Tag: Trump

  • Strong women don’t

    The male Trumps are of course very clued-in and wise about sexual harassment. Like Eric Trump for example:

    In an interview with “CBS This Morning,” the son of GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump seemed to think that women allowed sexual harassment to occur.

    Eric Trump was responding to a comment his father made in a USA Today piece, in which he said that his daughter Ivanka would either find a different career or job if she was harassed in the workplace.

    “I think what he’s saying is, Ivanka is a strong, powerful woman, she wouldn’t allow herself to be objected to it,” the younger Trump said. “And by the way, you should take it up with Human Resources, and I think she would as a strong person, at the same time, I don’t think she would allow herself to be subjected to that. I think that’s a point he was making, and I think he did so well.”

    Yeah. Good point. Strong Trump women don’t take any shit, while the rest of us just sit there limply and let it happen. It’s totally voluntary, sexual harassment is, so if it happens to you, it’s your fault for being so weak and stupid.

    Even the women of Fox aren’t buying it.

    Well she just says that because she’s got blood coming out of her whatever.

    Only Losers get sexually harassed, am I right?

  • “We need a strong leader who will stand up for America”

    Sheriff Joe Arpaio is speaking at a Mike Pence event today.

    Arpaio, a longtime supporter of Trump, spoke on his behalf at the convention.

    “I have spent 55 years in law enforcement,” Arpaio told delegates and attendees. “Fifty-five years, I’ve always regarded my work [and] missions critical, but my most important mission has just begun: to help elect Donald Trump president of the United States. The stakes are high. We need a strong leader who will stand up for America and put the interests of her citizens first.”

    Not including the ones who have the misfortune to be in the Maricopa County prison system, of course. Arpaio doesn’t want A Strong Leader (a fĂźhrer) to put their interests first, or anywhere.

    The New Yorker on Arpaio in 2009:

    The biggest part of the sheriff’s job is running the jails, and Arpaio saw that there was political gold to be spun there. The voters had declined to finance new jail construction, and so, in 1993, Arpaio, vowing that no troublemakers would be released on his watch because of overcrowding, procured a consignment of Army-surplus tents and had them set up, surrounded by barbed wire, in an industrial area in southwest Phoenix. “I put them up next to the dump, the dog pound, the waste-disposal plant,” he told me. Phoenix is an open-air blast furnace for much of the year. Temperatures inside the tents hit a hundred and thirty-five degrees. Still, the tents were a hit with the public, or at least with the conservative majority that voted. Arpaio put up more tents, until Tent City jail held twenty-five hundred inmates, and he stuck a neon “vacancy” sign on a tall guard tower. It was visible for miles.

    His popularity grew. What could he do next? Arpaio ordered small, heavily publicized deprivations. He banned cigarettes from his jails. Skin magazines. Movies. Coffee. Hot lunches. Salt and pepper—Arpaio estimated that he saved taxpayers thirty thousand dollars a year by removing salt and pepper. Meals were cut to two a day, and Arpaio got the cost down, he says, to thirty cents per meal. “It costs more to feed the dogs than it does the inmates,” he told me. Jail, Arpaio likes to say, is not a spa—it’s punishment. He wants inmates whose keenest wish is never to get locked up again. He limits their television, he told me, to the Weather Channel, C-span, and, just to aggravate their hunger, the Food Network. For a while, he showed them Newt Gingrich speeches. “They hated him,” he said cheerfully. Why the Weather Channel, a British reporter once asked. “So these morons will know how hot it’s going to be while they are working on my chain gangs.”

    Arpaio wasn’t kidding about chain gangs. Foreign television reporters couldn’t get enough footage of his inmates shuffling through the desert. New ideas for the humiliation of people in custody—whom the Sheriff calls, with persuasive disgust, “criminals,” although most are actually awaiting trial, not convicted of any crime—kept occurring to him. He put his inmates in black-and-white striped uniforms. The shock value of these retro prisoner outfits was powerful and complex. There was comedy, nostalgia, dehumanization, even a whiff of something annihilationist. He created female chain gangs, “the first in the history of the world,” and, eventually, juvenile chain gangs. The chain gangs’ tasks include burying the indigent at the county cemetery, but mainly they serve as spectacles in Arpaio’s theatre of cruelty. “I put them out there on the main streets,” he told me. “So everybody sees them out there cleaning up trash, and parents say to their kids, ‘Look, that’s where you’re going if you’re not good.’”

    Naturally he likes Trump.

  • Trophies

    Two of Trump’s sons have paid big bucks to slaughter charismatic megafauna in Africa.

