Trump Did NOT Cause COVID-19... But He Is Responsible For The Way The U.S. Is Botching The Response

The last thing in the world Trump wants to see are headlines like this one from Politico yesterday: Trump's mismanagement helped fuel coronavirus crisis. And once large numbers of people start dying, Trump will get really desperate, desperate that voters don't blame him, though they should. "For six weeks behind the scenes, and now increasingly in public, Trump has undermined his administration’s own efforts to fight the coronavirus outbreak-- resisting attempts to plan for worst-case scenarios, overturning a public-health plan upon request from political allies and repeating only the warnings that he chose to hear. Members of Congress have grilled top officials like Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and Centers for Disease Control Director Robert Redfield over the government’s biggest mistake: failing to secure enough testing to head off a coronavirus outbreak in the United States. But many current and former Trump administration officials say the true management failure was Trump’s... Interviews with 13 current and former officials, as well as individuals close to the White House, painted a picture of a president who rewards those underlings who tell him what he wants to hear while shunning those who deliver bad news... 'If this sort of dysfunction exists as part of the everyday operations-- then, yes, during a true crisis the problems are magnified and exacerbated,' said a former Trump HHS official. 'And with extremely detrimental consequences.'" Ironically, it's his own moron supporters who will pay the most dearly, since that 30-some-odd percent of Americans are the only people who believe a word that comes out of his filthy mouth.

Something like 20,000 people went to Fascistpalooza-- they refer to it as CPAC-- last week and speakers included many of the leaders of the far right of American politics including Señor Trumpanzee, Coronavirus Czar Pence, Jared Kushner-in-law + Ivanka, Don Jr. and Kimberly Guilfoyle, Kellyanne Conway, Betsy DeVos, Mike Pompeo, Lawrence Kudlow, Alex Azar, Mark Meadows, the U.S. psychopathic ambassador to Israel, David Friedman (suspected by some of being the Typhoid Mary of the far right), Richard Grenell, Ken Cuccinnelli, Sam Brownback, Nikki Haley, hate talk radio host Mark Levin, Ronna Romney McDaniel, Sebastian Gorka, Ted Cruz (who announced on Sunday evening that he will be self-quarantining at home in Texas after learning that he had a "brief conversation and a handshake" with the guy who tested positive for COVID-19), Joni Ernst, Marsha Blackburn, Dan Sullivan, Paul Gosar (also quarantined now), Gym Jordan, Liz Cheney, Devin Nunes, Andy Biggs (one of the 2 members of Congress who voted against coronavirus funding), Louie Gohmert, Matt Gaetz, Doug Collins, Paul Gosar, Steve Scalise, Roger Williams, Glenn Beck, James O'Keefe (the Project Veritas guy) and dozens of other neo-fascists only known inside the movement. They-- and all the attendees-- were exposed to COVID-19.

Glenn Beck's propaganda website announced over the weekend that "one of the attendees at this year's Conservative Political Action Conference, the country's largest annual gathering of conservatives, has tested positive for the coronavirus. While the identity of the patient is unknown, the American Conservative Union confirmed the patient tested positive for the disease in a New Jersey hospital and was exposed to the virus before attending CPAC. The Hill reported that the patient is currently being quarantined.

The American Conservative Union also announced that the person with coronavirus did not shake hands with Trump or Pence, although some people may recall that at a Florida fundraiser for Vern Buchanan, Pence shook hands with a cadet who is now quarantined.

The big annual AIPAC convention nearly had as many attendees as CPAC. And so far 3 people have tested positive for coronavirus. Speakers included Coronavirus Czar Pence, Status Quo Joe, Michael Bloomberg, Austrian neo-fascist Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, Joe Trippi, Mike Pompeo, Miss McConnell (R-KY), Steny Hoyer, Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Michael McCaul (R-TX), Steve Scalise (R-LA), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Liz Cheney (R-WY), Lee Zeldin (R-NY), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Blue Dogs Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Abigail Spanberger (VA) and Mike Sherrill (NJ), Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Chuck Schumer and top Schumer operative J.B. Poersch, Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Ann Wagnwer (R-MO), Eliot Engel (D-NY), Virginia Foxx (R-NC), David Kustoff (R-TN), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Adam Smith (D-WA), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Angie Craig (D-MN), and Félix Antoine Tshisekedi-Tshilombo, President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Top political leaders in Italy and Iran have tested positive for coronavirus and members of the Iranian parliament have begun dying. Pelosi has discussed shutting down Congress to avoid spreading the disease among members-- who, remember, go home (i.e., everywhere) every weekend and shake hands with their constituents and then come back to Congress. It's too late to down anything about it now. As Buzzflash editor Mark Karlin noted, "Richard Hatchett, the doctor leading efforts to find a vaccine for Coronavirus, says it is 'much more lethal than normal flu... This is the most frightening disease I've ever encountered in my career.'"

Amidst the news reports on Coronavirus, there is a steady flow of warnings from epidemiologists that the Coronavirus presents a tsunami pandemic. Although it may be an outlier estimate, according to a CBS Evening News interview with a top Harvard epidemiologist, he predicts 40-70% of every adult in the world over the age of 35 will be infected with Coronavirus, “with millions of people dying.” That may be alarmist, but if you watch the interview with this solemn, low-key Harvard expert, you are left shaken not only by the gravity of what might face us, but by the willful denial of the potential catastrophe led by Trump.

Trump’s visit to the CDC on Friday was surreal, typical of his deranged preoccupation with and perpetuation of an alternative universe that is grounded in a Fox News fantasy that is aimed at controlling his base, while consolidating power and attempting to steal the 2020 election to assert “unitary executive authority” over the US. His indefatigable propaganda, that conflicts with epidemiological experts in regards to the Coronavirus, will not be modified by any concessions to reality if they detract from his pernicious fantasy world that he has constructed largely with the input of Fox News TV personalities, particularly with the ongoing advice of Sean Hannity.

In the unhinged news conference at the CDC, Trump appeared as if he had slept in his golfing clothes and wore a red campaign cap as he made pronouncements that had more to do with spreading deadly disinformation on the Coronavirus than in limiting its wildfire expansion.

