End Our National Crisis !

The New York Times

Opinion: End Our National Crisis !

Corruption – Anger – Chaos – Incompetence – Lies – Decay

The Case Against Donald Trump: 

Mr. Trump’s ruinous tenure already has gravely damaged the United States at home and around the world. He has abused the power of his office and denied the legitimacy of his political opponents, shattering the norms that have bound the nation together for generations. He has subsumed the public interest to the profitability of his business and political interests. He has shown a breathtaking disregard for the lives and liberties of Americans. He is a man unworthy of the office he holds.

The editorial board does not lightly indict a duly elected president. During Mr. Trump’s term, we have called out his racism and his xenophobia. We have critiqued his vandalism of the postwar consensus, a system of alliances and relationships around the globe that cost a great many lives to establish and maintain. We have, again and again, deplored his divisive rhetoric and his malicious attacks on fellow Americans. Yet when the Senate  refused to convict the president for obvious abuses of power and obstruction, we counseled his political opponents to focus their outrage on defeating him at the ballot box.

Nov. 3 can be a turning point. This is an election about the country’s future, and what path its citizens wish to choose.

The resilience of American democracy has been sorely tested by Mr. Trump’s first term. Four more years would be worse.

But even as Americans wait to vote in lines that stretch for blocks through their towns and cities, Mr. Trump is engaged in a full-throated assault on the integrity of that essential democratic process. Breaking with all of his modern predecessors, he has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power, suggesting that his victory is the only legitimate outcome, and that if he does not win, he is ready to contest the judgment of the American people in the courts or even on the streets.

The enormity and variety of Mr. Trump’s misdeeds can feel overwhelming. Repetition has dulled the sense of outrage, and the accumulation of new outrages leaves little time to dwell on the particulars. This is the moment when Americans must recover that sense of outrage.

It is the purpose of this special section of the Sunday Review to remind readers why Mr. Trump is unfit to lead the nation. It includes a series of essays focused on the Trump administration’s rampant corruption, celebrations of violence, gross negligence with the public’s health and incompetent statecraft. A selection of iconic images highlights the president’s record on issues like climate, immigration, women’s rights and race.

The urgency of these essays speaks for itself. The repudiation of Mr. Trump is the first step in repairing the damage he has done. But even as we write these words, Mr. Trump is salting the field — and even if he loses, reconstruction will require many years and tears.

Mr. Trump stands without any real rivals as the worst American president in modern history. In 2016, his bitter account of the nation’s ailments struck a chord with many voters. But the lesson of the last four years is that he cannot solve the nation’s pressing problems because he is the nation’s most pressing problem.

He is a racist demagogue presiding over an increasingly diverse country; an isolationist in an interconnected world; a showman forever boasting about things he has never done, and promising to do things he never will.

He has shown no aptitude for building, but he has managed to do a great deal of damage. He is just the man for knocking things down.

As the world runs out of time to confront climate change, Mr. Trump has denied the need for action, abandoned international cooperation and attacked efforts to limit emissions.

He has mounted a cruel crackdown on both legal and illegal immigration without proposing a sensible policy for determining who should be allowed to come to the United States.

Obsessed with reversing the achievements of his immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, he has sought to persuade both Congress and the courts to get rid of the Affordable Care Act without proposing any substitute policy to provide Americans with access to affordable health care. During the first three years of his administration, the number of Americans without health insurance increased by 2.3 million — a number that has surely grown again as millions of Americans have lost their jobs this year.

He campaigned as a champion of ordinary workers, but he has governed on behalf of the wealthy. He promised an increase in the federal minimum wage and fresh investment in infrastructure; he delivered a round of tax cuts that mostly benefited rich people. He has indiscriminately erased regulations, and answered the prayers of corporations by suspending enforcement of rules he could not easily erase. Under his leadership, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has stopped trying to protect consumers and the Environmental Protection Agency has stopped trying to protect the environment.

He has strained longstanding alliances while embracing dictators like North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Russia’s Vladimir Putin, whom Mr. Trump treats with a degree of warmth and deference that defies explanation. He walked away from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a strategic agreement among China’s neighbors intended to pressure China to conform to international standards. In its place, Mr. Trump has conducted a tit-for-tat trade war, imposing billions of dollars in tariffs — taxes that are actually paid by Americans — without extracting significant concessions from China.

Mr. Trump’s inadequacies as a leader have been on particularly painful display during the coronavirus pandemic. Instead of working to save lives, Mr. Trump has treated the pandemic as a public relations problem. He lied about the danger, challenged the expertise of public health officials and resisted the implementation of necessary precautions; he is still trying to force the resumption of economic activity without bringing the virus under control.