    Animal rights activists are revolted by a series of trophy photos that have emerged showing Eric and Donald Trump Jr. posing with a dead elephant, kudu, civet cat and waterbuck while on a big game safari in Zimbabwe last year. In one photo, Donald Jr. proudly holds a dead elephant tail in one hand and a knife in the other.

    “Look at me! I made this animal dead because I have a big gun! Animals are losers, they don’t have guns.”

    The big game safari was organized through a company called Hunting Legends. The Daily Mail reports that there are trophy fees for the deer-like animal they shot, called the Kudu. The Trumps reportedly paid at least $2,795.00 and another $1,997.00 for the Waterbuck they were pictured with, but Don Jr. says on Twitter, “the money from hunting fees preserves animals and habitat.”

    Of course they could always just donate the money to animal habitat preservation and skip the part where they kill the animals.

    Or, even, they could just skip the part where they kill an elephant.

    Updating to add:

    Via Samantha Bee:

  • Has no one told Johnny Walnuts that Donald Trump IS the Republican Party’s official nominee?

    (No, it’s not going to be all Trump all the time from now on. But…clear and present danger, and all that.)

    Jim Wright says what I say – McCain doesn’t get to say Trump doesn’t represent the Republican Party, because he obviously and absolutely does.

    John McCain said this morning Donald Trump does not “represent the views of our Republican Party, its officers, or candidates.”

    Donald Trump doesn’t NOT represent the views of our Republican Party.

    Its Officers.

    Or its CANDIDATES.

    Has no one told Johnny Walnuts that Donald Trump IS the Republican Party’s official nominee for President of the United States and in point of fact DOES represent the Republican Party, its Officers, its members, and all its Candidates (of which he is chief among them)? By DEFINITION.

    You’ll note, McCain STILL endorses Trump for President.

    What I’m saying here, not so subtly, is that John McCain is a sterling example of why down-ticket voting in the coming election is even more important than voting for the President. This raging loony old man and those like him in the Senate and the House are the entire problem. And they know it. THEY KNOW IT. McCain daily rages against Trump’s lunacy but supports him ANYWAY and it doesn’t take any great clairvoyance to extrapolate Senator McCain’s rubber stamp support for President Trump’s mad demands once he’s in office.

    I couldn’t agree more.

  • He comes back with a certain bravado

    Fareed Zakaria called Trump a bullshit artist on CNN this morning.

    Zakaria pointed to the pattern that has emerged in Trump’s efforts to defend or clarify his controversial statements.

    “Every time it is demonstrated that Donald Trump is plainly ignorant about some basic public policy issue, some well-known fact, he comes back with a certain bravado and tries to explain it away with a tweet or a statement,” Zakaria said.

    “Bravado” is a very sweet way of putting it. Psychopathic shamelessness is how I would put it.

    “It’s entertaining,” Zakaria said of Trump’s shtick, “if the guy is trying to sell you a condo or a car. But for the president of the United States, it’s deeply worrying.”

    It was deeply worrying in Bush Junior, and it’s that squared in Trump.

    At the end of the post there’s a note:

    Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims ― 1.6 billion members of an entire religion ― from entering the U.S.

    Yep.

    If you watch the video you will see: Zakaria does call him a bullshit artist.

  • And the government will no longer be the government

    Also they’re coup-plotting.

    “I’m afraid the election’s gonna be rigged, I have to be honest,” Trump told the crowd.

    While Trump has often questioned the integrity of the primary contests in both parties, his newest remarks seemed to begin laying groundwork for him to contest the Nov. 8 election results.

    “Contest” it as in inciting a coup to overturn it. That’s the logic of what he’s saying, whether he realizes it or not.

    It was a line of attack that longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone pushed on a podcast with Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos that was posted online Friday. Stone suggested voter fraud is “widespread” and said if Hillary Clinton wins a state like Florida after polls show Trump in the lead, the election would be “illegitimate.”

    “If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government,” Stone said. He also promised a “bloodbath” if the Democrats attempt to “steal” the election.

    “And the government will no longer be the government.”

    These people are terrifying.

  • Albatross

    John McCain isn’t happy with Trump’s attacks on Khizr and Ghazala Khan.

    Mr McCain, a war veteran and the party’s 2008 presidential nominee, thanked the Khan family for immigrating to America, adding “we’re a better country because of you.”

    “I cannot emphasize enough how deeply I disagree with Mr. Trump’s statement,” Mr McCain said in a statement.

    “I hope Americans understand that the remarks do not represent the views of our Republican Party, its officers, or candidates.”