“Anybody that needs a test gets a test…. the tests are all perfect,” Trump said from behind a CDC lab desk. “like the letter was perfect. The transcription was perfect. Right? This was not as perfect as that but pretty good.”

He couldn’t resist trying to again claim that his call to Ukrainian President Zelensky on July 24, 2019, was “perfect,” even though he was impeached over it. But, of course, as with his violation of asking for a foreign power to assist him in the 2020 election, he was equally guilty of promising universal testing when the kits are, as of today, still in extremely short supply. Less than 2000 people in the entire US had been tested as of Thursday.

He boasted the demented falsehood, “People are really surprised I understand this stuff [the Coronavirus]. Every one of these doctors said, ‘How do you know so much about this?’ Maybe I have a natural ability.’”

He managed to squeeze in his usual barb at one of his self-perceived “enemies,” in this case Democratic Washington Governor Jay Inslee whose state is currently at the initial epicenter of the Coronavirus outbreak in the US, and has just declared an emergency in the state. Trump called him a “snake” and a bad man because when Mike “HIV Epidemic and Smoking Doesn’t Cause Cancer” Pence called Inslee to offer federal help, Inslee recounted, “I told him [Pence] our work would be more successful if the Trump administration stuck to science and told the truth.” It was like a dagger through Trump’s vampire heart, striking at the very gaslighting that the DC press has generally faithfully reported. There was so much more of Trump’s vast array of unabashed lying during the “briefing,” but one particular exchange sticks out more than the other dangerous lies, in part because it was the frightening truth. He was asked when the passengers on the stricken Grand Princess, moored off of San Francisco with no one allowed to leave, would be discharged to quarantine on the mainland (only a small percentage have been tested thus far), and Trump said he has been against letting them off because it would hurt “my numbers.”

What did he mean? He was just publicly, as he is wont to do, revealing his con. He didn’t officially include any passengers on the ship who have contracted the Coronavirus as being among Americans who have been infected (the number of whom have the virus is not trustworthy as revealed by the CDC). The infections appear to be vastly under reported because there are, as noted above, not enough test kits to determine, even roughly, how many people are affected, and Trump wants to keep “his numbers” low to reinforce his lie that the Coronavirus is a Democratic “hoax” and “will disappear some day like magic.”

But no reporter followed up on this despicable statement on his part. The Grand Princess, given that the Coronavirus is transmitted at up to 6 feet, is Trump's Voyage of the Damned. He is facilitating infection of passengers by not letting them off the ship, because he doesn't want known US infection numbers to ratchet up. Couldn’t one reporter call him out on how he is indifferent to the passengers confined and destined to be infected?

There was so much more inanity to the briefing filled with lies, bombast, name-calling and even a Trump digression to ask a Fox reporter how his ratings were for a recent town hall appearance. In short, if was vintage unhinged Trump.

However, we are facing a catastrophic pandemic being managed by a mentally incompetent faux president, and lives are on the line-- many lives, as he and his anti-science Sancho Panza, Mike Pence, run havoc through efforts to mitigate the virus’s spread, not to mention handling the devastating economic fallout, the stress on the US public health system, social disruption, the uninsured, and honest recommendations about avoiding the virus.

In short, Trump needs to be restrained in a mental health facility, not to be “governing” the nation. His handling of the Coronavirus is beyond incompetent. He is offering "advice" that will actually accelerate the spread of the virus. If the DC press corps didn't treat his lunacy with such deference, we might see the virus spread at a lower rate (and its exponential spread is just starting), but they are incapable-- for the most part-- of doing anything other than transcribing his lies and false assurances aimed, in large part, at trying to stop the stock market from plunging even further.

Some cable news stations have become more critical of his pronouncements and tweets, and are starting to interview actual medical experts, but, for the most part, the media continues to treat the travesty of the likes of his CDC press briefing as standard practice. They normalize Trump’s pathology.

Don't these "reporters" have families they cherish and now face Coronavirus unchecked by a lunatic? How can they still act as if Trump is suited for office? The virus is closing in on DC-- and it will inevitably start to infect the DC media, members of Congress and staffers, and even likely the White House. That is because unlike Trump’s other enemies, a virus does not care about a person’s status in life. It can’t be stopped by bullying, deceit and power.

Part of the problem, as explained before on BuzzFlash, is that the major media is owned by corporations, who are concerned with profits, who have wealthy people on their boards, and rely on conservative advertisers. The interest of the publishers filters down to reporters to treat Trump as an actual president and not to demand the truth from him. This is what Noam Chomsky famously called the “manufactured consent” guard rails of the media.

This epidemic is going to get worse, far worse, and the infections and deaths are on Trump's hands. He is a toxic contagion of misinformation and a sociopathic, cruel demagogue, who only values creating a spectacle for the media, chaos and grifting. Meanwhile, we will all suffer from his evil.

The media, particularly the DC White House “reporters,” are Trump’s enablers as the Coronavirus will take a larger toll than it would otherwise if Trump’s cons were challenged. Our lives are at risk, and many many reporters still assist Trump by making excuses for, what one news outlet euphemistically called, his “freewheeling style."

What Trump needs is not servile scriveners. He needs a mental health intervention.

The media is largely inured to a mentally impaired impostor presiden and treat him as though he merits his authority.

Let's hope that the 2020 election isn't canceled due to a "national emergency" declared by Trump as the Coronavirus pandemic explodes out of control due to Trump's ineptitude and political cynicism. Our economy may have imploded by then too. Is the media prepared for this, or will they just again report Trump’s rants rather than ferret out the truth as we enter into full-fledged fascism?

That the DC press corps is still normalizing Trump when he is making preposterous claims about his "ability" to contain the virus when he is worsening the pandemic, that he is endangering our lives, is mind boggling. Aren't these journalists supposed to take a deep dive into the truth?

Under Trump, the US has become the epitome of ignorance. We are purveyors, under Trump's macabre "hunches," of a primitive denial of reality.

Trump is frustrated because he can't give the Coronavirus a nickname and mock it. However, the Coronavirus cannot be intimidated by the rantings of a carnival barker con man. Death and disease have an agenda that can't be bullied.