As the economy pancaked, he signed an initial round of aid for Americans who lost their jobs. Then the stock market rebounded and, even though millions remained out of work, Mr. Trump lost interest in their plight.

In September, he declared that the virus “affects virtually nobody” the day before the death toll from the disease in the United States topped 200,000.

Nine days later, Mr. Trump fell ill.

The foundations of American civil society were crumbling before Mr. Trump rode down the escalator of Trump Tower in June 2015 to announce his presidential campaign. But he has intensified the worst tendencies in American politics: Under his leadership, the nation has grown more polarized, more paranoid and meaner.

He has pitted Americans against each other, mastering new broadcast media like Twitter and Facebook to rally his supporters around a virtual bonfire of grievances and to flood the public square with lies, disinformation and propaganda. He is relentless in his denigration of opponents and reluctant to condemn violence by those he regards as allies. At the first presidential debate in September, Mr. Trump was asked to condemn white supremacists. He responded by instructing one violent gang, the Proud Boys, to “stand back and stand by.”

He has undermined faith in government as a vehicle for mediating differences and arriving at compromises. He demands absolute loyalty from government officials, without regard to the public interest. He is openly contemptuous of expertise.

And he has mounted an assault on the rule of law, wielding his authority as an instrument to secure his own power and to punish political opponents. In June, his administration tear-gassed and cleared peaceful protesters from a street in front of the White House so Mr. Trump could pose with a book he does not read in front of a church he does not attend.

The full scope of his misconduct may take decades to come to light. But what is already known is sufficiently shocking:

He has resisted lawful oversight by the other branches of the federal government. The administration routinely defies court orders, and Mr. Trump has repeatedly directed administration officials not to testify before Congress or to provide documents, notably including Mr. Trump’s tax returns.

With the help of Attorney General William Barr, he has shielded loyal aides from justice. In May, the Justice Department said it would drop the prosecution of Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn even though Mr. Flynn had pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. In July, Mr. Trump commuted the sentence of another former aide, Roger Stone, who was convicted of obstructing a federal investigation of Mr. Trump’s 2016 election campaign. Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, rightly condemned the commutation as an act of “unprecedented, historic corruption.”

Last year, Mr. Trump pressured the Ukrainian government to announce an investigation of his main political rival, Joe Biden, and then directed administration officials to obstruct a congressional inquiry of his actions. In December 2019, the House of Representatives voted to impeach Mr. Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors. But Senate Republicans, excepting Mr. Romney, voted to acquit the president, ignoring Mr. Trump’s corruption to press ahead with the project of filling the benches of the federal judiciary with young, conservative lawyers as a firewall against majority rule.

Now, with other Republican leaders, Mr. Trump is mounting an aggressive campaign to reduce the number of Americans who vote and the number of ballots that are counted.

The president, who has long spread baseless charges of widespread voter fraud, has intensified his rhetorical attacks in recent months, especially on ballots submitted by mail. “The Nov 3rd Election result may NEVER BE ACCURATELY DETERMINED,” he tweeted. The president himself has voted by mail, and there is no evidence to support his claims. But the disinformation campaign serves as a rationale for purging voter rolls, closing polling places, tossing absentee ballots and otherwise impeding Americans from exercising the right to vote.

It is an intolerable assault on the very foundations of the American experiment in government by the people.

Other modern presidents have behaved illegally or made catastrophic decisions. Richard Nixon used the power of the state against his political opponents. Ronald Reagan ignored the spread of AIDS. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying and obstruction of justice. George W. Bush took the nation to war under false pretenses.

Mr. Trump has outstripped decades of presidential wrongdoing in a single term.

Frederick Douglass lamented during another of the nation’s dark hours, the presidency of Andrew Johnson, “We ought to have our government so shaped that even when in the hands of a bad man, we shall be safe.” But that is not the nature of our democracy. The implicit optimism of American democracy is that the health of the Republic rests on the judgment of the electorate and the integrity of those voters choose.

Mr. Trump is a man of no integrity. He has repeatedly violated his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Now, in this moment of peril, it falls to the American people — even those who would prefer a Republican president — to preserve, protect and defend the United States by voting.

Opinion: The Self-Dealing Administration

This article is part of a special Sunday Review: End Our National Crisis.

 

By Michelle Cottle        October 16, 2020

Devin Oktar Yalkin for The New York Times.

