reflectivepundit

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.

The Mainstream Media and Trump’s Second Presidential Campaign

By Brigitte L. Nacos

In 2015, during the pre-primary season, Donald Trump laid the groundwork for his domination of the mainstream media’s news coverage that continued through his nomination as GOP presidential candidate. Research by communication scholars documented not only Trump’s complete dominance of the news but also the fact that he received more positive coverage than his GOP rivals. Now, four years later, the President repeats his news dominance by blasting crazy, inconsistent, and contradictory statements via Twitter or “informal” encounters with the White House press. What Trump and a compliant mainstream media managed then seems to be repeated now: Then, Trump’s GOP rivals received little media attention; now Democrats competing for their party’s nomination receive little prominent coverage in comparison to the president.

I just took a look at the online headers signaling lead stories in the New York Times and Washington Post. Of the 7 top news headlines of the Times, not counting the opinion pieces, three mentioned “Trump,” one had “White House” in the header. On the Post site, above the opinion pieces, 13 of 20 headlines mentioned “Trump.” In both cases one or more additional   headers signaled Trump administration policies without mentioning the president’s name.

Of course, these headers change constantly. But what does not change is the dominance of stories that Trump triggers with his constant flow of statements. Indeed, certain of these items get often special attention as breaking news—such as the banner on top of the Washington Post site that earlier today advertised that Trump, again, changed his mind about lowering payroll taxes.

Surfing early afternoon today for half an hour or so through the all-news cable channels except for Trump’s favorite FOX News I found that the hosts at CNN, MSNBC and even CNBC were talking about Trump all the time--often with visuals of the president in the background and Trump-related news items on the crawl bar.

At minimum Trump sets the news agenda day-in and day-out by an endless flow of outrageous statements that are most of the time not at all related to the reality of governing. His expressed positions are reported as lead stories as are the complete reversals that come often within hours or days.

The news organizations that Trump accuses of publicizing “fake” news are full what he says, full of his alternative facts and post-truths that he knows will be magnified not only by FOX but by his press “enemies” as well.

Yes, every president has to be covered. The question is: what is covered and how prominently and extensively.

This is a question that the newsrooms need to ponder now and answer better than four years ago. Otherwise, even the best of our news organizations become, again, unwittingly, Trump’s bedfellows in a marriage of convenience before next year’s election.

America’s Liberal Democracy under Attack

 

By Brigitte L. Nacos

With the news media already in weekend mode, the US Supreme Court announced on Friday its ruling that President Trump can use $2.5 billion to build his controversial Wall at the Southern border –although the Congress had earmarked this money for the Defense Department. Ignoring that the US Constitutions reserves the power of the purse to the legislative branch, the Court’s decision allows Trump to spend billions to fulfill his number one campaign promise in 2016. Not Mexico as he promised then but American taxpayers at the expense of the military will pay for the wall.

Reports about the ruling were momentarily “breaking news” on cable TV and mostly forgotten, when Trump threw another of his tweet bombs insulting Congressman Elijah Cummings and his Black constituents in Baltimore. Just as the President had early characterized countries with Black populations s-holes, his latest tweet insult called Cummings “a brutal bully” and his congressional district “a disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess” and “the worst run and most dangerous anywhere in the United States.”  Cummings is one of the most soft-spoken members of the House. Given that Trump has a long history of attacking, insulting, and stereotyping African-Americans, Latinos, and other minorities of color, he added to the list of outrageously racist statements.

The attack on the African-American Congressman and African-Americans residing in his district, about half of his constituents, came shortly after similar content in his beloved Fox & Friends program on FOX News. This is typically how it works—the President sees and hears what he likes on FOX, tweets it as his own and thereby triggers massive mainstream news coverage.

In this case as in many similar tweet bombs before, his core supporters received another assurance from their Dear Leader that he is a White Nationalist defending their hateful, divisive ideology. Building the Wall, putting racial and religious minorities in their place along with Democrats and everyone else who does not support him is the Song of the King for the coming election campaign.

America’s liberal democracy is under attack and shows already some cracks. Just like power-hungry leaders abroad, such as Erdogan in Turkey or Viktor Orban in Hungary break institutions or hand them over to loyal supporters, Trump, too, has partners in Courts, the Department of Justice, and most of all in the Republican majority caucus in the US Senate.