Journalist Nancy LeTourneau, in a March 5 article in the Washington Monthly straight forwardly charges that the “media still won’t address Trump’s unfitness for office”:

The unwillingness of the news media to discuss Trump’s unfitness for office keeps the public from grappling with the fact that his response to this crisis has been a disaster. That will also shield the president from accountability when this particular crisis gets much worse-- which most experts assume is just a matter of time...

Since shortly after Trump was inaugurated, I have been saying that we need to talk about his mental health issues. To anyone who has been paying attention, he has only deteriorated since that time...

It is becoming more clear every day that none of us are safe as long as Donald Trump is president. That is why all of us have to talk about the elephant in the room that the media wants to avoid: this president is not well.

...[Trump] is clearly mentally unbalanced, narcissistic, cruel and preoccupied with his role both as the master entertainer and creator of diversionary spectacle. Add to that his role as a demagogue seeking to become a dictator and his functioning as a mafia don who only values personal loyalty to him over loyalty to the United States, and you have a clear and present danger in the White House.

...Tourneau concludes: “The unwillingness of the news media to discuss Trump’s unfitness for office keeps the public from grappling with the fact that his response to this crisis has been a disaster. That will also shield the president from accountability when this particular crisis gets much worse-- which most experts assume is just a matter of time.”

...Journalism should be a noble calling, but for the most part it functions now as a fluffer for Trump’s ruinous shortfalls.

Some fault lines are starting to show, as some journalists realize the disastrous future that awaits us as a “normalized” Trump leads us over a cliff. It may be too late, and many of the White House reporters are still treating Trump with deference and recording his misinformation as though it were true, but all we can hope for is that the crack in the dam of the corporate press will widen as DC journalists realize that their lives and the lives of their families are on the line too.

UPDATE: Just one extraordinary example of how Trump is endangering US citizens and urging exposure to the virus, and why he must be removed from control of the strategy to manage the pandemic:

TRUMP: “A lot of people will have this [the Coronavirus], and it’s very mild. They will get better very rapidly. They don’t even see a doctor ... So, if we have thousands or hundreds of thousands of people that get better just by, you know, sitting around and even going to work-- some of them go to work, but they get better.” – Fox News interview Wednesday.

Remember, "The White House overruled health officials who wanted to recommend that elderly and physically fragile Americans be advised not to fly on commercial airlines because of the new coronavirus, a federal official told The Associated Press. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention submitted the plan this week as a way of trying to control the virus, but White House officials ordered the air travel recommendation be removed, said the official who had direct knowledge of the plan. Trump administration officials have since suggested certain people should consider not traveling, but they have stopped short of the stronger guidance sought by the CDC."

All along the way, Trump has made every possible wrong decision on how to handle Covid-19. "From the beginning," reported Michael Shear at the NY Times "the Trump administration’s attempts to forestall an outbreak of a virus now spreading rapidly across the globe was marked by a raging internal debate about how far to go in telling Americans the truth. Even as the government’s scientists and leading health experts raised the alarm early and pushed for aggressive action, they faced resistance and doubt at the White House-- especially from the president-- about spooking financial markets and inciting panic. 'It’s going to all work out,' Mr. Trump said as recently as Thursday night. 'Everybody has to be calm. It’s going to work out.' … But from Mr. Trump’s first comments on the virus in January to rambling remarks at the C.D.C. on Friday, health experts say the administration has struggled to strike an effective balance between encouraging calm, providing key information and leading an assertive response. The confused signals from the Trump administration, they say, left Americans unprepared for a public health crisis and delayed their understanding of a virus that has reached at least 28 states, infected more than 300 people and killed at least 17."

Business Insider reported that "Hospitals are bracing for what could be millions of admissions nationwide as the virus spreads." How are American businesses responding?

• Apple is recommending employees at its Silicon Valley headquarters work from home.
• Google is letting its tens of thousands of Bay Area employees work from home.
• Cisco is closing a building at its massive Silicon Valley campus after a worker was exposed to the coronavirus.
• Sequoia Capital, the prestigious VC firm that famously warned startups about the 2008 financial crisis, published a memo urging startup founders to prepare for business disruptions.
• Bank of America is splitting up its Wall Street traders and sending some to Stamford amid concern over coronavirus.
• An employee at investment giant TIAA has contracted coronavirus, and the Manhattan WeWork office where they were working has been closed for cleaning.
• Goldman Sachs switched a 400-person conference at the last minute to an audio-only webcast.
• Morgan Stanley is moving about half of its Wall Street traders to its disaster-recovery site outside NYC.

Yesterday, I suggested looking at Maureen Dowd's NY Times column, Trump's Crazy Fantasy World in regard to his mental illness. Today I want to bring up something else from the same column: "Trump," she wrote, "is continuing his Panglossian handling of the coronavirus. 'The tests are beautiful!' he said as he toured the C.D.C. Friday evening, after a kerfuffle over delays in testing. 'The tests are all perfect, like the letter was perfect, the transcription was perfect,' he added, referring to his communication with the president of Ukraine. 'This is the highest-level test anywhere.' 'I like this stuff, I really get it,' he said, adding that maybe he should have become a scientist, like his uncle the 'super genius,' instead of running for president. Meanwhile, the stock market is still freaking out and financial angst is spreading from boardrooms to kitchen tables. We can vividly see in this crisis how close to the surface Trump’s id is and how easily he cleaves to delusions. He personalizes everything so much that when things go bad, he can only see it as an attack on him by the forces out to get him. He seems psychologically incapable of dealing with a virus that is complex and uncertain. The virus will be in every community and needs truth, honesty and intelligence-- all absent from the unstable Trump, who at his core is a frightened boy and pretender."

What Americans Really Want To Know Is, Who Will Protect Us From Trump

To a normal person, the case for reelection Trump is making-- "I'll protect you"-- is patently absurd. But normal people won't be voting for Donald Trump anyway, even if they did in 2016. Ron Brownstein asserted yesterday that amid all the meandering and asides, the belittling taunts and geysers of grievance in his insane 2 hour CPAC speech, Trump may have synthesized the essence of his reelection strategy in just those three words: "I'll protect you."

With that concise phrase, Trump revealed volumes about his view of the electorate and the coalition that he hopes will carry him to a second term. The comment underscored his determination to convince his followers of a two-stage proposition: First, that they are 'under siege,' as he put it, by an array of forces that he presented as either hostile to their interests or contemptuous of their values, and second, that only he can shield them from those threats.