 

For anyone attempting to understand Donald Trump’s presidency — to really grasp its essence — the place to look isn’t the White House or the federal agencies or even the Supreme Court, with its expanded conservative majority. The lurid heart of Trumpist Washington lies within the grand, Romanesque-revival building at the corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and 12th Street, Northwest: the Trump International Hotel.

Built at the close of the 19th century, the structure originally served as the city’s main post office, a towering tribute to public service. Under Mr. Trump, it now stands as both a monument to and a tool for advancing the endless spectacle of self-dealing and corruption that has come to define this president, his family and much of his administration.

On any given day, a glut of lobbyists, lawmakers, foreign agents and other favor-seekers come through the Trump International, schmoozing with administration bigwigs — on occasion the president himself — and spending gobs of cash. This ritual not only strokes the president’s ego — What a swank place you have here, sir! — it enriches his family business, ownership of which Mr. Trump has refused to divest himself.

We aren’t talking about a few overpriced martinis or breakfast meetings but, rather, some serious, high-dollar hobnobbing. In the six months ending in March 2017, the government of Saudi Arabia spent at least $270,000 at the hotel. The National Shooting Sports Foundation dropped at least $62,000 there in 2018, according to a Times report last weekend, which also noted that the National Automobile Dealers Association has used it as a base for meetings with policymakers, spending close to $80,000. Groups hosting posh events there range from the Philippine Embassy to the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association to the FLC Group, a Vietnamese conglomerate. (Those who responded to The Time’s inquiries denied inappropriate motives.)

The appearance of impropriety is not confined to the family’s Washington hotel. From Scotland to New Jersey to Florida and beyond, Trump properties have raked in tens of millions of dollars from those seeking to curry favor with, or at least express their appreciation for, the president.

“An investigation by The Times found over 200 companies, special-interest groups and foreign governments that patronized Mr. Trump’s properties while reaping benefits from him and his administration,” the paper reported, concluding that the president has “built a system of direct presidential influence-peddling unrivaled in modern American politics.”

Some of Mr. Trump’s more egregious self-enrichment projects have failed. Most notably, his plan to host this year’s Group of 7 meeting at the Trump National Doral resort near Miami met with so much political blowback that he quickly abandoned the idea. But at this stage, his clan’s routine self-dealing barely raises an eyebrow.

The president’s campaign contributors, large and small, also do their share to support the first family. This cycle, Trump businesses have received more than $4 million from the president’s campaign-related committees and the Republican Party, according to the latest numbers from the Center for Responsive Politics. This includes $380,000 that the campaign spent on a “donor retreat” at Mar-a Lago. The campaign also has been paying around $37,000 a month for space in Trump Tower in Manhattan.

Even Americans who don’t support Mr. Trump are filling his coffers. Each time the president, a family member or certain top administration officials visit a Trump property, taxpayers foot the bill for the security details that must tag along.

On a 2019 trip to Ireland, Vice President Mike Pence stayed at a Trump resort located on the far side of the country from where his official meetings were being held. (In addition to whatever taxpayers spent on lodging, the additional ground transportation cost nearly $600,000.)

The Washington Post has estimated that the U.S. government had paid well over $1 million to the president’s company since he took office in costs associated with the Secret Service. This includes at least 530 nights at Mar-a-Lago and 950 nights at the president’s club in Bedminster, N.J.

Taxpayers are also footing part of the bill for business trips by the Trump kids. In January 2017, Eric Trump jetted down to Uruguay to check on one of the Trump Organization’s condo projects, costing Americans around $98,000 in hotel rooms for the Secret Service and embassy staff members. Two trips the following month, one by Eric to the Dominican Republic and one by Eric and Don Jr. to Dubai, ran taxpayers nearly $250,000 for Secret Service expenses such as airfare, lodging and ground transportation.

In May of 2018, China awarded Mr. Trump’s golden child, Ivanka, seven trademarks for her now-defunct lifestyle brand, right around the same time her father was pledging to save a major Chinese telecommunications company, ZTE, from going belly up. Ivanka’s office said there was no special treatment involved.

What’s good for the Trump family is, apparently, also good for the family of Ms. Trump’s husband, Jared Kushner, and their business interests. In May 2017, Mr. Kushner’s sister played up her brother’s position as senior adviser to the president when pitching some of Kushner Companies’ real estate developments to prospective Chinese investors through a federal program that provides fast-track visas to wealthy foreign investors. The project “means a lot to me and my entire family,” she told them. The company denied any impropriety.