    Ah  no. Sorry but that claim is dead in the water. You can’t say that when the guy who made the remarks is the Republican candidate for president. You’re stuck with them, because you’re stuck with him.

    Mr Trump took to Twitter on Monday to criticise the Khans for appearing on television, adding that the story was not about Khizr Khan, but rather “radical Islamic terrorism” and the US.

    Mr Trump’s former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski also defended his former boss, saying Captain Khan would still be alive if the billionaire was president “because he would’ve never engaged in a war that didn’t directly benefit this country”.

    He’s yours, Republicans.

  • An aura of crude strength and machismo

    Robert Kagan on Trump back in May:

    We’re supposed to believe that Trump’s support stems from economic stagnation or dislocation. Maybe some of it does. But what Trump offers his followers are not economic remedies—his proposals change daily. What he offers is an attitude, an aura of crude strength and machismo, a boasting disrespect for the niceties of the democratic culture that he claims, and his followers believe, has produced national weakness and incompetence. His incoherent and contradictory utterances have one thing in common: They provoke and play on feelings of resentment and disdain, intermingled with bits of fear, hatred and anger. His public discourse consists of attacking or ridiculing a wide range of “others”—Muslims, Hispanics, women, Chinese, Mexicans, Europeans, Arabs, immigrants, refugees—whom he depicts either as threats or as objects of derision. His program, such as it is, consists chiefly of promises to get tough with foreigners and people of nonwhite complexion. He will deport them, bar them, get them to knuckle under, make them pay up or make them shut up.

    And what is that? That is fascism. An aura of crude strength and machismo, a boasting disrespect for the niceties of democratic culture, playing on feelings of resentment and disdain intermingled with bits of fear, hatred and anger, attacking “others” and threatening them with violence: that is fascism.

    As Alexander Hamilton watched the French Revolution unfold, he feared in America what he saw play out in France—that the unleashing of popular passions would lead not to greater democracy but to the arrival of a tyrant, riding to power on the shoulders of the people.

    This phenomenon has arisen in other democratic and quasi-democratic countries over the past century, and it has generally been called “fascism.” Fascist movements, too, had no coherent ideology, no clear set of prescriptions for what ailed society. “National socialism” was a bundle of contradictions, united chiefly by what, and who, it opposed; fascism in Italy was anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-Marxist, anti-capitalist and anti-clerical. Successful fascism was not about policies but about the strongman, the leader (Il Duce, Der Fuhrer), in whom could be entrusted the fate of the nation. Whatever the problem, he could fix it. Whatever the threat, internal or external, he could vanquish it, and it was unnecessary for him to explain how.

    He wrote that before the Convention, before Trump got up and screamed that he alone can fix it.

  • “That’s a witch that needs to be arrested and put to death”

    Another rung on the fascism ladder:

    An official adviser to the Trump campaign has escalated the attacks on Khizr Khan, the gold star father who was critical of Trump at the Democratic convention, baselessly accusing him of being a “Muslim Brotherhood agent.”

    The adviser, Al Baldasaro, tweeted a link to an article from Shoebat.com, a fringe anti-Islam conspiracy website. The article also suggests (without any evidence) that Humayun Khan, who was awarded a Purple Heart and Bronze, was a jihadist who joined the military to kill Americans.

    The piece, written by Theodore and Walid Shoebat, is less of an article and more of a fever dream of conspiracies strung together.

    Tell us more about Theodore Shoebat.

    In recent days, Theodore Shoebat has also called on the government to execute gay people for sodomy and Hillary Clinton for witchcraft. He also said women who have abortions should be lined up and shot by firing squad.

    SAY WHAT???

    Let’s look at that last link, to a piece at Right Wing Watch.

    Shoebat had particular praise for Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals judge Steven Colloton for issuing a decision in 2014 upholding the constitutionality of the death penalty, which Shoebat again said should be applied to gays … as well as to witches like Hillary Clinton.

    “We need judges who uphold the death penalty for evildoers,” he said. “We need judges who would uphold the death penalty for those, not just murderers, obviously murderers deserve death, I think most people would agree with that. But you also have other people who deserve the death penalty, not necessarily murderers; people who are involved in witchcraft, who promote witchcraft. Witchcraft is very, very dangerous, very demonic and look how much destruction it has caused in the United States. Look at Hillary Clinton. That’s a witch that needs to be arrested and put to death. Most definitely. As the scriptures says, I believe in Leviticus, ‘Thou shall not suffer a witch to live.’”

    “Homosexuals also need to be put to death,” Shoebat continued, “because it is evil, it is demonic and it is against human nature.”