That dark and martial message shows that Trump continues to prioritize energizing his core supporters-- blue-collar, older, and nonurban whites uneasy about demographic, cultural, and economic change-- even at the price of further alienating voters dismayed or disgusted by his behavior as president. It also shows that, even as an incumbent... [rather than touting] the usual path of presidents seeking reelection... the economic progress since his inauguration-- the message that most Republican strategists believe represents his best opportunity to recapture white-collar suburbanites in particular. But Trump showed far more passion in warning against all the dangers he described as massing against his supporters. The speech demonstrated yet again that he’s more comfortable positioning himself as the lone sentry manning the watch at 'midnight in America' than as the optimist who has delivered 'morning in America,' as Ronald Reagan memorably put it.

This positioning may help explain the reports that Trump has not lobbied too hard to prevent the Republican-controlled Senate from joining the Democratic House in rejecting his emergency declaration to transfer federal funds to his proposed border wall. It’s difficult to imagine a way for him to more dramatically portray himself as the solitary figure standing up for his voters than vetoing a resolution, passed by both chambers, opposing his declaration-- over the border wall, no less. “It actually suits him better to have a presidential veto against even his own party, because it supports this line, ‘You can’t count on the Democrats, you can’t count on even the Republicans, but you can count on me,’” said Robert P. Jones, the CEO of the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), which studies public attitudes primarily on social and cultural issues.

Trump tried to send that message with both the substance and the style of his CPAC speech. He offered a rare example of a president using profanity during public remarks when he insisted that congressional Democrats are using “bullshit” charges against him. For Trump, breaking such rules of presidential decorum offers another opportunity to tell his supporters that he will barrel through any norm, and shatter any convention, to protect them. “When he does that type of thing,” said the longtime Republican strategist John Brabender, “it enhances the type of supporter he is truly talking to.”

This video that played on a loop at CPAC pretty much sums up the GOP messaging for 2020. [Trigger warning: feh!]



Brownstein continued that his CPAC speech was a preview of the 2020 campaign, closely echoing the central arguments of the American far right from Joseph McCarthy to George Wallace to Pat Buchanan [to Sean Hannity, Seb Gorka and Stephen Miller]. And like them, "he portrayed his preponderantly white followers as caught between disdainful elites and dangerous minorities. Trump lambasted 'the failed ruling class' that he claimed has betrayed working Americans with free-trade deals. He described college campuses as biased against conservatives, and he insisted that 'Hollywood discriminates against our people.' And as he has done since his first day as a national candidate, Trump warned darkly of immigrants coming to steal Americans’ jobs or menace them with crime. Amid all these domestic threats coiled a serpentine network of international dangers, from trading competitors such as China targeting U.S. industries to Central American nations encouraging migrant caravans so they could 'give us some very bad people. People with big, long crime records.' The new twist in Trump’s CPAC speech was how directly he tried to connect the Democratic Party with the shadowy forces that he tells his supporters are threatening them. At one point, he declared that there are 'people in Congress right now … that hate our country.' Later, he insisted, 'Democratic lawmakers are now embracing socialism.' Both charges send the underlying message: Trump’s opponents are not only misguided, but also fundamentally un-American."

As he summoned all these dangers, Trump simultaneously portrayed himself as the one force that could block them. As Jones described it, Trump offered himself to his supporters as “a kind of wall,” a resolute barrier against the forces of social and economic change. Perhaps the single most telling moment of the speech came when he offered his pledge to “protect” his supporters: Trump insisted that gun owners are “under siege” from liberals determined to undermine the Second Amendment, before quickly adding, “but I’ll protect you.” That rhetoric echoed his declaration of “I alone can fix it” during his acceptance speech at the 2016 Republican convention. At CPAC, a few moments later, Trump added an exclamation point: “We will defend the American way of life.”

Trump didn’t define “the American way of life” in his speech, but he’s left little doubt that he identifies it with the attributes of his own followers: overwhelmingly white and Christian and mostly living outside major cities. (Trump generated a big round of applause at CPAC with a passing attack on “sanctuary cities.”) “It is really clear in a lot of Trump’s most visceral rhetoric [that] it’s not the whole country he is speaking to,” Jones said. “He is speaking to his base, and he has no intention of speaking to the entire country.

“That is another [presidential] norm that he’s broken: really not ever getting to an inclusive ‘we,’” Jones added. “His ‘we’s’ are always ‘what my base supports.’”

The fervor that Trump stirs among his supporters with such exclusionary rhetoric is palpable at each of his rallies—and was visible again at CPAC last weekend. But the circle he draws around “the American way of life” has never been inclusive enough to attract a majority of the country. Both Election Day exit polls and postelection analysis of state voter files indicate that the groups that feel most excluded from his definition—young people, minorities, college-educated white women—not only gave Democrats larger-than-usual margins last November, but also turned out in unusually high numbers. The veteran Democratic pollster Geoff Garin told me the evidence from 2018 suggests that in 2020, at least 10 million more people might vote than in the 2016 presidential election—most of them from constituencies hostile to Trump.

Trump, and the GOP leadership more broadly, continue to behave as if those newly activated Americans are not also hearing everything Trump does to stoke his core supporters. But last weekend’s speech encapsulated almost everything that people critical of or even ambivalent about Trump dislike about him. Each time Trump breaks a boundary, he hardens the discontent, in particular among many well-educated middle-class voters who are doing fine economically but who view him as unfit for the Oval Office in morals and temperament. “There is a group of voters who voted for Trump holding their nose, who hoped he would be a different person and would be like other presidents-- a figure of decorum and dignity and respect,” Garin said. “And he was anything but [that] … at that speech.” In PRRI polling last fall, 88 percent of African Americans, 75 percent of Hispanics, and 70 percent of white voters with a four-year college degree or more agreed that he has damaged the dignity of the presidency.

Trump’s disjointed, angry, boastful, vulgar, and divisive speech at CPAC was the clearest indication yet that he remains almost entirely uninterested in reaching out to the groups resisting him... Trump last weekend showed clearly that his own instinct is always to reprise the strategy that elected him in 2016: Maximize turnout among his core groups of non-college-educated, evangelical, and rural whites, even if that further inflames the groups most alienated from him.