Also in 2017, both Citigroup and Apollo Global Management, one of the world’s largest private equity firms, made large loans to Kushner Companies after White House meetings between Mr. Kushner and top executives from those firms. The involved parties insisted that the loans had nothing to do with Mr. Kushner’s position — that, in fact, his family’s business had not even come up in the discussions. The $184 million loan from Apollo came through in November. The next month, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission dropped an investigation into Apollo. While there was no indication that the two episodes were related, the timing was a tad unseemly.

Foreign entities know a soft target when they see one. In early 2018, The Washington Post reported that officials in at least four countries — China, Israel, Mexico and the United Arab Emirates — “have privately discussed ways they can manipulate” Mr. Kushner “by taking advantage of his complex business arrangements, financial difficulties and lack of foreign policy experience,” according to U.S. officials familiar with the related intelligence reports.

In politics, as in life, the fish rots from the head. And many members of the administration seem to have embraced the first family’s ethical flexibility. Among the top officials to depart under allegations of self-dealing or other misuse of taxpayer money were the secretary of the interior, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the secretary of health and human services and the secretary of veterans affairs. Impressively, Wilbur Ross remains the commerce secretary, despite reports of multiple sketchy financial dealings.

Forget Abraham Lincoln’s Team of Rivals. Mr. Trump will be remembered for assembling a world-class Team of Grifters.

The Trump campaign world presents its own opportunities for self-enrichment. Before being ousted as campaign manager this summer, Brad Parscale had been facing scrutiny both for the campaign’s profligate spending and for the lavish lifestyle he had adopted since joining Team Trump. Following Mr. Parscale’s demotion, the campaign began an audit of spending during his tenure, according to Business Insider. (The campaign has denied that Mr. Parscale is being targeted by the review.)

Mr. Parscale features prominently in recent allegations that the Trump re-election effort has been violating campaign finance laws. In late July, a nonpartisan watchdog group, the Campaign Legal Center, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission accusing the campaign and a related fund-raising committee of masking $170 million in spending to vendors and Trump family members by funneling the payments through companies run by Mr. Parscale and others formed by the campaign’s lawyers. Among the outlays in question are fat salaries for Eric Trump’s wife, Lara, and Don Jr.’s girlfriend, Kimberly Guilfoyle. The campaign has denied any wrongdoing.

But I bet you could have guessed that by now.

With so much grift and graft and self-enrichment swirling about, it’s amusing — and yet horrifying — to recall that Mr. Trump ran in 2016 as a tough, independent outsider who would bring in the “best people” to help him clean up political corruption. Today, as election night looms, the president’s campaign has reportedly booked the Trump International Hotel in D.C. for a victory party. Rooms sold out months ago.

Forget draining the swamp; the president slapped his name on it and began charging admission.

 

Opinion: When Science is Pushed Aside

This article is part of a special Sunday Review: End Our National Crisis.

By Jeneen Interlandi       October 16, 2020

Lynsey Addario for The New York Times.

 

From his first days in office, President Trump has waged a relentless and cynical campaign against the institutions most responsible for turning science into sound policy.

These institutions — the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Environmental Protection Agency — are as essential to democracy as any high court or legislative body. They have set standards that the rest of the world still aspires to, for safe food and medicine, for clean air and water and, until recently, for effective disease control. At their best, they stand as a bulwark against the apathy that can attend such difficult problems and as a beacon for human society’s highest ideals: intelligence, discernment and moral action in the face of grave threats.

In the past four years, however, they have been imperiled like never before by a president who places no value on science. Or data. Or facts. Or truth.

He’s a president who muzzles credible scientists and amplifies charlatans. One who suggested on live television that UV light and bleach injections might cure people of the coronavirus. One who has refused to promote or consistently wear face masks, even as the virus has spread through his inner circle and assaulted his immune system. He’s a president who has lied, again and again, about the severity of threats the country is now facing — be they from climate change or the pandemic — even as reams of evidence make those threats plain.

Mr. Trump’s disdain for science is so terrifying that two of the nation’s oldest scientific publications — Scientific American and the New England Journal of Medicine — have waded into the morass of electoral politics for the first time in their more-than-100-year histories. The Journal implored voters to fire the president come November, while Scientific American went a step further and endorsed Joe Biden. “The evidence and science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people — because he rejects evidence and science,” the editors there wrote.

That rejection began at the Environmental Protection Agency, where Mr. Trump appointed an administrator whose greatest ambition had been to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency. After a string of scandals, Mr. Trump replaced him with a former coal industry lobbyist. The agency has effectively prohibited any study involving human participants and any scientist who receives federal grants from informing its environmental policies. It has deliberately downplayed climate change, going so far as to purge the term from its website. It has also weakened or dismantled scores of environmental protections, including curbs on greenhouse gas emissions, rules meant to keep toxic chemicals in check and protections for national wetlands and wildlife.

