reflectivepundit

Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine and the Weak Links in the Western Bloc

By Brigitte L. Nacos

The much-praised unity of the European-North American bloc since the Russian invasion of Ukraine has in reality weak links. The weakest is Hungary, a member of both the EU and NATO. The country’s newly reelected Prime Minister Viktor Orban is a long-time admirer of Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin and a constant critic of EU and NATO leaders in Brussels.

Emboldened by his election victory last Sunday, Orban used his acceptance speech for a rhetorical slap in the direction of Brussels. And three days later, this Wednesday, he broke with the EU’s refusal to pay for Russian gas and oil with rubles. “If the Russians ask for it, we will pay in rubles,” he told reporters. While other neighbors of Ukraine facilitate NATO weapon transports into the embattled country, Hungary has refused to cooperate.

One wonders, whether Hungary is such an important part of EU and NATO that Orban can violate the European Union’s agreements, laws, and court rulings designed to strengthen democracy. After all, Orban destroyed Hungary’s developing democracy and replaced it with so-called illiberal democracy, a benign code for autocracy. While the democratic institutions are still in place, they are completely controlled by Orban and his Fidesz party.

Yet, along with Poland, which was before the Ukraine invasion moving to become a full illiberal democracy as well, Hungary receives the highest payments from the European Union.

As for the United States and NATO, things are not going well either: 63 Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted yesterday, Tuesday, against a non-binding resolution in support of NATO. And that in the face of the horrific Russian invasion of Ukraine.

These are the main points of the resolution.

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) reaffirms its unequivocal support for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as an alliance founded on democratic principles;

(2) calls on the President to use the voice and vote of the United States to adopt a new Strategic Concept for NATO that is clear about its support for shared democratic values and committed to enhancing NATO’s capacity to strengthen democratic institutions within NATO member, partner, and aspirant countries; and

(3) calls on the President to use the voice and vote of the United States to establish a Center for Democratic Resilience within NATO headquarters.

Why in heaven did close to one third of the GOP conference vote “no?”

They took exception to the following provision in the resolution’s full text:

“Whereas democracies across the alliance face external threats from authoritarian regimes such as Russia and China and internal threats from proponents of illiberalism [emphasis added]…”

The naysayers, close to one third of the GOP conference, rejected the highlighted part of the above sentence because they perceived it as a criticism of Hungary and Poland by the Liberal Left. After all, hard-core Trumpian GOPers admire those countries’ illiberal democracies and strive to introduce their authoritarian models right here at home.

These GOPers are fans of strongmen. And, of course, of one particular would-be strongman who does not support NATO and endorsed Orban's latest candidacy.

NATO and EU should enlist Ex-Chancellor Merkel as Peace-Maker

By Brigitte L. Nacos

As the Ukrainian military and civil defense units fight the invading Russian military effectively, Vladimir Putin’s decision to place his military’s nuclear forces on high alert heightens the threat of his use of nuclear weapons in the Ukrainian theater of war—and perhaps beyond. In this critical situation, all efforts must be made to find a peaceful solution. And the best person to enlist for what seems a mission impossible is in my view Germany’s ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel, She  speaks Russian fluently und knows Putin better than any other Western politician. Her ability to reason like the trained scientist she is would be a good basis of discussions with the usually rational but more recently highly emotional Russian leader.  

The unity displayed by NATO and EU and allies in other parts of the globe in their swift opposition to Russia’s war against Ukraine must have come as an unprecedented shock to Putin. The Russian president must have underestimated how effective President Biden’s repair of the U.S.-European relationship has been. He reversed his predecessor’s efforts to destroy NATO as we know it and weaken the EU and thereby strengthened Western democracies so that they now can resist Russian expansionism forcefully without direct participation in the military hostilities.

Two weeks into this war, the Ukrainian military and civilian Territorial Defense Forces have stalled Russia’s plan to occupy its neighbor. The unprecedented sanctions against Russia have isolated the country cutting it mostly off the global markets. This has already resulted in hardship for the Russian public.

As Thomas Friedman writes in today’s New York Times, “Russia has no good way out [of this war]…” And that is the problem. Not only for Putin but for the Western alliance against him. Strongman do not want to accept defeat, cannot accept a loss. That’s bad enough, as we learned following the 2020 presidential election in the U.S., in a country in which the institutions of government still work as supposed. But in an autocracy with a sole ruler on top there are no built-in restrains. Thus, the danger of Putin’s end game that may include the deployment to weapons of mass destruction.