    So to sum up, Baldasaro is an official adviser to the Trump campaign and Baldasaro considers Theodore Shoebat a trustworthy source.

    Down, down, down we go.

  • This monstrous clown

    Historians speak out on Trump.

    [David] McCullough and Ken Burns, the filmmaker and author, have assembled a group of distinguished American historians to speak about the candidacy of Donald J. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, in videos being posted to a Facebook page, Historians on Donald Trump.

    It is a diverse, honored group — including, among others, Robert A. Caro, Ron Chernow, David Levering Lewis, William E. Leuchtenburg, Vicki Lynn Ruiz — that speaks with alarm about Mr. Trump’s candidacy and his place in the march of American history.

    I plan to work my way through that whole page.

    Mr. McCullough, raised in a Republican home and now aligned with no party, said the prospect of a Trump presidency so distressed him that he felt he could not remain publicly detached. “When you think of how far we have come, and at what cost, and with what faith, to just turn it all over to this monstrous clown with a monstrous ego, with no experience, never served his country in any way — it’s just crazy,” he said. “We can’t stand by and let it happen. The Republican Party shouldn’t stand by and let it happen.”

    He goes on to say that he’s an independent and has admired plenty of Republicans and this isn’t a party thing. I second that. If Trump were a Democrat I would loathe him just as much and even more (on account of how I want Dems to be better than that).

    In the 1920s, fear of immigrants fueled the rise of the Ku Klux Klan and exclusionary laws aimed at European Catholics and Asians, said Ms. Ruiz, a professor of history at the University of California, Irvine, and past president of the American Historical Association. Also, about one-third of the Mexican population in this country was pushed out, more than half of them United States citizens by birth, she said.

    “Playing with hate has had tragic consequences throughout our history,” she said.

    And other histories too. It’s never benign. Let’s not do it.

  • He doesn’t think we should be against the NFL

    Trump is going to find that one drawback to being a major party candidate is that news organizations will report that he’s telling whoppers. He told whoppers about how the NFL wrote to him to complain about the debates, which the NFL says it never.

    In an interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, Trump complained that two of the debates are up against NFL games, and claimed that the organization sent him a letter calling the schedule “ridiculous.”

    “Well, I’ll tell you what I don’t like. It’s against two NFL games,” Trump said. “I got a letter from the NFL saying, ‘This is ridiculous. Why are the debates against—’ ‘cause the NFL doesn’t wanna go against the debates. ‘Cause the debates are gonna be pretty massive, from what I understand, OK? And I don’t think we should be against the NFL.”

    But the NFL says Nope. Nope we didn’t. Nope we didn’t write a letter to Trump. Nope.

     

  • He’s not going to go into Ukraine, all right?

    Trump goes on tv, attempts to talk to grownups, fails dismally.

    Donald Trump said Sunday that Russian President Vladimir Putin won’t make a military move into Ukraine — even though Putin already has done just that, seizing the country’s Crimean Peninsula.

    “He’s not going into Ukraine, OK, just so you understand. He’s not going to go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down. You can put it down. You can take it anywhere you want,” Trump said in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on “This Week.”

    “Well, he’s already there, isn’t he?” Stephanopoulos responded, in a reference to Crimea, which Putin took from Ukraine in early 2014.

    At this point I see Basil Fawlty in my mind’s eye, backpedalling furiously. “Oh well he’s there – but – ”

    Trump said: “OK — well, he’s there in a certain way. But I’m not there. You have Obama there. And frankly, that whole part of the world is a mess under Obama with all the strength that you’re talking about and all of the power of NATO and all of this. In the meantime, he’s going away. He takes Crimea.”

    Stephanopoulos interjected to note that Trump has suggested he could recognize Russia’s claim on Crimea over Ukraine’s — and Trump didn’t back away from that possibility in the interview.

    “I’m going to take a look at it,” he said. “But you know, the people of Crimea, from what I’ve heard, would rather be with Russia than where they were. And you have to look at that, also … just so you understand, that was done under Obama’s administration.”

    He has no idea what they’re talking about, does he. It could be Paraguay or Mongolia or Zimbabwe and he wouldn’t know the difference.

    The Clinton campaign responded later Sunday, with senior policy adviser Jake Sullivan saying: “What is he talking about? Russia is already in Ukraine. Does he not know that? What else doesn’t he know?”

    “Today, (Trump) gamely repeated Putin’s argument that Russia was justified in seizing the sovereign territory of another country by force. This is scary stuff,” Sullivan said in a statement. “But it shouldn’t surprise us. This comes on the heels of his tacit invitation to the Russians to invade our NATO allies in Eastern Europe.”