In that way, Trump’s unstinting promises to “protect” his supporters against a changing America may expose him to greater risk from an electorate that will likely look slightly younger and more diverse in 2020 than it did four years ago. “It is a trade-off without a doubt,” Brabender said. “But it is a calculated risk by a president who feels that the trade-off is worth it. In fairness, it was the same trade-off four years ago, and it paid off. The question is whether you can do the same thing this time, when the electorate is going to change a little bit.” After last weekend, there’s less doubt that Trump is determined to find out.

Democrats are entering this race with a clear advantage. I sure hope they don't blow it with the one front-runner who would be a better foil for Trump than Hillary was: Status Quo Joe. Who warned in 1993 of "predators on our streets" who were "beyond the pale" and said they must be cordoned off from the rest of society because the justice system did not know how to rehabilitate them?" It wasn't Trump. But right now Democratic base voters don't know about the real Joe Biden, just the one Obama picked as a ticket-balancer. There's no doubt that if he's the nominee, his record will be the best way the GOP could ever hope to depress turnout among the Democratic base. Neither Trump nor Biden has any understanding of why this is important to voters:

Midnight Meme Of The Day!

by Noah

Check out those psycho ward eyes. Trump's rambling Saturday speech at CPAC was nothing short of a madman displaying his own two and a half hour mental breakdown for all to see, and, his cult crowd of fellow untreated lunatics cheered him on. That's a man who is never coming back to sanity no matter what drugs they come up with. He's GONE. And, he's taking that flag and the country with him.

Meanwhile, will the stench of Trump ever leave that flag, and what it stands for? No. What Trump did with that flag was every bit the desecration he has committed upon The United States Of America. I'm reminded of the quote Sinclair Lewis quote Howie chose for the DownWithTyranny masthead.

When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross

I also think that if Trump hugs that flag any tighter, he's going to have to pay it $130,000.

Steve Bannon: A Man From Another Time (But Not The Time You Might Think)

-by Valerius

Introduction

Steve Bannon came out of his hole last week at CPAC, and, not unlike as Punxsutawny Phil often does, he predicted a long winter. The difference is, the winter he is predicting is for America, if not, in his mind, for all of western civilization. The end of America a nation. As a concept. As a nation of laws. As one nation, under God, indivisible. And certainly as a land of liberty and justice for all. After these most recent remarks, there can be little doubt of the depth of his convictions to fundamentally change our republic. Moreover, he also makes it clear that if you aren’t with him, you are against him.

First, some background. Over the last almost year, a significant amount of opposition research was conducted on Rep. Dave Brat, who represents the VA-7th district, in support of the candidacy of Eileen Bedell (who’s running again in 2018, by the way-- pay attention to her!). In what is by now a well-known tale, in 2014, Brat defeated then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the Republican primary, bolstered by Tea Party support and the campaign managing of none-other-than Steve Bannon. Many of the themes used by the President in his campaign and now Presidency had their test run, if you will, in Virginia two years prior-- particularly the dangers of “radical Islamic terrorism” (their phrase, not mine, but I will use herein) and immigration. And those themes are working, right according to plan.

Please note, most of this article is to explicate Bannon’s worldview, to try to understand the man whom none of us elected but is clearly now, as Karl Rove was often described, the President's brain. I figured if I’m going to go through all this, I might as well share it in the hopes it might help someone else. Now, back to the present day...

CPAC, 2017

Bannon spent CPAC on familiar themes. To summarize: first, Bannon continued the offensive on the media, saying that the attacks on the press are going to keep coming every day, that the media is a corporatist cabal supporting elites, and that it is therefore the true enemy of the state. This is nothing but a page from Lenin’s playbook, whose attacks on the press began immediately upon coming to power. These attacks accomplish at least three important things:

1- They diminish, by ignoring, an already weakened opposing party by putting a non-political actor as the primary antagonist to the President and his congressional sycophants. The press, while mighty in many ways, has no actual political power;

2- They make even more of the discussion about non-substantive issues, even though those substantive issues continue moving forward-- or continue to be stalled without as much coverage, therefore allowing them fade away; and,

3- They push the administration toward being the most, if not only, trusted source of information, which means they can, do and will feed the public lie after lie after lie without check, and particularly through the President’s Twitter account. If you don’t already, you really should follow it for a few days. It’s pretty special, and, just to put it perspective, in time it will be looked upon alongside Jefferson and Lincoln’s letters, for example.

Current polling data, however, shows a majority of Americans don’t trust such information from the administration and do, in fact, trust the media. In time, however, with the promised constant pushing — and especially if the White House continues on the path it started on this past week by excluding certain members of the media from briefings-- that level of trust, and certainly attention paid can, and almost inevitably will, change. To paraphrase from Joseph Goebbels, a lie repeated a thousand times is still a lie, but it becomes an orthodoxy nonetheless. When you tell the lies, constantly, from the loudest microphone in the world, it will inevitably bolster those who want to believe them and wear out those who don’t.

Second, during his comments, Bannon openly shares one of his goals-- or, “the President’s goals,” as he so quaintly puts it-- and this is, plainly, to destroy almost all the executive agencies, or as he calls it, “the administrative state.” [For the record, a good rule of thumb for this administration is that if an agency is led by a present or retired military officer then it is likely not going to be destroyed.] Bannon shamelessly admits that the horrific appointees to head each executive agency were chosen specifically with the goal of the agencies’ destruction in mind. It’s a kind of slow and tortuous first-degree murder of executive agencies, if you will, planned with malice aforethought. And everything, he intimates, is going according to plan.

As shown in this New York Times article and associated video clip related to Bannon’s comments, and as I have observed from other sources, he is a decent speaker-- calm, rationale sounding, collected-- and he is good at endearing himself to his audience as he hits populist themes that resonate. He almost always follows the same patterns and talking points, which are not unlike this below:

I’m here to tell you, that [depending on the audience, these are interchangeable or can be combined] the press, Islam, the people on the left and/or liberalism as a philosophy are bad. Now, I really don’t have much more to say than that, except a couple show-off type references to a philosopher or historic event that you won’t know but makes you think I’m smarter than you. Lastly, you all in the audience listening are good people, and you are the important foot soldiers who are going to do my bidding to make this happen. Now let’s go out there and destroy things!