The frequent and long phone conversations between Putin and various Western leaders are signs that there may be room for actual negotiations. But that would need a most skilled negotiator.

Ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel would be the best possible choice!

The goal must be to find a solution that guarantees Ukraine’s independence but at the same time offers Putin a way out with the ability of justifying the war and its end result as something positive to his people  

For Trump’s GOP Violence is “Political Discourse”

When it comes to violence, we know for a long time that Donald Trump is like the emperor without cloths: he does not hide his love of brutal force for the sake of his own power. He does not hide most of his illegal actions but describes and celebrates them in public. He is naked, when it comes to any shame. He is an empty vessel, when it comes to a moral compass.  

And now, the Republican Party, already on bended knees, has revealed its complete surrender to its fascist leader and his complete disregard of the legal anchor of this nation: The Republican National Committee censored their members Rep. Liz Cheney and Rep. Adam Kinzinger for participating in the congressional investigation of the January 6^th events. They charged the only two Republicans courageous enough to stand up for democracy for taking part in the “persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse.”

However incredible it is: One of the two major political parties in the oldest continuous democracy declared today openly that terrorist and insurgent violence is “legitimate political discourse” among “ordinary citizens.” Obviously, the leading GOP party hacks felt the urgent need to second Donald Trump’s promise to January 6^th terrorists, insurgents, and fellow-plotters in the White House and elsewhere that he might pardon them all, when back in power.

50 years ago, Hannah Arendt wrote about violent movements,

If goals are not achieved rapidly, the result will be not merely defeat but the introduction of the practice of violence into the whole body politic. …The practice of violence, like all action, changes the world, but the most probable change is to a more violent world.

That’s exactly what we are experiencing now: When Trump and his MAGA movement failed to overturn the election and keep him in office on January 6^th, 2021, violence became part of body politic in America.

Neo-Nazis march now openly in American streets, display swastikas, and attack Jewish Americans. The violent Far Right and its organized groups have friends in high places claiming to provide security.

Violence as political discourse has no place in democracy. Embracing violence as is a giant step to fascism.

Especially, when it becomes the doctrine of a major political party.

Democrats in Need of Soundbite Messages

By Brigitte L. Nacos

In today’s print edition of the New York Times a full-page column by Ezra Klein is headed by the headline, “Can Democrats Find A Winning Message?” (The online version has a different title). This is a pressing question for those who still hope that Donald Trump’s handiwork in favor of illiberal democracy and authoritarian rule can be stopped. Klein’s opinion piece analyzes the dire predictions of election analyst David Shor, who foresees for the near future massive losses for Democrats in the U.S. Congress, most of all the U.S. Senate. That is not only based on the undemocratic electoral process set up by the U.S. Constitution, but also on the disability of the Democratic Party and its leaders to translate even the most attractive and most publicly supported features of their and President Biden’s agenda into compelling soundbites understood by the American public at large.

These are the terms that Americans hear from Democrats in Washington day-in and day-out—not only in their conversations in the halls of Congress and the White House but also in their appearances in television and radio, in their tweets, and in their coverage by the press: reconciliation bill, filibuster, John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, and so on.

Go out and meet regular people and ask them about the purpose of the voting rights advancement act. Or the filibuster controversy and the content of the reconciliation bill that Democrats are fighting about. Or the filibuster controversy.

Compare that to Trumpian soundbites:

Stop the Steal, Save America, Make America Great Again, America First. These are simple, catchy phrases.

Go out and ask regular Americans what is meant with MAGA and the other slogans above. Most know.

It is not enough for the fighting so-called liberals and progressives within the Democratic camp to get onto the same message. Although that is a precondition at a time, when democracy is under attack from the former president, his supporters, and those who disagree but fear to say so publicly.

Democrats needs to translate their bureaucratic messages into simple words that every American can understand. Soundbites that bite.

Soundbites that speak to the hopes and fears and anger that drives red and blue America further apart yet. At Trump’s rally last night in Iowa, one of his female supporters told a reporter with emphasis that the “civil war” was coming. Must come. Just one illustration of dangerous polarization in our country.