God Help America!

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Instead of singing “God bless America” this July Fourth holiday, we must rather wish and sing, “God help America!”

We do not need blessings for the dismal state of affairs but rather help to prevent further damage to our democracy.

To be sure, the great ideals of America were never fully realized—but there has been progress, sometimes more rapidly and sometimes more slowly.

Since Donald Trump took the highest office in the land, the president himself, his advisers, his incompetent department heads, the blindly following GOP in Congress, and his media propagandists led by FOX news have violated or supported the violation of laws and democratic rules of the game. Instead of moving Americans forward to a more promising future, they united to usher in a reactionary regime presided over a demagogue in bed with despicable dictators around the world.

Trump’s role at the G-20 meeting in Japan and his self-organized unreal reality show meeting with North Korea’s supreme human rights violator Kim Jong-Un was another embarrassing horror show on the international stage. After sharply criticizing Japan and Germany just before the meeting began, Trump’s jovial get-togethers with Vladimir Putin and Saudi Arabia’s de-facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman( MBS), bolstered the international standing of ruthless rulers that violate civil liberties, human rights, and international law.

Trump continues to believe Putin’s denials of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election campaigns in order to help candidate Trump rather than believing his own intelligence agencies that found ample proof of Russian malfeasance.  He believes MSB’s implausible denials that he ordered brutal murder of a Saudi journalist and U.S. resident in spite of contrary findings by the CIA and the United Nations.

The Donald’s latest meeting with North Korea’s Kim, with whom he fell in love thanks to the North Korean’s lovely letters, was not only celebrated by the President but by the American mainstream media as “historical.” Obviously, the very press that Trump has labeled again and again “enemy of the American people,” is falling again for his pre-campaign antics as they did before and during his 2016 campaign.

While Trump assured Kim and the world that he was “honored” by the joined crossing of the border between the two Koreas and lauded the Chairman Kim’s “powerful voice,” North-Korean security guards and state press used physical force against American journalists in the official press pool who pushed for access—bruising the new White House press secretary in the process.

Trump and his crew, including daughter and son-in-law, ignored these signs of Kim Jong-un’s horror show—probably happy  to draw the attention of Americans away from potential Trump opponents in the 2020 electoral race.

That brings me to the second point why God needs to help America this July Fourth: Unless Democrats competing to challenge the President next week get their act together, they will hand Trump his reelection on a platter. While it is fine to point to Trump’s promises made and promised broken record, Democrats need to offer voters a precise program for a brighter future in both domestic and foreign affairs.

If Howard Schultz Runs in 2020 as an Independent, Could a Boycott of Starbucks Stop Him?

By Brigitte L. Nacos

After the first two years of Trump’s presidency and the recent shut-down of the federal government the number one imperative must be is to vote the MAGA man in 2020 out of office.

I believe that the impeachment route would be merely another irritant and stall in the GOP dominated US Senate. Democracy is best served when the electorate decides.

The biggest hurdle to vote Trump out could well be the candidacy of independent or third party candidates. Think of Jill Stein of the Green Party who might have drawn enough votes in crucial states to deny Hillary Clinton and hand Trump the victory.

Yet, Howard Schultz, the founder of Starbucks, talks now publicly about a possible run in 2020—as an independent candidate.

What makes rich guys like Ross Perot in the 1990s and Schultz now think that they alone can heal all the ills of our political system? A good guess here is that it might be the same arrogance and hubris which motivated in the past and still motivate today the current occupant of the White House.

If Mr. Schultz believes that he is the best candidate for the highest office in the land, he should compete in the primaries of the Democratic Party given his liberal credentials.

Another business man and billionaire, Michael Bloomberg, who did a good job as Mayor of New York City, is not a pure enough liberal to have a chance to win the Democratic nomination.  He seems to recognize the pitfalls of an independent candidacy if the number one goal is to deny Trump a second term.

Schultz should take a page out of Bloomberg’s political playbook informed by experience in an actual public office and common sense.

It is telling that Trump tried this morning to goad Mr. Schultz by posting the following tweet:

Howard Schultz doesn’t have the “guts” to run for President! Watched him on @60Minutes last night and I agree with him that he is not the “smartest person.” Besides, America already has that! I only hope that Starbucks is still paying me their rent in Trump Tower!