Much of the other substance is disjointed as he jumps, freely, from thought to thought, not unlike the President (although not as stupidly), but he always returns to those points.

[I haven’t found any examples of him speaking to anything but a friendly audience, nor do I think I’ve ever seen him take a challenging question. If you have, please share.]

Economic Nationalism

History, both ancient and modern, is an important part of Bannon’s peculiar worldview, and informs his philosophy of “economic nationalism.” As to what that means, he sees protectionist economic policies as important to the nation’s well-being, and that regulations and free trade agreements that he feels limit competitiveness and profit are anathema to our national interest. Therefore, they all must be destroyed. On its face, this is not a foreign concept as shown throughout history, but there is more lurking just below the surface.

Bannon’s attempt to make his brand of nationalism strictly focused on economics and not greater issues of sovereignty such as national security, is a spurious distinction. Calling it “economic” nationalism, however, makes it more palatable for the masses. With threats behind every corner, however, it seems more likely that this version of nationalism will also deal with issues far greater than the economy. Otherwise wouldn’t the administration seek to ban persons from seven Muslim countries-- an executive order of which he was a primary author-- based on arguments for which they may be able to make a more compelling argument that courts are less likely to scrutinize, such as jobs, instead of safety? That, however, has not been the case; his nationalism would seem to be driven by more than economics.

It is as if Bannon, as a voracious reader, has yet to study the Enlightenment. During a 2014 meeting of the Institute for Human Dignity in Rome, where he participated via Skype, he referenced reverentially two legendary battles between Christian and Muslim forces on European soil-- in 732 A.D. in Tours and 1529 A.D. in Vienna. In these battles-- both before the Enlightenment-- the West was triumphant, repelling the invading Muslim armies. He then continues to say that we are, today, in a “war of immense proportions,” and once again, it is against Islam. To be fair, he doesn’t specifically describe today’s conflict as being against all Muslims, only radical Islamic terrorists, but given the historical context in which he places the current conflict, that distinction seems hollow, at best.

It is telling to me that, when speaking of our “forefathers,” I have never heard or seen him refer to our founding fathers. Never Jefferson. Never Washington or Adams or Madison or Monroe or Hamilton or Henry or Franklin or Paine or Otis. It’s always before them, to the time when European nation-states warred with each other. To him, our forefathers were from those battles at Tours and Vienna:

“[T]hey [meaning “our forefathers”] were able to defeat it [meaning Islam], and they we able to bequeath to us a church and a culture that is really the flower of mankind.”

One can almost see Bannon in armor, riding his stallion, raising his sword to King and country while ordering others into battle to be slaughtered. Picture Brat, Conway, Spicer, Spencer and Miller willingly charging into the enemies’ ranks while he remains safely behind.

The greater point, however, is that he doesn’t appear to countenance the Lockean/Jeffersonian ideal that informs the Declaration of Independence and forms the core of what it means to be an American:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed[.]

Instead, it is that Christianity and the west are ”the flower of mankind,” the most beautiful thing in all history, and all those who are not are lesser and have been, and are being, and should be vanquished. This perceived superiority is what drives his ideas of nationalism, not his disingenuous idea of economic protectionism. He does not believe in the idea of the equality of all people encompassed in our founding documents, a goal toward which America has marched, if not haltingly, since its inception.

He believes instead in feudal nation-states which can never be secure, for we are “us,” and they are “them.” The only way to protect from the marauding hordes coming over the horizon is to close the gate and remove or attack anyone suspicious.

In short, he does not hold true American values in his heart, values that propelled this nation to be, in fact, great. Until recently in our history, no matter the disagreements between left and right, all at least paid lip service to the notion of equality and the government’s role in achieving it, as outlined in Jefferson’s Declaration. The argument was about how to achieve that equality. Now, Bannon wants to the make the argument about what is means to be an American at an even more fundamental level, going back to ideas of territory and nationality of the middle ages.

The Political Strategist

As others have pointed out, Steve Bannon is a relative newcomer to politics, particularly as an active participant with the institutions of government, like much of this administration. His prior careers are not unimpressive-- inter alia, U.S. Naval officer, Goldman Sachs, successful enough as a screenwriter and producer that he made a very good living from it-- and it seems clear that he has the intelligence and drive to be successful at whatever he sets his mind to. His newness to the political arts brings with it an energy and excitement about the ideas themselves, an energy that the grizzled and cynical baby boomers who have been on Capitol Hill for too many generations have lost. That, however, is not a virtue in and of itself as he seems to have locked into a particular subset of political ideas without truly challenging them.

Listening to him, he reminds me of a sort of sophomoric political science student that any of us may have known is school. This student had just discovered communism, thinks that it is the best idea ever, never reads another theory or questions the ideas, only allows in things that support the argument, and then wants to tell everyone about it. And that’s what he’s done.

Bannon’s ability to speak convincingly and with charisma, and to do so through others, such as Dave Brat or Donald Trump, is easily and well received for any number of reasons, among them that much of our populace is suffering from a severe downgrade in the ability to both communicate and listen, as exemplified through this stereotype of a fan of the President:



As the President himself said, during the campaign, “We love the poorly educated.”



This moment of candor from the President shows that they are not unaware that those lacking in education respond well to the easily digestible themes of “us v. them,” of “make America great again,” that helped propel him to the Presidency. Cleverly, if not luckily, Bannon has managed to rise to highest levels, much as a result of this strategy, without much questioning.

According to his former screenwriting partner, Julia Jones, Bannon’s interest in politics began in earnest after the events of September 11, 2001, and the event, to her observation, changed him. Even prior to that, she said that he was fascinated with war and that Sun-tzu’s Art of War was his go-to reference.



[A quick aside: the pain that this woman shows in discussing someone she probably was close to is palpable.]

September 11, it would seem, more deeply instilled within Bannon the "us v. them" mentality that shapes Sun-tzu’s writing. Possibly, 9/11 instilled also a kind of post-traumatic and lasting shock, as it (reasonably) has many others, including, I would argue, the President. Perhaps he lost people he knew on 9/11, but in any case it took his fascination with war to a new level.