More than two decades ago, Jeffrey Scheuer wrote in his book “Soundbite Society: Television and the American Mind” that TV news was “filtering out complex ideas in favor of blunt emotional messages that appeal to the self and to narrower moral-political impulses.”

According to Scheuer, this obvious bias in favor of simple messages was not the result of intentional slants but rather the nature of the medium—TV with limited air time.

For the Right, there was and still is typically the choice between right or wrong, good or evil. Perfect for short soundbites. For Liberal, these differences were and still are far more complex to press into a meaningful soundbite.

The TV soundbite society of then has long expanded to an overall soundbite society—and not only because of Twitter’s limited text requirement.

In the last decade, but especially since Donald Trump appeared on the political stage in a starring role, aggressive, violent, shocking, insulting, threatening soundbites have become the most-used propaganda weapons of Trump’s Republicans.

Democrats must not copy the viciousness of Trumpian soundbites. But they need to quickly translate the policies they want to enact into simple, effective messages.

That’s not an easy task.

But without making it an urgent effort and succeeding, David Shor’s disheartening predictions may well come true in 2022, 2024 and beyond.  

The Two Decades since 9/11 Changed the Country for the Worse

By Brigitte L. Nacos

The attacks of September 11, 2001, by far the worse deadly strikes on the American mainland from the outside, are rightly remembered on the 20^th anniversary as a dark day in the history of the United States. But 9/11 was also a heroic day as far as first responders were concerned many of whom lost their lives as they tried to rescue fellow-Americans from the falling Twin Towers of the World Trade Center.

9/11 was also a day, when true patriotism overcame the shock of what seemed an unimaginable act of evil masterminded by Al Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden and his henchmen. Yes, true patriotism. About nine months after the U.S. Supreme Court decided the outcome of the 2020 presidential election in favor of George W. Bush, a very controversial decision, partisan and ideological differences made room for unity. When members of Congress appeared jointly in front of the Capitol, there was no division. The message was clear: Leaders in Washington and elsewhere—and we, the people, were not Democrats or Republicans now, they and we were first of all Americans.

As time went by, for sure, rumors and conspiracy theories circulated. The so-called Truthers sought and claimed to have found proof for a CIA/government plot that destroyed the WTC and part of the Pentagon. But while Trutherism found many believers in the post 9/11 era, these conspiracy theorists did not violently invade the U.S. Congress and threaten Democratic governors and state legislators.

Instead, in our own communities, common sense for the good of the whole prevailed. Most of the time. Especially, when problems and issues concerned our children and grandchildren. In school board meetings, parents disagreed. But they did not threaten and physically attack each other or the teachers of their children. 

Today, twenty years after 9/11, the “Stop-the-Steal” and QAnon conspiracy theories continue to fuel political and social polarization. While Al Gore gave a gracious concession speech and pledged his full support to George W. Bush, the former president and his supporters continue to spread the Big Lie that Donald Trump won the 2020 election. The Big Lie motivated lawless right-wingers to attack the very foundations of our democracy.

On September 11, 2001, 3,000 innocent Americans lost their lives. Reason enough to commemorate the victims and the courageous first responders.

Twenty years later, the Covid-19 pandemic has taken so far 660,000 lives in the United States—220 times more deaths than on 9/11. Of late, close to 1,500 Covid-19 infected persons die in this country every day. One 9/11 in two days!

And yet, given the political and social polarization, there is no nation-wide pulling together as Americans first.  

On 9/11, America was attacked by foreign terrorists.

Today, America is threatened by home-grown terrorists. By White Supremacists/Neo-Nazi groups and radicalized individuals who talk about a coming civil war. They feel emboldened by one ex-president and one political party that continue to downplay the breach of the Capitol on January Sixth.

Yes, the two decades after 9/11 did change the country—change it for the worse.

Not Racial, Ethnic, and Religious Diversity but White Supremacy and Crazy Conspiracy Theories Loom as Serious Threats to U.S. Democracy

By Brigitte L. Nacos

In his 2011 book “Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?” the one-time presidential speechwriter, presidential GOP candidate, and to this day right-extreme pundit Patrick J. Buchanan characterized the essence of a nation as “a people of common ancestry, culture, and language, who worship the same God, revere the same heroes, cherish the same history, celebrate the same holidays, share the same music, poetry, art, literature, held together, in Lincoln’s words, ’by bonds of affection…mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle-field, and patriotic grave, to every living heart and heath-stone.”

