reflectivepundit

Trump’s Claim to Be an Absolute Ruler: “I am the Chief Law Enforcement Officer”

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Incredibly, this morning’s most prominent headline in the New York Times (as in other leading newspapers) did not highlight the most shocking and troubling statement the 45^th U.S. president made the previous evening. “I am the chief law enforcement officer,” Donald Trump said shortly after issuing pardons and commutations of sentences to an unruly bunch of corrupt individuals—without the “normal” role of the Justice Department. 

Probably without knowing that France’s Louis XIV coined the dubious justification of absolute monarchy with the exclamation “l’etat c’est moi” (“I am the state”), Donald Trump told us basically that only he determines what the law is, who will or will not be charged, tried, found guilty, and serve a sentence.

Last night, President Trump himself confirmed what has been evident for a while: With the help of Attorney-General William Barr as his most faithful protector and the Republican Senate majority and the rest of the GOP as enthusiastic cheerleaders rather than the constitutional check of an out of control executive, Donald Trump is now no longer the president in a system that was designed by our Founding Fathers.

Even before reelection and a second term Trump is bold enough to do away with the appearance of following the U.S. Constitution, the rule of law—not men and the well- established rules of the game.

In reality, in his ascent to dictatorial rule President Trump resembles now the strongman he admires most, Vladimir Putin of Russia.

The most troubling aspect is the absence of any protests from Washington or elsewhere in the country. Aside from the superficial comments by the talking heads in evening and morning shows and their never changing line-up of so-called expert guests, there were no outcries from leading Republicans or Democrats.

And there were no spontaneous protests by regular citizens in defense of their democracy. Instead, it was a day like any other day--for Trump’s supporters and for his opponents.

Add to this an uptick in Trump’s approval ratings of late and the increasingly bloody and completely counterproductive infights between the men and women competing for the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party as the stuff that emboldens this president even further.

Sometimes democracy dies in darkness. This time, our democracy spirals downward in bright daylight. 

Until is too late?

The GOP Crowned the First American King

By Brigitte L. Nacos

 “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark!” Nothing characterizes today’s state of affairs in our country better than this sentence from Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” that came to mean more generally that things are wrong, troubling, threatening.

If there were any doubts that the liberal democracy that the Founders designed and codified in the U.S. Constitution was trampled by the 45^th U.S. president and the Republican Party in the first three years of his term, such calms were squashed during the impeachment procedures against Donald J. Trump in the U.S. Senate.

What unfolded in the upper chamber of Congress this week was as shameful as it can get in a democracy: In concert with the White House, Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell staged a show trial as practiced in totalitarian settings. Witnesses were not allowed to testify, documents not subpoenaed.

In spite of massive evidence in support of the two impeachment articles presented by House managers GOP senators broke their oath of impartiality and sided with their “Great Leader” and his wacky crew of defense attorneys.

Before the ultimate “not guilty” verdict was in, the outcome was clear. Even those GOP Senators who believed that Trump was guilty of “Abuse of Power” and “Obstruction of Congress” supported acquittal.    

The party of Trump—once known as the Republican Grand Old Party—completely accepted and excused this president’s (1) well-documented efforts to bribe the president of Ukraine to smear a potential political opponent in the upcoming presidential campaign by withholding congress-approved military aid urgently needed to fight Russian invaders; and (2) his refusal to allow White House officials testify in the impeachment procedures in the House and provide relevant administration documents to House committees.

In short, Mitch McConnell and GOP senators crowned the first American King, the monarch that the Founding Father’s wanted to abolish forever through a system of checks and balances and shared powers.

Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his respect and admiration for the most authoritarian leaders of our time, from Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Turkey’s Tayyip Erdogan, China’s Xi Jinping to North Korea’s Kim Jong Um, Egypt’s Abdel Fattah el-Sissi, and others. He loves these men because they are “strong” and wield their power widely.  Now he has increased his own power.

Even before the final roll call next week, President Trump knows that there will be not be congressional checks on any misuse of power  nor on obstruction of congressional oversight as long as the GOP has the majority in the Senate.

With a toothless majority in Congresses upper chamber, and Attorney-General at the President’s service, two Trump appointed members on the Supreme Court, and intimidated civil servants fearful to stick to fact and truth, American democracy as envisioned by the Framers and we know from the past is rotten.

No, we do not have an authoritarian system yet, but we are moving towards what Hungary’s Viktor Orban and other European populists call blatantly “illiberal democracy.” It is not difficult to imagine what would happen in a second Trump term.

The elections on November 3 can stop this downward slide!

Why did Trump order the Assassination of the Iranian General? The President’s Twitter Archive provides the Best Answer

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Since 2011, Donald Trump mentioned Iran 380 times in tweets that revealed his obsession with and hostility towards the Islamic Republic. In many of these Twitter messages he attacked President Obama for not being tough enough.

But in the most revealing tweets are the following:

Nov.  14, 2011: @BarackObama will attack Iran in the not too distant future because it will help him to win the election.

Nov. 29, 2011: In order to get elected @BarackObama will start a war with Iran.

April 4, 2012: Remember what I said about @BarackObama attacking Iran before the election...

Oct. 22, 2013: Don’t let Obama play the Iran card in order to start a war in order to get elected—be aware Republicans!

As we know, President Obama did not attack Iran to trigger a rally-‘round-the-flag effect in support of his reelection chances as Trump predicted wrongly.

However, according to the Pentagon, it was Trump who ordered the deadly drone strikes that killed Qassim Soleimani, the Iranian general in charge of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard’s Quds Force. While not shedding tears over Soleimani’s demise, one wonders about the overall strategic concept behind the assassination. While an all-out war is unlikely, Iran will strike back sometime, somewhere.  And the explosive Middle East will become even more dangerous and destabilized.