Furthermore, an outline of a film proposal done by Bannon in 2007, Destroying the Great Satan: The Rise of Islamic Facism [sic] in America, states that despite possible good intentions, the media, Jews, and government agencies were helping to create an environment supportive of jihadists wanting to create an Islamic state in America. He speaks also of the Muslim Brotherhood more specifically, and has propagated conspiracy theories, on his radio show and elsewhere, that there is, when taken in sum total, a global Islamic effort to destroy the West, and that the U.S. government is, even if unknowingly, complicit in that effort.

Over time, it would seem, this “them” has grown from terrorists to perhaps all of Islam then to anyone who, quite simply, doesn’t share his philosophy or fears or paranoia, be they foreign or domestic. Not unlike the aforementioned sophomore poli-sci student, he is 100% sure that he is right. Opportunities to convince him otherwise are limited as, not unlike his boss, he lives in an ivory tower far from the day-to-day realities of most Americans. Not surprisingly, he is reputed to be a stern leader demanding discipline and obedience-- he has no tolerance for dissent, especially at the core, philosophical level.

In any case, Bannon blames the U.S. government for allowing an Islamic state to gain a foothold in America. He attacks that belief with an argument that government agencies are bad for the bottom line, and therefore should disappear. In terms of what that means for domestic politics, if those agencies go, the executive will undoubtedly be weakened as it will not be able to either create or enforce the regulations that gives it its power.

In such a circumstance, Bannon, ever the student of war and history, seeks to make the people’s/populists’ branch-- the House of Representatives-- as the real seat of power, not unlike Hitler’s use of the Reichstag in the early-to-mid 1930s. In such a circumstance, the Speaker of the House would become the most powerful person in American politics.

Furthermore, Bannon comes along with congressional districts gerrymandered to the right to such a degree, thanks, inter alia, to Karl Rove and REDMAP, that a Republican majority may not disappear anytime soon. Democrats may get millions more votes across the nation, but if the districts are shaped in ways that crack or split or pack those votes to make them ineffective, it doesn’t matter.

Exacerbating the problem is that in 33 states, Republicans control both legislative houses, and in 25 of those do so alongside a Republican governor. In most states, the legislative chambers have the primary responsibility for redistricting for both Congressional and their own, state, districts. Unless Democrats can make significant headway at the state level by the time of the next decennial census in 2020, when the bulk of redistricting is done, this could be a long period of Republican majority at both the state and federal levels.

Is there any question as to why Rep. Paul Ryan sits quietly, smiling, whenever he is near the President? He knows his time is coming. The President is just a term-limited stooge.

Who is “Them” and Who is “Us”?

This all then begs the question: who, in his mind, is “us,” and who is “them”? Many arguments have been made, including previously by me on this website, that he is driven by discrimination, but now I am not so sure. Generally speaking, nationalism is most commonly about a "shared cultural heritage," and Bannon doesn’t appear to stray too far from that notion. Discrimination against many others is woven into his work, to be sure, but that may be the unavoidable result of it. Fundamentally, however, it is a hate of Islam that is the true force behind his actions.

If you asked him what the shared cultural heritage is that makes an American, and even if he were to answer 100% completely honestly, I now doubt that race or ethnicity would be an obvious part of his answer. If pressed he might admit to some religious component as he and his spawn (Dave Brat, in particular) often speak of Judeo-Christian values as being what makes us. To them, this delineates the west against the Muslim east.

To him, however, that’s not the main point. The main point is, quite simply, to protect “the flower of mankind.” I don’t think he’d care if some of those fighting to that end didn’t look 100% like the other soldiers around them, as long as they shared those values. But if to actuate this goal people get left behind, kicked out, hurt, or killed, and if they all happen to be of a same subset of our current society, then so be it. The ends, after all, justify the means.

This is why his comment that Breitbart news is “the platform of the alt-right” doesn’t truly sound as if he was saying that he’s a racist. What I now think he meant is that if the alt-right wants to follow along and be his foot soldiers, he’s fine with that. He knows that to win battles, he needs allies, and Breitbart has helped cultivate them, even if they are odious racists. That’s fine with him, as long as they are devoted.

To Bannon, "American," like "Saxon," or "Norman," or “Hun,” or whatever tribe or clan that then evolved into modern nation-states, is something concrete and tangible, and that is what is needed to fight his “war of immense proportions.” It is clear that he has no interest in trying to convince even those who, given a more accessible explanation or argument (as George W. Bush demonstrated in driving this country to war with Iraq), might still follow him. That, after all, might lead to questions and disagreements and dissension in the ranks.

From this fear of dissent his war with the media is born, and it is both real and symbolic. He can’t have the media be a trusted source, or, when it inevitably pokes holes in his argument, people will stop listening. So he is dealing with them directly by cutting them out. The symbolic nature of making the media the enemy is that it gives the true believers an enemy to rally against that they can see and understand for themselves, without having to explain the greater historical context from 723 A.D.

In a similar vein, and in more direct and violent way, the Director of the National Rifle Association is now rallying conservatives against "the left," writ large. This is perhaps even more frightening as it pits neighbor against neighbor and goes even further to raise suspicions and tension to dangerous levels, as demonstrated in Kansas City this past week.

In the end, “us” is a devoted following to country and King; pawns he can move around the board, who will fight and die for the cause, and who will feel it is an honorable death. If this sounds familiar, it is because it is not unlike how suicidal terrorists, kamikaze pilots, and other martyrs through history have been willing to die for the glory of their act.

One final point-- remember, that the “King” isn’t necessarily the President, as he is term limited and Bannon isn’t so stupid as to even attempt to change that. No, his anointed one is the Speaker of the House, who is not subject to term limits. Call me crazy, but I honestly believe he’s thought this through this far ahead; that it’s all part of the plan.

The Fourth Turning

Bannon is also inspired by a book called The Fourth Turning. This book argues that every 80 or so years, i.e. at the turning of the fourth generation after a prior major historical upheaval-- there is another major upheaval in history: 1780 (American Revolution) to 1860 (Civil War) to 1940 (World War II) to now-- 2020.