Obviously, Trump would love a third candidate in the race who could win enough votes from Independents and Democrats to keep him in office.

While Howard Schultz is no longer running Starbucks he is the single-largest shareholder of Starbucks holding 33 million shares directly and 1.7 million shares indirectly through trusts as of Jun. 26, 2018.

If he runs as an independent, a massive boycott of Starbucks might stop his candidacy.

President Trump’s Rhetorical Support of Violence and the Mail-Bombs: Violent Words Result in Violent Deeds

By Brigitte L. Nacos

When President Donald Trump in the fashion of a populist demagogue celebrates a congressman who assaulted a reporter for asking a perfectly legitimate question;

When candidate Trump promised to pay legal fees for his fan boys who beat up protesters at his rallies;

When the President and his disciples call for jailing political opponents;  

When the Presidents calls opponents “evil,”

Nobody should be surprised that Trump and his GOP enablers in the Congress and other high offices incite and condone violence.

Yesterday, a pipe bomb was sent to financier George Soros who supports liberal causes. Today, there are reports of possible improvised explosive devices addressed to two other persons that Mr. Trump has relentlessly attacked since he declared his candidacy for the highest office in the land: Ex-Secretary of State und former U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton and  Ex-President Barack Obama.

Given the President’s daily dose of lies, alternative facts, and post-truth statements combined with his attacks on Democrats/Liberals as an existential threat to the America he and his equally reactionary supporters want to recapture, nobody should be surprised when more consequential violence will follow.

Under President Trump the United States has become more and more like a banana republic.

The old children’s rhyme, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me,” is simply wrong.

Rhetorical attacks on individuals or groups can and do result in great harm. Hate speech can and does encourage individuals and groups to resort to violent actions against the targets of violent rhetoric.

Take the example of Dylann Roof who in 2015 shot to death nine African-Americans at the end of a bible study meeting in a Charleston, S.C., church. In his online “manifesto” he described how posted words on White Supremacy web sites had awoken his racial awareness and convinced him to move from mere words of violence to actual deeds. Since others did not act, he wrote, he had to...

By declaring himself a “nationalist” the President spilled the beans. His ideology is the same as that of those alt-right ideologues, nativists, and racists that marched in Charlottesville. The President’s divisive propaganda at each of his campaign rallies emboldens the violent characters on the extreme right further.

Just think of the members of far right hate-group Proud Boys that brutally attack the political opposition and seem reminiscent of Hitler’s Brown Shirts and Mussolini’s Black Shirts.

What will happen on Election Day and thereafter?

Warning to Progressive Democrats: The Devil is in the Name

By Brigitte L. Nacos

When activists of the Netroots Nation met the other day in New Orleans  to discuss their strategies for the 2018 mid-term and the 2020 presidential elections, they heard from several potential presidential contenders of the Democratic Party—among them Senators Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren. But it was Cynthia Nixon, a challenger of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s reelection bid from the left, who addressed the controversial “s” word for socialist.

Nixon appealed to the progressive crowd not to shy away from the “democratic socialist” label or their agenda. “Republicans call us socialists no matter what,” she said.

The problem is, however, that the devil is in the name. And the “s” word for socialist does not sit well with Democrats and Independents either. While most Americans would be hard pressed to define the term, there is no love lost when it comes to socialism that tends to be equated with communism.

So, progressive leaders from Bernie Sanders to Cynthia Nixon and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and progressive activists everywhere drop the label “socialism” and replace it with a more benign and actually more fitting “s” word --social.  

Call yourself Social Democrats, call your agenda social, call your distinct partisan wing “Social Democrats of America” (different from your current name Democratic Socialists of America).

Your agenda is social—health care and education for all, living wages, environmental protection, human rights for asylum seekers and immigrants, and so much more of what you find in Western Europe’s comparable democracies. Most, if not all of what Progressives here fight for has long been adopted in EU countries—most of all a social safety net for everyone.

So, again, the devil is in the name. Keep the letter “s” but change the word to social!

The Damning Facts that Drive Trump’s Lies and the Hope for Truthtellers

By Brigitte L. Nacos

The facts are clear: Russian operatives controlled by Vladimir Putin interfered in the 2016 presidential elections with the intent to help Donald Trump to become president. The highest U.S. intelligence officials, all appointees of this president, and the U.S. Senate’s intelligence committee controlled by a GOP chair and majority, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller agree on this.