The Trump administration has billed each of these rollbacks as a win for the economy — a tired argument that’s easily debunked, in some cases by the government’s own research. The E.P.A.’s own lies have been even more brazen. A spokeswoman recently told The Times that by undoing so many environmental protections the agency was returning to its “core mission,” which is to protect the environment.

The story has been similar at the F.D.A., where officials have repeatedly appeared to bend to the president’s will, for instance by authorizing unproven coronavirus treatments that he champions but that scientists advise against. The first of those authorizations — for the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine — was rescinded after the treatment was linked to potentially deadly side effects in Covid-19 patients. The second — for convalescent plasma — triggered a crisis of confidence in the F.D.A., when its commissioner, Dr. Stephen Hahn, grossly overstated the treatment’s potential in public remarks that he was then forced to walk back.

That spectacle has left both scientists and ordinary citizens deeply anxious about the coming coronavirus vaccines. The president has all but promised one before Election Day; scientists insist that such a timeline cannot possibly be met without compromising safety. The F.D.A. recently tried to assure the public that it will come down unequivocally on the side of safety. But in early October Mr. Trump dismissed the agency’s newly tightened vaccine standards as a “political hit job” and indicated that he would somehow overrule officials there.

The most shameful of all Mr. Trump’s meddling has been at the C.D.C., an agency designed to confront exactly the kind of pandemic America is now facing. Political appointees have prevented scientists at the agency from publishing a range of crucial guidelines and edicts meant to shepherd the nation through the pandemic. As a result, decisions across the country about school openings and closings, testing and mask-wearing have been muddy and confused, too often determined by political calculus instead of evidence.

The C.D.C.’s director, Dr. Robert Redfield, has repeatedly walked back statements that counter the president’s own sunny assessment of the pandemic. Other scientists at the agency have been muzzled altogether — holding few news conferences and giving almost no talks or interviews in the nine months since the coronavirus first reached American shores. Morale at the agency has reached a low point, with many career civil servants there telling The Times that they might resign if Mr. Trump wins re-election, and others speculating that the C.D.C.’s ability to function at all, in this pandemic or the next, is in serious jeopardy.

The most immediate impacts of these machinations are plain to see. Pollution is up, fines for polluters are down, carbon emissions have risen and are poised to rise further. Hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost, and millions of livelihoods destroyed, by a pandemic that could have been contained. The nation’s standing in the wider world, and public trust here at home, have been eroded almost beyond recognition.

The longer-term impacts will be equally dire. Consider a future in which the empirical truths ferreted out by doctors, scientists and engineers no longer have currency because there is no one left to act on them. Real medicine and snake oil are sold on the same shelf, with no good way to tell the two apart. Vaccines are developed, but even the most pro-science families don’t trust them enough to make use of them. We resign ourselves to the lead in our water, the pesticides in our food and the toxins in our baby bottles because we know that no one will resolve these crises in our favor. Lies and shrugs become the official response to any disease that threatens us.

Some of these things are already beginning to happen. Agencies that use science to protect human health have long been plagued by a lack of funding and too much political interference. But a world in which these agencies become fully ornamental would be dangerously different than the world we currently inhabit.

It’s hard to say what chance science or civics have against so foolish and self-serving a commander in chief. But for now, at least, there is still cause for hope. Earlier this month, the F.D.A. updated its criteria for emergency authorization of a coronavirus vaccine, against Mr. Trump’s stated wishes. After a brief standoff, the administration quietly backed off its opposition to the new guidelines, which should make it all but impossible for the president to rush a product through in the next few weeks.

Career civil servants at the C.D.C., the E.P.A. and elsewhere are engaged in similar battles to preserve these institutions and the embers of what they stand for. Anyone who wants to ensure that Americans’ food and medicine nourish rather than poisons them, or who worries about the relentless march of climate change, or who hopes that the next deadly disease outbreak will be prevented from morphing into a global pandemic, should root for those civil servants to succeed — and vote accordingly.

The Radicalizer in Chief

 

This article is part of a special Sunday Review: End Our National Crisis.

Christopher Lee for The New York Times

By Jesse Wegnan                              Oct. 16, 2020      

Mr. Wegman is a member of the editorial board.          

This month, federal and state authorities arrested 13 Michigan men on terrorism, conspiracy and weapons charges. Six of the men are alleged to have been plotting to kidnap the state’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer, with whom they were furious for imposing shutdowns, as most other governors did, in the early weeks of the pandemic.