Given those characteristics, Buchanan lamented, “the European and Christian core of our country is shrinking” and “the death of its [America’s] cradle faith brings social disintegration, an end to moral community, and culture war.”

 He left no doubt that the election of President Barack Obama represented the greatest threat to the survival of “his” idea of America. And in his prescriptions to save the European-Christian America included a moratorium on immigration and rolling back any progressive gains won in what Buchanan labeled the [liberal] culture war.

Not only pundits like Buchanan but also some well-known scholars have long warned of the evils of multiculturalism. In 2004, the late Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington chose as the lead in his article “The Hispanic Challenge” the following paragraph,

“The persistent flow of Hispanic immigrants threatens to divide the United States into two peoples, two cultures, and two languages. Mexicans and other Latinos have not assimilated into mainstream U.S. culture, forming instead their own political and linguistic enclaves—from Los Angeles to Miami—and rejecting Anglo-Protestant values that build the American dream. The United States ignores this challenge at its peril.”

It is ironic that President Joe Biden warned the other day in his Memorial Day that “democracy itself is in peril,” using the same term as Huntington. But the peril Biden spoke of has a very different meaning than the peril Huntington meant.  

Whereas Huntington and Buchanan saw multicultural challenges to what Isabel Wilkerson described in her recent book “Caste: The Origins of our Discontents” as a system of White caste dominance, Joe Biden invoked the beliefs and values of true Christianity and inclusive democracy, when he said, “Wherever Americans are, there — there is democracy: churches and synagogues and mosques, neighborhoods and coffee shops and diners, bleachers at kids’ baseball or soccer games, libraries and parks.  Democracy begins and grows in the open heart and the impetus to come together for a common cause…Americans of all backgrounds, races, creeds, gender identities, sexual orientations, have long spilled their blood to defend our democracy.  The diversity of our country and our arm- — and of our armed services is and always has been an incredible strength.”

Shame on Mainstream Media for Publicizing another Trump for Political Office

By Brigitte L. Nacos

It is well-document that the most influential organizations of the U.S. mainstream media—from CNN to the New York Times and Washington Post—singled out Donald Trump for the bulk of their election-related coverage. This was the case in 2015 before and in 2016 during the Republican primaries. The celebrity candidate, however rude and insulting, received significantly more and more positive coverage than his competitors on the GOP side but also with respect to Hillary Clinton. Only after he had won the presidential nomination, did the same news organizations finally scrutinize the least qualified and the most dangerous of all candidates. It was too late.

While these same newsrooms deserve credit for their watchdog role during the nightmarish years of the Trump administration, they seemed not to have learned from their past mistakes in 2015/16. Again, they help—unwittingly, I assume—to pave the way for another Trump’s political career.

I was shocked this morning, when I first saw on Yahoo’s home page a story on Lara Trump, Donald’s daughter-in-law, under the headline “Lara Trump for North Carolina Senate Seat?” The article originated in the New York Times and was, as the story revealed, teased by Donald Trump’s enabler-in-chief Lindsay Graham, Senator of North Carolina, who told FOX News that the pro-conviction vote by Richard Burr of North Carolina in the Senate’s impeachment trial “made Lara Trump almost the certain nominee for the Senate seat” in that state.

So, the ambitious Trump through marriage, whose political ambitions had already been covered quite generously before, won another plum piece of free media without saying a single word or doing a single thing—just like father-in-law Donald whose ample free news in 2015/16 freed him from pleading for donations or spending his own money.

The news media must not become the former president’s substitute for his no longer available Twitter account but treat him like any former ex-president, better less so, although the FOX News newsrooms and their competitors will be delighted to serve as his bullhorns.

Just as important, the influential mainstream media must refrain from providing free publicity to other members of the Trump Clan: his sons, his daughters, daughters-in-law, and son-in-law.

When it comes to Mr. Trump and his family, journalists, editors, producers—all in the mainstream media must act according to George Santayana’s aphorism, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

I do not expect that they will.

Trump and the Madman Theory: A Madman Without a Theory

 By Brigitte L. Nacos

In his book “The Madman Theory: Trump Takes on the World” Jim Sciutto applies President Nixon’s so-called “Madman Theory” to President Trump. But whereas Richard Nixon and his National Security Adviser/Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had some, however crazy plan as they tried to convince adversaries of a president mad enough to resort to weapons of mass destruction to get concessions, Trump and his advisers never had a plan.