But that obviously does not concern Trump.

Replace “@BarackObama” and “Obama” with @realDonaldTrump in the four tweets above and you get a good idea why the Commander-in-Chief gave the green light for the assassination of the Iranian general on the territory of the sovereign state of Iraq.  

The President obviously believes that the conflict with Iran will raise his public approval and help his reelection along with his fight against the impeachment process.

So far, so good, for Trump: The breaking news now is all about the U.S.-Iran conflict—not about impeachment and likely Democrats running against the president in the general election campaign.  

Trump’s Virus of Alternative Facts Spreads at Home and Abroad

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Drawing on his experience as Hitler’s propagandist-in-chief Joseph Goebbels revealed, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” What once was the centerpiece of Nazi propaganda has become commonplace in contemporary America. The virus of alternative facts—in common language: lies propagated as truth--has spread from Donald Trump’s campaign and White House to his supporting cast in the administration, in Congress, and throughout the onetime Great Old Party.

Whether in his tweets, staged press encounters, or mass rallies the president himself tells and repeats again and again the same alternative facts. Just as important for these lies to spread is that

(1) the right-wing media report Trump’s whopper lies with excitement and breaking news prominence as true revelations; and

(2) the mainstream media, although day-in and day-out attacked by Trump, cover the President’s tweet output constantly and thereby, unwittingly, magnify them.  

Today, the wide gap between alternative fact and actual fact, between truth and lie, has increased the ideological and partisan polarization. Roughly half of the American public believes whatever alternative facts the President and his enablers in politics, FOX News, and others in his media propaganda arm say or write, while the other half of the nation form their views based on demonstrable facts.

Take this example: After the President met yesterday with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in the Oval Office (ironically, the same day congressional Democrats publicized the text of the two impeachment articles!), U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that President Trump had “warned against any Russian attempts to interfere in United States elections.” Lavrov, however, told the press during a news conference in the Russian Embassy that he and Trump did not discuss elections at all.

Sad but true, the Russian’s version is credible, Pompeo’s is not. After all, President Trump has all along denied any Russian interference in the 2016 election—why, then, would he warn of any interference by Moscow in next year’s presidential race?

The virus of alternative facts has not merely dire consequences at home but also abroad. Trump’s constant attacks on ”fake news” and “fake media”—a  reprise of the term “Luegenpresse” (lying press) used by Nazi leaders in their assaults on not yet completely controlled news organizations—have become part of the propaganda schemes of  leaders around the world, including those in  Russia, China, Turkey, Venezuela, and Israel.

Most disconcertingly, even when followers recognize fully that their leader is a chronic liar they may not withdraw their support. Indeed, the other day, a voter in the United Kingdom revealed “she was voting for Mr. [Boris] Johnson precisely because he is a proven liar. It shows, she said, that he is ‘human’.”

Preferring serial liars as leaders! That’s the very sad state of affairs here, in the UK, and elsewhere.

ISIS and the Terrorist Threat after the Death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Kudos to the our country’s intelligence community, our Special and Conventional Forces, and the Syrian Kurds for locating and taking out ISIS’s founder and spiritual leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in a daring raid. After the earlier demise of the physical “caliphate” this weekend’s death of Baghdadi is a welcome victory for the United States and all other targets of the ruthless and cult-like doctrine of the Islamic State and its fanatic jihadists.

It was hardly surprising that Donald Trump during his rhetorical victory lap resorted to superlatives as he compared the end of al-Baghdadi to the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden during Barack Obama’s presidency. During his Q & A session with the press President Trump boasted in the style that dominates his political rallies, “This is the biggest one perhaps that we’ve ever captured...This is the biggest there is. This is the worst ever. Osama bin Laden was big, but Osama bin Laden became big with the World Trade Center. This is a man who built a whole, as he would like to call it, a country." Trump tried to bolster his own achievement and minimize that of his predecessor by characterizing al-Baghdadi as bigger than bin Laden; he also diminished and dehumanized the ISIS leader as dying “like a coward” and “like a dog.”

Trumpian lingo, not the tone normal presidents used in similar situations!

By declaring that “the world is a much safer place,” the president raised a very important question, namely, whether the death of the leader of a dangerous terrorist organization will likely weaken that group or even signals the beginning of its end.

Unfortunately, the answer is a clear NO. Remember that al-Qaeda did not go away after bin Laden’s violent death but gained in strength in various regions of the world—including Syria. And ISIS, an off-shoot of Al Qaeda in Iraq, became a deadly factor after bin Laden was gone.

As President Trump allowed, indeed encouraged Turkish President Erdogan’s troops to force Syrian Kurds, our staunchest allies in the fight against ISIS, out of their homeland as U.S. forces left the area hastily, the many thousands of ISIS fighters in hiding and a growing threat of their brethren escaping from prisons guarded by Syrian Kurds are major factors in ISIS’s likely revival. Moreover, even after the caliphate was defeated, ISIS expanded elsewhere, including in Afghanistan and several African regions.

In his statement and exchanges with the press yesterday Mr. Trump’s first and most profoundly thanked Russia (and his idol Putin), Turkey (and his strongman friend Erdogan), and Syria (and human rights violator supreme Assad) for their assistance. Those parties merely allowed the U.S. military to fly over their controlled parts of Syria. Although the Kurds were crucial in providing human intelligence to pinpoint al-Baghdadi’s hiding place, the President minimized their role. And he once again attacked our Western allies, democracies, for their lack of cooperation.

America’s posture in the fight against ISIS, al-Qaeda and their many affiliates relied for years on relative small footprints of the American military and major fighting roles for local allied forces.

But Trump's betrayal of the Syrian Kurds does not bode well for present and future alliances of this kind nor for America's crucial alliances in Europe and Asia.