Today, Putin admitted that he wanted Trump to win while, not surprisingly, denying any wrongdoing.

Even as he stood next to Russia’s authoritarian leader President Trump attacked the facts, repeated the lies he tweets day-in and day-out, and attacked alleged foes at home, while his actual words and body language showered admiration on the autocrat he obviously fears.

In her essay “Truth and Politics” Hannah Arendt wrote that “truth and politics are on rather bad terms with each other.” Still, in spite of her claim that lies are in the tool box of most, if not all politicians, she was aware of the danger of lies trumping facts. Thus, she wrote, “The chances of factual truth surviving the onslaught of power are very slim indeed…”

That’s what Americans are faced with today: Will the truth or will lies prevail?

As the Mueller investigation moves ever closer to Trump’s campaign crew and perhaps his family, as the indictments multiply and the trial of Trump’s campaign manager Paul Manafort nears, the president fights the truth with lies. In her philosophical essay Arendt wrote, “Unwelcome facts possess an infuriating stubbornness that nothing can move except plain lies.”

Will President Trump manage to replace the unwelcome truth with lies?

What happened today in Helsinki was even in Trump’s dreadful playbook a new low for any president and worse yet than his bullying of NATO, the EU, and the British Prime Minister last week. The horror show was not an assurance of the Trumpian “America First” promise but rather a declaration of love to Putin and “Russia First.”  

Yet, just like Trump declared the meetings in Brussels and the United Kingdom as historical success stories, he already praised himself for his success he achieved in Helsinki “for the American people.”

Will his advisers, will Republicans in Congress, will his appointees in the intelligence community continue to support this president as they did after each of his many outrageous missteps in the past?

Or will one truthteller or a group of truthtellers finally step forth and confront the liar-in-chief and the community of his enablers and supporters in the White House, in the administration, in the Congress, in states, cities, and counties with the facts, the truth?

Hannah Arendt wrote, “Where everybody lies about everything of importance, the truthteller…in the unlikely event that he survives, he has made a start toward changing the world.”

We can only hope and pray for such truthtellers and their survival. Otherwise, God help America as we love it.

The News about Sexual Assault and the Elephant in the Room: President Trump

By Brigitte L. Nacos

For weeks now the shocking news of sexual assault and misconduct by prominent males has been the leading story in news and social media. Women, so the narrative has it, finally dare to speak out publicly and going in droves on record with sickening revelations of unwanted sexual encounters of varying degrees.

As the defiant wife of Roy Moore, Alabama’s GOP candidate for a U.S. Senate seat, noted the other day, nobody talks about Russia anymore, thanks to the fake news of her husband’s alleged sexual misbehavior with very young girls—one merely 14-year old.

She was right. And for that nobody can be more thankful than Donald Trump.

To begin with, Special Prosecutor Mueller’s investigation is closing in on the Trump campaign’s and White House’s inner circles, including family members. It must be a relief to see “the Russia thing” on the backburner of media, elite, and public agenda.

The daily reports about women’s accusations against more prominent men also overshadow by far news about the full content and most unjust consequences of the planned congressional tax reform. It is therefore not surprising that public opinion changed of late from overwhelming rejection to a plurality in favor of tax legislation that is designed to benefit the most wealthy individuals and corporation at the expense of middle and lower classes.

And just in time for Thanksgiving, President Trump returned Mr. Moore’s favor by endorsing him and not precluding his campaigning for the accused. Asked about Moore, Trump told reporters,

“He says it didn’t happen. You have to listen to him, also.”

“I do have to say, 40 years is a long time. He’s run eight races, and this has never come up. So, 40 years is a long time.”

I wonder why anyone can be surprised that Trump defends Moore. After all, Moore is now in the same boat as Trump was during last year’s campaign, when more than a dozen women accused him of the sexual misbehavior. Today, a report in the Washington Post describes the shocking revelations of 13 of these women. Trump threatened to sue them but never did.   

Like Trump then, Moore now denies any wrong-doing and attacks the victims accusing them of lying, of being tools of political opponents.  

In spite of all the talk about female victims of sexual harassment and attack finally being heard and finally being believed, the elephant in the room is the occupant of the Oval Office. He certainly does not believe women accusing him and Moore or probably any other Republican.