wild Man of Borneo.

[Belle]

I think news networks/outlets/media are generally not up to much and I wouldn't trust any of them to lie straight in bed. They run the same cookie-cutter approach to political narrative with full bias on display, and the only really interesting place for debate and discussion these days is the internet. So, give those conventional media the flick they deserve. They all have their political agendas which has precious little to do with public interest. Occasionally you'll get a good story but not often enough to justify the rest of the rubbish which goes down. Mostly they pander to existing reader ideologies without any real depth of investigation or discussion. Consequently, the political malaise is allowed to ferment unabated. Some news outlets actively patronize their readers and keep them in a state of perpetual victimhood ("The Guardian").

This is absolutely marvellous and I'm a subscriber. I send this around to my friends and family who all love it!!

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJdKr0 ... ZYqLCa9mng

[jserraglio]

As I see it, the leading force serving as a check on anti-democratic authoritarianism in my country has been the elite print media: e.g., the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.

These publications do not pander or condescend to their readers.

[Belle]

As I see it, the leading force serving as a check on anti-democratic authoritarianism in my country has been the elite print media: e.g., the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.

These publications do not pander or condescend to their readers.

In my opinion those publications you mention are all part of the problem. Not enough dispassionate, unbiased analysis. They have their agendas too. For example, much more rigorous and objective analysis was needed post your last Presidential election - from both perspectives. I'm yet to see anything resembling this. And, as I said, the internet's private channels on U-Tube are the only places you're likely to experience this in any serious form. I hardly ever watch TV these days for news and commentary and only scan the newspapers online. Some things on pay TV are worthwhile when there is a balance between ideologies, but otherwise I shut off. I am on the lookout for a kind of heterodoxy - a person or persons willing to think outside the square. Light years away from Google group-think and bullying.

And when ideologies become hegemonic through partisan news media I know we're in trouble. Generally, I don't think we are served very well at all with our current media - the world over. Some are in active decline, with the begging bowl out, because people have realized the emperor has no clothes.

[jserraglio]

Of course they have their agendas—they are our newspapers. Oneof which is to check abuses of power, particularly by an executive who has lackeys for cabinet ministers and lapdogs for legislators.

[Belle]

Of course they have their agendas—they are our newspapers.

Read again what I wrote. Analysis and news should not be confused with 'agenda'.

[jserraglio]

Read again what I wrote ... [You wrote:] They have their agendas too.

Neither should hard news reporting be confused with analysis. The Times does both better than most. And of course the NY Times has a point of view. Every newspaper worth its salt has a point of view. That does not preclude unbiased reporting and balanced analysis--and the NYT does both exceptially well.

[Belle]

Read again what I wrote ... They have their agendas too.

Neither should hard news reporting be confused with analysis. The Times does both better than most, if not all news media.

That's what I'm saying; hard news IS confused with commentary/analysis and that's the problem. Instead of participants standing on either side of the political debate hurling rotten eggs at each other it would be useful to have honest, objective discussion about issues. For example, Trump is the proverbial 'bull in a china shop'. Instead of asking WHY this occurred and why voters felt it was necessary, and the systemic faults which bedevil an effete polity these are merely represented through insult, outrage and adoption of a high moral ground. This is not what the news media should be doing. Stiff analysis and objective reporting are what's needed. These things are of great interest to me at my age; the whole process and the impulses behind it.

As far as socio-political/cultural commentary and analysis, "Spiked Online" is an excellent site because you cannot predict or pin down any explicit ideology. It is critical of everything in the public area in one way or another, leaving readers free to think for themselves. I used to tell my students, when I was an English teacher, that (as a rule of thumb) if they'd seen a controversial film or documentary and didn't walk away from it asking themselves "what would I have done" they've probably been propagandized. And I taught them to look at news media from different 'stables', identifying the (emotive) language used and the values these represented. It was a lot easier to do than you would think.

[jserraglio]

Let's agree to disagree on this one. The Times and Wash Post reporters may not be political scientists, but they do explore in some depth the causality and the patterns behind the political events they report.

Contrary to what you suggest, they have maintained a dispassionate tone even when provoked. They have not, for example, reciprocated the insults, outrage and moralizing aimed at them by the WH communications shop, which is perhaps one reason among many that the WH still actively seeks out excellent reporters like Maggie Hagerman of the Times. They are among the best in the business.

And since you just asked me to re-read what you wrote, let me suggest that you do likewise with these fine publications. The free press, along with the judiciary, being the only two pillars of our democracy that have not yet reneged on their duty.

[Belle]

I'm a lot older than you are and have obviously seen it all before. We will have to agree to disagree. I cannot, in all conscience, regard the mainstream media - no matter what masthead - in the idealistic light that you do. Freedom of speech should not be confused with integrity and objective reporting, democracy notwithstanding. And your last sentence depends on what you regard as the 'duty' of those 'two pillars'. I've read plenty of criticisms about decisions from your Supreme Court (same here in Australia with our High Court); ergo, up to half of the people feel that 'duty' wasn't done for them. I think Lincoln's lofty words have become lost in a wall of noise that is the modern media and an adversarial polity.