    We’re doomed.

  • Russia, if you’re listening

    The New York Times reports, aghast –

    DORAL, Fla. — Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, essentially encouraging a foreign power’s cyberspying of a secretary of state’s correspondence.

    “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

    Mr. Trump’s call was an extraordinary moment at a time when Russia is being accused of meddling in the U.S. presidential election. His comments came amid questions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers, which researchers have concluded was likely the work of two Russian intelligence agencies.

    Trump seems to think he and Clinton are business rivals, or perhaps contestants on a reality tv show – Top Campaigner maybe? He seems to have forgotten that the object of their rivalry is the presidency, and that presidents (and thus aspirants to the presidency) shouldn’t be encouraging foreign autocrats to spy on our own secretaries of state.

    Or, to put it more bluntly, he seems to be flirting with treason, which isn’t a good look on a major party candidate.

  • You can’t always

    Trump pissed off a lot of musicians.

    Quite a few bands whose music has been used along Donald Trump’s campaign trail have made their unhappiness very public: The O’Jays. The surviving members of Queen. George Harrison‘s estate. Adele. Earth, Wind & Fire. REM’s Michael Stipe. The Turtles. Aerosmith’s Steven Tyler (though he said his objection was financial, not ideological). Neil Young (though he, like Tyler, eventually said he was concerned about money and permission). And perhaps most famously now, The Rolling Stones — more on them later.

    Legally, however, the GOP and the Trump campaign can use all those songs, as Melinda Newman (a former colleague of mine at Billboard) explained in Forbes this week, as long as the rights holders are paid: “The sad truth is for many artists, they can not keep their songs from being used in this context even if they vehemently disagree with the politician who is using the song.”

    They can keep their music out of paid political advertising, but this is not that.

    As the balloons and confetti (eventually) began to rain down last night at the Quicken Loans arena, however, rock ‘n’ roll had the last word on Trump — or maybe exactly the inverse happened. The evening’s last musical selection was the Rolling Stones’ “You Can’t Always Get What You Want.” Commenters on Twitter last night made hay of the seeming disconnects in meaning between the song and the convention’s spectacle of unity. But Trump has long used that tune in particular as one of his campaign’s anthems, despite the band’s fury and a request the band sent to the GOP candidate’s team earlier this year to stop using it.

    No one from the Trump campaign has explained exactly why “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” has become such a staple selection at his events — at one rally in Carmel, Ind. back in May, for example, the song was played at least four times at that single campaign stop.

    He’s probably taunting us. We want a world where Trump is just a loud, vulgar real-estate profiteer. We’re Losers, and he’s taunting us.

  • Trump circled her photo and scrawled “The Face of a Dog!”

    James Hamblin at the Atlantic has more details about Trump the man. I figure everybody should keep recycling them non-stop so that nobody will forget them.

    Hamblin focuses on the question whether Trump is really a psychopath, and says let’s talk about NPD instead.

    One psychologist, Ben Michaelis, called Trump “textbook Narcissistic Personality Disorder.” Psychologist George Simon called Trump “so classic that I’m archiving video clips of him to use in workshops because there’s no better example of his characteristics.”

    Then he says no actually let’s talk about Antisocial Personality Disorder.

    According to the DSM, Antisocial Personality Disorder should be diagnosed in a person who meets two criteria about the way they function in the world, and criteria about their personal traits. In the realm of the latter, the person must also demonstrate two other traits: antagonism and disinhibition.

    That certainly fits Trump well, doesn’t it. That is in fact why he’s such a terrifying candidate.

    As one recent example, Fox News debate moderator Megyn Kelly said that she “may have overestimated his anger management skills” when, in response to perceived unfair questioning, Trump called her a “bimbo” with “blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.”

    In a much more prolonged example, writer McKay Coppins wrote a profile of Trump in which he called Mar-a-Lago a “nice, if slightly dated, hotel,” and incurred years of backlash. “He had tweeted about me frequently in the weeks following its publication—often at odd hours, sometimes multiple times a day—denouncing me as a “dishonest slob” and “true garbage with no credibility,” Coppins recalls. “For two years, Trump continued to rant about how I’m a scumbag, or a loser, or ‘just another phony guy.’”

    And that is what a lot of people want to see in the White House – a schoolyard bully writ large.

    Then there’s lying, callousness, impulsivity, irresponsibility – all terrible qualities for a president, surely. He aces them all, according to Hamblin.

    The other domain of Antisocial Personality Disorder is personality functioning, which involves two criteria. First, either one of the following:

    Identity: Ego-centrism; self-esteem derived from personal gain, power, or pleasure.