Ms. Whitmer’s actions most likely saved thousands of lives. The arrested men, along with hundreds of other anti-shutdown protesters who swarmed the State Capitol in Lansing, considered her a tyrant.

As the protests grew in April, President Trump could have supported a governor navigating a tough situation and reminded Americans about the importance of stopping the spread of the coronavirus. Instead, he tweeted, “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” — a message that has to date received nearly 200,000 likes and almost 39,000 retweets. He tweeted the same of other states with Democratic governors and said the Second Amendment was “under siege.” It was as though Mr. Trump saw himself as another anti-government insurgent.

The message seems to have come through loud and clear. Protesters became bolder, and some marched into the Michigan statehouse brandishing semiautomatic rifles and long guns, forcing a shutdown of the State Legislature. Many political leaders rightly condemned the armed display. Mr. Trump defended the protesters. “These are very good people, but they are angry,” he wrote on Twitter.

As Ms. Whitmer said after this month’s arrests: “Hate groups heard the president’s words not as a rebuke, but as a rallying cry. As a call to action. When our leaders speak, their words matter. They carry weight. When our leaders meet with, encourage or fraternize with domestic terrorists, they legitimize their actions, and they are complicit. When they stoke and contribute to hate speech, they are complicit.”

Even after the arrests and charges, Mr. Trump has refused to rebuke violent agitators. Instead, he keeps feeding the fire. Speaking on Fox Business on Thursday, he said of Ms. Whitmer: “She wants to be a dictator in Michigan. And the people can’t stand her.”

A president’s words are among his most powerful, and potentially dangerous, tools. They can rally the American public to work together toward a common cause. They can soothe the jangled nerves of a frightened nation, or provide a healing balm at a time of mourning. They can move global financial markets, start wars — and embolden violent individuals.

From the start of his campaign for president in 2015, Mr. Trump has gleefully upturned every expectation Americans had about how their presidents speak. He revels in crude insults, trivial gripes and constant mockery of those who disagree with him.

This is harmful on many levels. “The president isn’t just the chief of the executive branch, but the head of state,” said Ian Bassin, who worked in the White House Counsel’s Office during the Obama administration and now runs the nonprofit group Protect Democracy. “That means part of what the presidency is about is norm-setting. When a president establishes that it’s OK to make fun of people with disabilities, or to be racist, or to lie, or to assault women, you see that replicated in society. That’s not a surprise.”

Mr. Trump doesn’t just mock his enemies. He demonizes and dehumanizes them. His attacks have resulted in his targets — whether a lawmaker like Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, a television personality like the former Fox News anchor Megan Kelly, a government scientist like Dr. Anthony Fauci, or a regular American citizen — getting swamped with death threats, and in some cases requiring personal protection.

The violent rhetoric, and its consequences, began almost as soon as Mr. Trump’s campaign for the White House did.

In August 2015, barely two months after Mr. Trump announced his presidential bid by accusing Mexican immigrants of being “rapists,” two Boston men beat a homeless man with a metal pipe and then urinated on him. “Donald Trump was right,” one of the men said, according to the police. “All these illegals need to be deported.”

Mr. Trump tweeted out a condemnation of the attack, calling it “terrible” and saying, “I would never condone violence.” But repeatedly on the campaign trail, he did just that.

At a February 2016 campaign rally, he told his supporters: “If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Just knock the hell out of them. I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.”

A few weeks later he said of one protester, “I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell you.”

At another rally, a protester being escorted out by the police was sucker-punched. Mr. Trump called the attack “very, very appropriate” and the kind of action “we need a little bit more of.”

In August 2016, he warned that if Hillary Clinton was elected, she would appoint Supreme Court justices who would rule in favor of gun control laws. “Nothing you can do, folks,” Mr. Trump said, before adding, “Although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.”

This language was dangerous enough coming from a candidate. With Mr. Trump’s ascension to the most powerful job in the country, the stakes got only higher, and his reach broader.

A few months after his inauguration, he told a gathering of police officers that they should rough up the people they arrest. “Please don’t be too nice,” Mr. Trump said, to laughter and cheers.

When a Republican representative from Montana physically assaulted a reporter who had asked a question, Mr. Trump praised the lawmaker. “Any guy that can do a body-slam,” Mr. Trump said, “he’s my guy.”

In May, Mr. Trump responded to protests against police brutality by saying, “When the looting starts, the shooting starts.” When the shooting did start, he defended one person accused of gunfire: a 17-year-old boy who drove 20 miles to a Wisconsin protest armed with a semiautomatic rifle, which he allegedly used to shoot three people, killing two of them. It was self-defense, Mr. Trump suggested days after the teenager was charged with murder.