[jserraglio]

I'm a lot older than you are

Doubtful.

As for the two non-performing pillars, one is an authoritarian executive temperamentally hostile to democracy. The other is a lapdog legislature that so far has enabled this demagogic executive. The judiciary will become active only in the unlikely event that the Congress challenges the President.

That leaves the press on the barricades. Yes, the mainstream press, not the niche outlets you are touting. If not for them (and to a limited extent, the courts), our democracy might have already failed. Despite them, it may still fail. How's that for idealism?

[Belle]

As usual, you make an eloquent argument. I'm in my 7th decade. I just don't agree with you, that's all. And the 'niche' outlets are vast in number. There's an existential threat to mainstream media as we speak and I'm glad of it because they have reneged on their duty through partisanship.

[jserraglio]

I'm in my 7th decade.

So too my kid brother would have been. Nice chatting with you.

[lennygoran]

Well here's HOPEing she tells all and helps Mueller! What Trump has done with the Dem's memo is outrageous. Glad I can forget about alot of this while down here in the sun-only bad thing is at breakfast the TV is set on FOX News. Len

I gave up my barber because she only ever had on Fox News I understand that it's gotten even worse. I have another at the other end of the road, but she's just as bad. There is no TV, but her customers are still constantly complaining about Hillary and the Democrats. They don't understand the concept of "We haven't died yet, either." So if we can have a March meet-up in NYC, don't be surprised if I show up looking like the Wild Man of Borneo.

John well I'm not giving up eating in the breakfast room-fortunately the olympics have been on so FOX has been off for a few days. Would love to have a march gathering-when are you coming in? Len

[lennygoran]

I'm a lot older than you are and have obviously seen it all before. We will have to agree to disagree. I cannot, in all conscience, regard the mainstream media - no matter what masthead - in the idealistic light that you do. Freedom of speech should not be confused with integrity and objective reporting, democracy notwithstanding. And your last sentence depends on what you regard as the 'duty' of those 'two pillars'. I've read plenty of criticisms about decisions from your Supreme Court (same here in Australia with our High Court); ergo, up to half of the people feel that 'duty' wasn't done for them. I think Lincoln's lofty words have become lost in a wall of noise that is the modern media and an adversarial polity.

Belle Trump has lied over 1000 times-or do you disagree on that? And what does he have to hide? I'm afraid you've been taken in-thank goodness for the NYTimes and Washington Post-have you been following his part in the Don Jr memo on loving the Hillary dirt? What about how he harrassed women over the years? Len

[Belle]

I make no comment about your President and I don't know what he does or doesn't do. I'm not being "taken in" - what I'm talking about is bias across the entire media spectrum, which exists whether Trump is in office or not. It's a systemic problem.

[lennygoran]

I make no comment about your President and I don't know what he does or doesn't do. I'm not being "taken in" - what I'm talking about is bias across the entire media spectrum, which exists whether Trump is in office or not. It's a systemic problem.

Belle could you give an example of how the NY Times is biased? Also any examples from CNN? Len

PS-Washington Post, NBC news?

[Belle]

I make no comment about your President and I don't know what he does or doesn't do. I'm not being "taken in" - what I'm talking about is bias across the entire media spectrum, which exists whether Trump is in office or not. It's a systemic problem.

Belle could you give an example of how the NY Times is biased? Also any examples from CNN? Len

PS-Washington Post, NBC news?

I'm not going to talk about specific media; just right across the board. If you look at my original comments I'm concerned about a real lack of discourse/dialogue about what ails our democracies, without real biting analysis and objectivity. There is a cookie cutter approach to reporting which I don't think serves the people well. This came up in a recent U-Tube discussion with some public intellectuals and I had to agree with them. I don't know your specific political decision-making but what I'm talking about stretches across all media and has for some decades. People congregate on their own political sides and seem to want to hear only that viewpoint. This isn't good for democracy. I'm in general agreement with the people on this online discussion program - but it's only one of many generated on this topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOxmIjiRqTw

The mainstream media is being totally disrupted by the internet and they need to change the way they do business if they're going to continue being relevant.

[lennygoran]

Belle will have to check out the you tube link when we get home-right now for me it's nature, great weather, beautiful waterviews, etc. For me the worst media by far are the tweets of Trump-thank goodness for the ny times! Len

[Belle]

That looks beautiful - and very romantic. I wouldn't be worried about Trump if I was on a happy holiday!!

[lennygoran]

That looks beautiful - and very romantic. I wouldn't be worried about Trump if I was on a happy holiday!!

Belle talk about romantic-tonight's dinner on st pete beach with a revolving 12th floor dining room-it takes 1 and 1/2 hours to fully revolve-the views were just superb and the food was very good! Len

[Belle]

It looks adorable!! What a wonderful country you have with so many 'personalities' and locales.