    Self-direction: Goal-setting based on personal gratification; absence of prosocial internal standards associated with failure to conform to lawful or culturally normative ethical behavior.

    Trump is rather candid about these points. He is rich and powerful, and his business endeavors are primarily undertaken to achieve that end. “I don’t lose! I’ve never been a loser. I like to win!”

    And that’s how he sees the world – as winners and losers, with the winners deserving all the spoils and the losers deserving poverty, contempt, and banishment.

    Then there’s dominance.

    Using dominance or intimidation to control others, though, shows up time and again in Trump’s history. He has done this particularly to journalists, and entire newspapers and magazines. In one incident, he sent The New York Times’ Gail Collins a copy of her column, having circled her photo and scrawled “The Face of a Dog!”

    That should be all anyone needs to know about him. Socially he’s another Milo Yiannopoulos, and he shouldn’t be allowed within a thousand miles of any political office.

  • The classic technology of the demagogue

    Evan Osnos at the New Yorker says the scary thing about the Republican convention is that the Republican party seems to have fallen into line behind this terrible terrible man.

    Four years after the previous Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, told delegates that “we are a nation of immigrants,” Trump connected killings of police officers, misperceptions of immigration levels, and distorted anecdotes about crime in order to employ the classic technology of the demagogue: he created a grave national threat that only he can solve. His opponent, he said, promises “mass amnesty, mass immigration, and mass lawlessness. Her plan will overwhelm your schools, your hospitals.”

    For moderate Republicans, the Convention cemented a bewildering transformation at the top of their Party. There was no clamorous showdown, as some had predicted. The Party slid gently into a new incarnation.

    We’re doomed.

  • As all would-be authoritarians do

    People with more determination to look straight at unpleasant things than I have watched Trump’s acceptance speech last night, and reported that it was pure fascism, which by that time surprised no one.

    The Times says about it:

    In the most consequential speech of his life, delivered 401 days into his improbable run for the White House, Mr. Trump sounded much like the unreflective man who had started it with an escalator ride in the lobby of Trump Tower: He conjured up chaos and promised overnight solutions.

    To an electorate that remains anxious about his demeanor, his honesty and his character, Mr. Trump offered no acknowledgment, no rebuttal, no explanation.

    His demeanor, his honesty, his character and his politics. Let’s not leave that part out, Times. He has a form of politics, and we remain “anxious” about it, which is the understatement of the decade. He has the politics of conjuring up chaos and promising overnight solutions – the politics of racism and hatred and fear, the politics of macho contempt for women and macho love of violent rhetoric.

    Inside the Quicken Loans Arena, a thicket of American flags behind him, he portrayed himself, over and over, as an almost messianic figure prepared to rescue the country from the ills of urban crime, illegal immigration and global terrorism.

    “I alone,” he said, “can fix it.”

    The “Quicken Loans Arena” is a nice touch. Profit is everything, human needs are for losers.

    “I alone,” he said, “can fix it.”

    But Mr. Trump made no real case for his qualifications to lead the world’s largest economy and strongest military. He is, he said, a very successful man who knows how to make it all better.

    Why would that be, exactly? Why would knowing how to gouge out staggering amounts of money from building super-expensive real estate mean he knows how to “fix” the things he identifies as problems or any other national problems? Bernie Madoff built himself a huge fortune too, until the Ponzi scheme collapsed; so what?

    The rest of the Times piece is just the same stupid shit Adam Gopnik excoriated in the New Yorker: analysis of what bad campaign strategy it was.

    John Cassidy at the New Yorker is not so interested in giving helpful advice to Trump on how to campaign better:

    As all would-be authoritarians do, Trump sought to portray himself as the defender of the little guy. “I have visited the laid-off factory workers and the communities crushed by our horrible and unfair trade deals,” he said. “These are people who work hard but no longer have a voice. I am your voice.” And again, toward the end, he used the same phrase after a riff on Clinton’s “I’m with her” slogan. “My pledge reads, ‘I’m with you, the American people. I am your voice,’ ” he said.

    Right. The billionaire builder of expensive Manhattan towers is the voice of the working class. You bet.

    I was standing next to the delegations from New York and Florida, both of which were Trump strongholds during the Republican primaries. The portions of the speech that received the loudest cheers were the most nativist and controversial bits. When he said, “We don’t want them in our country,” referring to people from Muslim nations with histories of terrorism problems, whom he would bar from the United States, he got perhaps the loudest cheer of the night. And when he said, “We are going to be considerate and compassionate to everyone, but my greatest compassion will be for our own struggling citizens,” the chants of “U.S.A.! U.S.A.!” were so vigorous that he joined in and gave the chanters a quick thumbs-up.