The merits of the book’s observations and conclusions are of no import for purposes of this article, except insofar of the undisputed influence they have on Bannon. One of the authors of the book recently published an article where he distanced himself from Bannon, and also explicated his and his now-deceased co-author’s conclusions, and further said that their intent was by no means to promote war.

In any case, The Fourth Turning’s examination of more recent history tells Bannon that we are in another period of crisis. Bannon therefore sees himself as a kind of messianic figure, a chivalrous knight, who will guide western church and culture through against a once again resurgent and invading Islam.

While obviously wrong on many levels, what he fails to see is that his resignation to the conflict combined with his fascination with war are in fact making it a self-fulfilling prophesy. Perhaps that is the only option he sees, or wants to see, as he seeks his seat alongside Charles Martel, who won the Battle of Tours in 732, as another savior of all Christendom. As he asked in the 2014 video discussion-- in 500 years from now how will history perceive what we do today?

Conclusions

I would submit that the following must be accepted as a certainty: that Islam-- in his twisted mind, again, to be clear-- as a historical and present enemy of his romanticized idea of Christianity and the west; and Liberalism, as a philosophy that recognizes equality as important, are Steve Bannon’s enemies, as is anyone who marches with them or who benefit from them. Moreover, while his attacks on the administrative state may seem, to some, anyway, to encourage entrepreneurship, that is only as important as far as it furthers the battles against Islam and liberalism. Lastly, we must accept that Bannon is, like others in history pursuing insane ideologies, incapable of compromise or cooperation.

I believe the current environment, or cycles, of outrage and reaction, if you will, is meant to keep people preoccupied, keep them going from outrage to outrage to outrage, always reacting. This, instead of actively trying to work to stop the madness, because let’s be clear-- as the President’s latest string of tweets about former President Obama spying on him shows-- it is madness and meant to distract.

Bannon et al cannot be allowed to continue to control, seemingly exclusively, the agenda or the news cycle. I’m not sure how to do that, but a first step is to stop consuming each outrage and start working on something else that matters. I have to admit, they are good at this game-- even when Trump is losing, he wins as he controls what has been called “mindshare,” but what I might call one’s personal bandwidth. There’s only so much time in the day, after all. The rare time when the administration has been put on the defensive, however, they make mistakes and weaken their alliances.

Lost in all of Bannon’s railing against the elites, as he did extensively in his film Generation Zero, is the irony that he, too, is an elite. Rich. Part of the Wall Street cabal on the one hand, the Hollywood movie-making set on the other. Not just military, but an officer. An author. A holder of multiple degrees from elite universities. He has used this broad background, strong education, and storytelling skills to convince enough of the right people with the right money and the right ignorance that conflict is the right choice. He is an intelligent man who was fascinated by war, as a hobby, and was then hurt by a horrific attack on our nation. He developed his political worldview in a vacuum, like a savant, and he has had the time, money, and opportunity to pursue his ideology like few before him.

In some ways, he is a sort of romantic, viewing the world as only a knight of the realm could. It is as if he refuses to see how the world has changed in the centuries since 1529. He is a man stuck in the past, refusing to acknowledge the advances in society. He wants to close the castle gate, raise the drawbridge, and if you approach: beware, for there are no friends outside the wall.

To be honest, Bannon’s ascent is stunning-- an actual American success story. Politically, before the past presidential campaign, he had run only one other political campaign, in 2014. Personally, he has changed from career to career and not only survived, but thrived, something not many of us could do. His audience until the past few years was tiny, and then exploded.

Through a confluence of both determined work and good (for him) fortune, he has gathered not insignificant allies: wealthy people and families, the border patrol, the NRA, unions, the under- and uneducated, racists and bigots, those convinced that 9/11 means we are at war with all of Islam, those whose lives have actually been-- or feel that America has been-- negatively affected by freer global trade and immigration, businesspersons of all levels and wealth who feel that government regulation is stealing their profits, people who resented a black president and wouldn’t allow another “token” presidency, those who believed we were lucky to survive a socialist as President, young people who hadn’t yet found their way and to whom he gave a home, a restless population still stung by a global recession, to name but a few. An odd coalition to be sure, but it is working.

He reached out internationally, as well, expanding Breitbart to Europe, and making other connections with the nationalist movements of other countries, as evidenced, inter alia, by Marie Le Pen’s visit to New York and Trump Tower shortly after the election. He has connected also with the Vatican’s more traditionalist wing, most of whom have concerns related to the direction of Catholicism under the current Pope, Francis, as he tries to open Catholicism to greater modernity. The list could go on. He has molded this coalition together, and now is propelling it, seemingly inevitably, toward still greater conflict.

Just remember this: Steve Bannon does not hold American values in his heart. He does not believe in equality as a concept or a worthwhile pursuit. He calls himself a Christian-- but does not have compassion. He allies himself with the somehow disaffected-- but not to help them, only to use them as pawns.

While Bannon et al must be defeated, they are not the only problem. We, the people, have been, as well. For too long, we have only observed our systems, not participated in them, or gotten lost in the trappings of modern society. In either case, we have allowed those in and with power and wealth to twist the system to their own selfish ends without consequence. Worse, in some cases, such as the bailouts in 2008, we gave their intransigence both our tacit support and money.

Realizing this puts us in a place, however, to utilize the incredible experience we have as the world’s longest running republican constitutional democracy, coupled with the incredible power of American innovation and technology, to find novel and more effective solutions to the problems that we face. We are smarter than just pointing fingers, better than making excuses, more compassionate than arguing over whose fault it is.

To stop all this, we must re-find and re-commit to a sense of purpose, to an American purpose, to a sense of purpose for government in the 21st century. For too long we have been told that "government is the problem," and we are now living those results. Saying that government is the problem is nothing but destructive, for, as Jefferson said in the Declaration, it is government, with the people's consent, that is the instrument through which equality is achieved. Government is a necessity, and We, the People, need to re-claim the power held in the requirement of our consent.

Change is needed, I think that is something about which we all can agree. It would be better, however, to pursue these changes by embracing the future instead of looking, as Steve Bannon is, to an ancient and violent past. That past is no more relevant to how the world is today than it is related to what it means to be a true American.