Now, after four crazy years, there is still a madman, a would-be tyrant and his hardcore followers trying to overthrow America’s more than 200-year-old democracy. What we have witnessed during the last four years and especially since Trump’s electoral defeat two months ago has been a huge step away from democratic principles—most of all the acceptance of election results by winners and losers in the pluralist system of governing.

As I watched FOX New last night at a time when Georgia’s election returns indicated a possible double win for the Democratic Party in the run-off for seats in the U.S. Senate, I heard hysterical outcries about those two “communists” ahead of their patriotic opponents. Given the long-used labels “communists” and “socialists” attached to “extreme liberals” by Trump and his propagandists, the time has come to call the Trumpian fascist movement no longer benignly “conservative” or “the conservative right,” they are in reality autocrats and, yes, they are fascists trampling on the rule of law.

At the end of his book “The Anatomy of Fascism” Robert O. Paxton details what he calls the “mobilizing passions” of fascism, among them,

• the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without any legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external;

• the need for authority by natural chiefs (always male), culminating in a national chieftain who alone is capable of incarnating the group’s historical destiny;

• the beauty of violence and the efficacy of will, when they are devoted to the group’s success.

We see these fascist mobilizing passions at play right now at work in Washington, D.C. and around the country with the President of the United States Donald Trump in the starring role. We see these fascist mobilizing passions in the two chambers of Congress where too many GOP Senators and Representatives violate the oaths they swear to the U.S. Constitution. And we see these fascist mobilizing passions in the social media posts of online fascists who are devoted to and courted by their Dear Leader.

In two weeks, there will be a changing of the guards in Washington. Joe Biden will become U.S. President, and Kamala Harris will become U.S. Vice-President.

But to assume that the fascist passions will evaporate once Biden and Harris move into the White House would be naïve. The Madman without Theory will not go quietly into a post-presidential life.

                                                                                                              ***

I wrote the above post a few hours before Trump's fanatic followers unleashed terror in the halls of the U.S. Congress. While the violence did not surprise me at all, I watched in amazement the thin or non-existent law enforcement presence in and around Capitol Hill. Assuming that the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and other agencies kept track of violent online extremist communities, law enforcement was fully aware that many fanatic Trump followers heard their idol's call to come to Washington and fight for his second term. Whereas overwhelming military and police might threatened peaceful "Black Lives Matter" demonstrators in the capital last year, the White Supremacists, typically insisting on their right to wear arms, met no serious resistance as they entered through doors and windows into congressional buildings.

After inciting and watching the seditious horror show for hours Donald Trump finally asked his terrorist followers to "go home" assuring them that he loved them...

 

 

The President Who Stole Christmas

By Brigitte L. Nacos

There will not be a Merry Christmas this year. Not in the United States of America.

Every day is now more deadly than were the horrific attacks of 9/11. Every day now, more than 3,000 Americans die as result of the Covid-19 pandemic. So far, more than 311,000 have succumbed to the illness. To put it differently, America has suffered the equivalent of 104 deadly 9/11 attacks!

Every day now, public health experts tell us that grimmer times are still to come. This morning’s heart-wrenching projection was a likely death toll of more 560,000 coronavirus victims in the U.S. by April 1, 2021.

And, yet, there is no public outcry, no public mourning. The most visible public activism is displayed by those who falsely claim to act in defense of their individual liberty and fight against mitigating health measures.

104times 9/11 in terms of lost souls seems less of a national nightmare than 9/11, when a divided nation united behind a crisis-managing president and consoler-in-chief, George W. Bush. Most embraced the notion, “Now, we are not Democrats or Republicans—we all are all Americans.”

There is no such spirit of unity and togetherness now. Just the opposite.

Unlike previous presidents, Donald Trump has not even tried to unite the country and discharge his most important duty: protecting the lives of Americans.

Instead, he denied, minimized, and completely ignored the most serious health crisis in a century at various stages. He called Covid-19 a political hoax, discredited and acted personally contrary to health experts’ mitigating guidelines, and cued his supporters to follow his dangerous words and deeds. Instead of listening to the best public health experts in the White House Covid-19 Advisory Board, Trump and his coterie sided the quackery of unqualified voices that advocated the debunked herd-immunity thesis.