    White people! White people!

    Ultimately, Trump’s motivation doesn’t matter very much. The platform that he is running on is divisive and dangerous, and, despite the consensus in the media and political worlds that he is destined to be defeated, it still isn’t entirely clear that his strategy won’t work. After Trump had finished, I asked Congressman John Mica, who represents a district just north of Orlando, and who was standing with the Florida delegation, what he thought of the speech. “He ticked all the boxes,” Mica replied. “I thought he was great.” But weren’t Trump’s words perhaps too dark to appeal to the country at large? Mica thought not. “The emphasis on safety and security,” he said. “I think that is a message that will resonate.”

    And if it does we’ll all be in deep deep shit.

  • What all forms of fascism have in common

    Adam Gopnik pointed out a week ago how shockingly normalized Trump is being, by Republicans and by the media.

    What is genuinely alarming is the urge, however human it may be, to normalize the abnormal by turning toward emotions and attitudes that are familiar. To their great credit, the editors of most of the leading conservative publications in America have recognized Trump for what he is, and have opposed his rise to power. Yet the habit of hatred is so ingrained in their psyches that even those who recognize at some level that Trump is a horror, when given the dangling bait of another chance to hate Hillary still leap at it, insisting on her “criminality” at the very moment when it’s officially rejected, and attempting to equate this normal politician with an abnormal threat to political life itself. They do this, in part, to placate their readership. In the so-called mainstream (call it liberal) media, meanwhile, the election is treated with blithe inconsequence, as another occasion for strategy-weighing. The Times, to take one example, ran a front-page analysis criticizing Trump for being insufficiently able to exploit a political opening given by the investigation into Clinton’s e-mail, with the complaint seeming to be that Trump just isn’t clever enough to give us a good fight—to be the fun opponent we want. If only he had some more skill at this! While the habits of hatred get the better of the right, the habits of self-approval through the fiction of being above it all contaminate the center.

    Not to mention the center (and the media) passion for the political contest, as if it were another episode of MasterChef.

    As I have written before, to call him a fascist of some variety is simply to use a historical label that fits. The arguments about whether he meets every point in some static fascism matrix show a misunderstanding of what that ideology involves. It is the essence of fascism to have no single fixed form—an attenuated form of nationalism in its basic nature, it naturally takes on the colors and practices of each nation it infects. In Italy, it is bombastic and neoclassical in form; in Spain, Catholic and religious; in Germany, violent and romantic. It took forms still crazier and more feverishly sinister, if one can imagine, in Romania, whereas under Oswald Mosley, in England, its manner was predictably paternalistic and aristocratic. It is no surprise that the American face of fascism would take on the forms of celebrity television and the casino greeter’s come-on, since that is as much our symbolic scene as nostalgic re-creations of Roman splendors once were Italy’s.

    What all forms of fascism have in common is the glorification of the nation, and the exaggeration of its humiliations, with violence promised to its enemies, at home and abroad; the worship of power wherever it appears and whoever holds it; contempt for the rule of law and for reason; unashamed employment of repeated lies as a rhetorical strategy; and a promise of vengeance for those who feel themselves disempowered by history. It promises to turn back time and take no prisoners. That it can appeal to those who do not understand its consequences is doubtless true. But the first job of those who do understand is to state what those consequences invariably are. Those who think that the underlying institutions of American government are immunized against it fail to understand history. In every historical situation where a leader of Trump’s kind comes to power, normal safeguards collapse. Ours are older and therefore stronger? Watching the rapid collapse of the Republican Party is not an encouraging rehearsal. Donald Trump has a chance to seize power.

    He’s succeeded this far – why should we think he won’t continue?

  • He’s a living black hole

    The guy who ghost-wrote Trump’s The Art of the Deal is regretting having done so. He regrets having helped shape the Trump image that has brought him so terrifyingly far.

    But the prospect of President Trump terrified him. It wasn’t because of Trump’s ideology—Schwartz doubted that he had one. The problem was Trump’s personality, which he considered pathologically impulsive and self-centered.

    Schwartz thought about publishing an article describing his reservations about Trump, but he hesitated, knowing that, since he’d cashed in on the flattering “Art of the Deal,” his credibility and his motives would be seen as suspect. Yet watching the campaign was excruciating. Schwartz decided that if he kept mum and Trump was elected he’d never forgive himself. In June, he agreed to break his silence and give his first candid interview about the Trump he got to know while acting as his Boswell.