At the presidential debate last month, Mr. Trump was asked to condemn white supremacists without equivocation. He would not. Instead, he instructed the violent right-wing group the Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by.”

Mr. Trump and his defenders regularly claim that he is being misunderstood and say that he has condemned violence and white supremacy more than any president in history. The president is asked to condemn violence so often because violence is so often committed in his name. The Proud Boys, for one, did not take his words as a condemnation. “I think he was saying I appreciate you and appreciate your support,” the group’s founder said after the debate.

Trump supporters are not the only people who commit acts of political violence. But Mr. Trump has been invoked in dozens of acts of violence, threats of violence or allegations of assault, according to a review of five years of criminal cases by ABC News.

The victims of some of the worst attacks have been from the minority groups that Mr. Trump so often targets with his words. In addition to the 2015 attack on the homeless man in Boston, there was the terror campaign involving more than a dozen pipe bombs sent to prominent journalists and critics of Mr. Trump by a Trump supporter. There was the massacre in an El Paso Walmart that left 23 dead; minutes before the attack, the 21-year-old suspect said he was doing it as a response to “the Hispanic invasion of Texas.” And there was the slaughter of 51 people during prayer in two New Zealand mosques by a right-wing zealot who said he saw Mr. Trump as “a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose.”

In 2017, a federal judge in Kentucky ruled that Mr. Trump could be sued by protesters who had been assaulted at a 2016 rally where he had said, “Get ’em out of here!” That statement was “an order, an instruction, a command,” the judge said, and the protesters’ injuries were “a direct and proximate result” of Mr. Trump’s words. The case was dismissed on appeal, but the judge was right: Mr. Trump’s supporters know that his first response is the truest expression of his beliefs, and Mr. Trump, for all his dissembling, knows exactly what he is saying.

This harm won’t end with Mr. Trump’s presidency. His toxic rhetoric has filtered down to elementary and secondary schools around the country, where children have been repeating the president’s most vile language for the past five years. In hundreds of cases, children have reported being mocked, harassed or attacked for being Hispanic, Black or Muslim, according to a survey by The Washington Post. Many of the incidents have made reference to Mr. Trump’s border wall, including one case last year in which a 13-year-old New Jersey boy told a Mexican-American classmate that “all Mexicans should go back behind the wall.” Soon after, the 13-year-old assaulted the boy and knocked his mother unconscious.

“It’s gotten way worse since Trump got elected,” said Ashanty Bonilla, a Mexican-American high school student who endured so much ridicule from classmates that she changed schools. “They hear it. They think it’s OK. The president says it. … Why can’t they?”

More from the Series: End Our National Crisis

Why They Loved Him !

Farah Stockman      October 16, 2020
This article is part of a special Sunday Review: End Our National Crisis.
Opinion | Why They Loved Him
The president tricked working-class voters. But the problems he railed about are real.         nytimes.com

 

The Foreign Policy That Wasn’t

This article is part of a special Sunday Review: End Our National Crisis.

Miami grapples with how to save treasured bay from rising seas and pollution

Miami grapples with how to save treasured bay from rising seas and pollution

STEPHANIE EBBS, JON SCHLOSBERG, GINGER ZEE and LINDSEY GRISWOLD                       

An unprecedented fish kill in Miami’s Biscayne Bay this summer has brought a new push to address issues caused by sea level rise and pollution.

Sea-level rise in Miami and southeast Florida is not a new problem. The water in the area has risen 5 inches since 1993, and a new $400 million pump system is what is keeping a large part of the city dry.

The Miami-Dade County Water and Sewer Department is already planning for a worst-case scenario when it comes to sea-level rise.

“If you look from now till 2040 — so 20-year horizon — we’re planning on worst case about 11 inches of sea level rise, which if you live in South Florida that’s a very frightening thing in your coastal community,” Kevin Lynskey, the department’s director, told ABC News.

PHOTO: 'It's not too late' climate segment with Ginger Zee (ABC News)
PHOTO: ‘It’s not too late’ climate segment with Ginger Zee (ABC News)

Biscayne Bay is described as a turquoise paradise that laps at the coast of southeast Florida and kisses the barrier island of Miami Beach. It includes a national park and aquatic preserve to protect wildlife in the area.

Rachel Silverstein, executive director of the advocacy group Miami Waterkeeper, called it one of the jewels of the state.

“Biscayne Bay generates billions of dollars annually for our regional economy,” she said.