As the first vaccine became available, the cheer leaders of one-term President suggested to name it “Trump Vaccine” in honor to all the good their hero has done to defeat Covid-19.

Instead, this catastrophic health saga will be remembered as the “Trump Virus” because the 45^th president knew early on how deadly this virus was and is but refused to take any mitigating actions to minimize the spread of the coronavirus.

To be sure, even if strict measures were implemented early on, Covid-19 would have taken many lives here as it did in other countries.

But this president’s complete failure of acting decisively in concert with sound scientific advice cost according to public health experts many, many more lives—probably hundreds of thousands! And many more will die in the weeks and months ahead.

No, there will not be Christmas as we know it in America. The man who stole it is President Donald Trump.

He stole it from those more than 310, 000 dead fellow-Americans and those close to them.

He stole it from those who lost their jobs and their small businesses.

He stole it from those who stand in long lines at food banks and soup kitchens.

He stole it from those children whose families face eviction from their apartments.

He stole it from Americans who seem strangely fatalistic in the face of an unspeakable crisis.

And, unlike the Grinch who stole Christmas in the famous cartoon, the man who stole this upcoming holiday in our real lives will not change his heart and mind.

Can America’s Democracy Survive the Onslaught by Trump and his Henchmen? Will the Press Act as Guardian of Democracy?

By Brigitte L. Nacos

Shamelessly like autocratic rulers at all times President Trump spelled out what he had alluded to for some time: If his opponent Joe Biden wins the election, Mr. Trump will not leave office peacefully. Worse yet, he and his henchmen are now plotting a scheme that is to assure Trump’s victory as The Atlantic reported. Asked yesterday during a news briefing whether he would commit to a peaceful transfer of power [in case he would lose the election], Mr. Trump answered, “Get rid of the ballots, and you’ll have a very — we’ll have a very peaceful, there won’t be a transfer, frankly. There’ll be a continuation.”  

In other words, 40 days before election day Donald Trump America and the world that he will remain U.S. president regardless of the election results. That is what happens in dictatorships, not in democracies. But during Trump’s presidency the rules of the games have already tilted in favor of raw presidential power.

To disregard Trump’s statements as just words would be a grave mistake. Especially when coming out of the mouths of the powerful, words matter; they tend to be followed by deeds.  

Like other autocrats, Trump signals his misdeeds by tweets or public statements. Thus, he makes no secret of the reason behind his rush to appoint and seat a replacement for Justice Bader Ginsberg: He wants a full Supreme Court dominated by GOP appointed conservatives in place to rule in his favor in case of a post-election dispute.

For more than 200 years, no sitting U.S. president declared upcoming elections to be illegitimate and refused to promise a peaceful change of power in case of defeat. It took the worst president in American history to throw his nation into an existential crisis of democracy.

The issue is no longer whether Republicans or Democrats win next month’s election, the issue is whether American democracy survives the already raging onslaught by an autocratic showman and his equally ruthless supporting cast.

Since there is little hope that other Republican leaders join Senator Mitt Romney in rejecting Trump’s power play, the leading media organizations may be the last hope to act as guardians of our democracy.

But that would take an agreement to report Trump’s threat to democracy day-in and day-out as most important news. It would mean for the press not to be distracted by Trump’s daily or even hourly launched rhetorical bombs that are minor in comparison to the existential danger. It would also mean that the failures of this presidency are highlighted every day, again and again.

Especially with respect to the Covid-19 pandemic. The president ignores the more than 200,000 Americans who died so far—more than half of them because of his mismanagement and his diabolical political calculations early on that states with Democratic majorities were mostly affected by the deadly disease.

It would mean for the press to remind the public that at this point the number of coronavirus victims is 70times higher than the number of those killed during the 9/11 attacks. Osama bin Laden, in charge of those the horrific 9/11 incidents, was called here and elsewhere in the West “evil-doer.”

I have spent much times and effort to research the central role of publicity and propaganda in terrorism and argued consistently that over-covering might well encourage more such political violence.

Concerning the coverage of President Trump now, I argue similarly that the news media must refrain from over-covering him and from reporting every aggressive and nasty word he speaks and tweets.

Instead, the news media must stick to the only matter that counts now: Most prominently reported and placed news and commentary about the existential calamity Americans faces—and must resist.