    “I put lipstick on a pig,” he said. “I feel a deep sense of remorse that I contributed to presenting Trump in a way that brought him wider attention and made him more appealing than he is.” He went on, “I genuinely believe that if Trump wins and gets the nuclear codes there is an excellent possibility it will lead to the end of civilization.”

    If he were writing “The Art of the Deal” today, Schwartz said, it would be a very different book with a very different title. Asked what he would call it, he answered, “The Sociopath.”

    So, that’s cheerful.

    He had qualms about doing the book, but he needed money.

    The book turned out to be harder to write than he expected, because Trump has a tiny tiny tiny

    attention span. He couldn’t talk about his childhood at any length because he got bored and twitchy.

    Week after week, the pattern repeated itself. Schwartz tried to limit the sessions to smaller increments of time, but Trump’s contributions remained oddly truncated and superficial.

    “Trump has been written about a thousand ways from Sunday, but this fundamental aspect of who he is doesn’t seem to be fully understood,” Schwartz told me. “It’s implicit in a lot of what people write, but it’s never explicit—or, at least, I haven’t seen it. And that is that it’s impossible to keep him focussed on any topic, other than his own self-aggrandizement, for more than a few minutes, and even then . . . ” Schwartz trailed off, shaking his head in amazement. He regards Trump’s inability to concentrate as alarming in a Presidential candidate. “If he had to be briefed on a crisis in the Situation Room, it’s impossible to imagine him paying attention over a long period of time,” he said.

    Oh well. It’s only the planet.

    This year, Schwartz has heard some argue that there must be a more thoughtful and nuanced version of Donald Trump that he is keeping in reserve for after the campaign. “There isn’t,” Schwartz insists. “There is no private Trump.” This is not a matter of hindsight. While working on “The Art of the Deal,” Schwartz kept a journal in which he expressed his amazement at Trump’s personality, writing that Trump seemed driven entirely by a need for public attention. “All he is is ‘stomp, stomp, stomp’—recognition from outside, bigger, more, a whole series of things that go nowhere in particular,” he observed, on October 21, 1986.

    Then there’s a section about how much Trump lies, and how cheerful he is about it – which makes him a psychopath.

    In his journal, Schwartz wrote, “Trump stands for many of the things I abhor: his willingness to run over people, the gaudy, tacky, gigantic obsessions, the absolute lack of interest in anything beyond power and money.” Looking back at the text now, Schwartz says, “I created a character far more winning than Trump actually is.” The first line of the book is an example. “I don’t do it for the money,” Trump declares. “I’ve got enough, much more than I’ll ever need. I do it to do it. Deals are my art form. Other people paint beautifully on canvas or write wonderful poetry. I like making deals, preferably big deals. That’s how I get my kicks.” Schwartz now laughs at this depiction of Trump as a devoted artisan. “Of coursehe’s in it for the money,” he said. “One of the most deep and basic needs he has is to prove that ‘I’m richer than you.’ ” As for the idea that making deals is a form of poetry, Schwartz says, “He was incapable of saying something like that—it wouldn’t even be in his vocabulary.” He saw Trump as driven not by a pure love of dealmaking but by an insatiable hunger for “money, praise, and celebrity.” Often, after spending the day with Trump, and watching him pile one hugely expensive project atop the next, like a circus performer spinning plates, Schwartz would go home and tell his wife, “He’s a living black hole!”

    No doubt the presidency thing is more of the same. I’ve never thought it was anything else.

    Schwartz told me that Trump’s need for attention is “completely compulsive,” and that his bid for the Presidency is part of a continuum. “He’s managed to keep increasing the dose for forty years,” Schwartz said. After he’d spent decades as a tabloid titan, “the only thing left was running for President. If he could run for emperor of the world, he would.”

    That’s what I mean.

    Schwartz told me that he has decided to pledge all royalties from sales of “The Art of the Deal” in 2016 to pointedly chosen charities: the National Immigration Law Center, Human Rights Watch, the Center for the Victims of Torture, the National Immigration Forum, and the Tahirih Justice Center. He doesn’t feel that the gesture absolves him. “I’ll carry this until the end of my life,” he said. “There’s no righting it. But I like the idea that, the more copies that ‘The Art of the Deal’ sells, the more money I can donate to the people whose rights Trump seeks to abridge.”

    Be careful what you ghost-write.

     

  • Quite extraordinary that he would be asking foreign nationals for money

    Natalie McGarry MP replies to a request for money from a son of Donald Trump.

    https://twitter.com/NatalieMcgarry/status/745790016891289602