But the bay is dying.

PHOTO: In this Aug. 12, 2020, file photo, a dead fish floats on the surface of the water in Downtown Miami on Biscayne Bay. (Daniel A. Varela/Miami Herald via AP, FILE)
PHOTO: In this Aug. 12, 2020, file photo, a dead fish floats on the surface of the water in Downtown Miami on Biscayne Bay. (Daniel A. Varela/Miami Herald via AP, FILE)

 

Canals are carrying trash, fertilizer runoff and contamination from failing septic tanks into the bay.

Over the summer, all the chemicals running into the bay — combined with record heat levels — starved the oxygen out of the water, killing thousands of fish.

“These suffocation events, and this is something that just happened recently in Biscayne Bay, just in early August … is a well-documented pattern of how water bodies essentially die, all around Florida and all around the world, so there’s a very tight connection between nutrient pollution and bacteria levels and these kinds of fish kills,” Silverstein said.

Louis Aguirre, a reporter from Miami ABC affiliate WPLG, recently produced a special about the challenges facing Biscayne Bay.

“We have over 100,000 septic tanks in Miami-Dade County — still to this day. And we need to transition those septic tanks and connectors to our sewer system, which is also aging, ASAP because those septics are just spewing wastewater into our groundwater. You know Miami-Dade only stays 6 feet above sea level, so whatever goes through our groundwater goes into our bay, and that’s pretty disgusting,” he told ABC News.

In a typical septic system, waste from the house enters the tank, the solid waste settles to the bottom and the water goes to the drain field to be clarified. But when sea levels rise it interferes with that process, and the drain field mixes with groundwater and the septic tank fails.

That means waste from a toilet can go directly into the groundwater.

The Miami Dade Water and Sewer Department tells ABC News they have identified 10,000 tanks today that are not high enough anymore, and in 20 years, that number will reach 50,000.

Lynskey explained they are not just focused on septic, they’re also concerned about the canal systems keeping South Florida from turning back into a swamp. As sea levels rise, the canals pick up more trash, nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizer used on farms and lawns and carries it right into Biscayne Bay.

PHOTO: In this Aug. 12, 2020, file photo, trash and dead fish float on the surface of the water in Downtown Miami, on Biscayne Bay. (Daniel A. Varela/Miami Herald via AP, FILE)
PHOTO: In this Aug. 12, 2020, file photo, trash and dead fish float on the surface of the water in Downtown Miami, on Biscayne Bay. (Daniel A. Varela/Miami Herald via AP, FILE)

 

But there is cause for hope.

Tampa Bay faced a similar challenge in the 1970s when the water was so covered in algae the seagrass died and fish and wildlife was driven out. After decades of effort to prevent polluted water from entering the bay, the seagrass has returned to nearly the same level as 1950, an area the size of Manhattan.

But Miami Waterkeeper said the city needs big changes in its sewage infrastructure to prevent more fish kills and preserve the bay.

“So we urgently need to be doing these investments and taking these opportunities we have to retrofit how our city is built and how it functions to be ready for sea-level rise,” Silverstein told ABC News.

The city of Miami agrees the problem is serious, but Lynskey said local leaders haven’t agreed on a path forward. The department is in the process of raising key infrastructure as high as 20 feet above sea level to reduce risk.

“Nobody’s come up with a magic bullet, we’ve already built billions of dollars of buildings and infrastructure. How do we make those survive? We’re still very much grappling with all that,” Lynskey said.

He said that as the sea level continues to rise tough decisions may have to be made from expensive septic tank replacements to decisions on whether to relocate.

“I think over the next 15 years, people are going to have to make some fundamental decisions on whether we’re going to try to keep every inch of land that humans live on, or are there some properties east of the ridge, where ultimately we retreat from and politically, I don’t think we’re there yet, but behind the scenes you can hear the conversations,” Lynskey told ABC News.

Republicans want to open pristine Alaska wilderness to logging. It’s a tragedy

Republicans want to open pristine Alaska wilderness to logging. It’s a tragedy

Kim Heacox                        October 25, 2020
<span>Photograph: Design Pics Inc/Alamy</span>
Photograph: Design Pics Inc/Alamy

Forests are the lungs of the Earth.

Around the world, every minute of every day, trees perform magic. They inhale vast amounts of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, and exhale oxygen, the stuff of life. They keep things in balance. And no single forest does this better – contains more living plant life per area, or stores more carbon – than the 17m-acre Tongass national forest in coastal Alaska.

Related: Big oil’s answer to melting Arctic: cooling the ground so it can keep drilling

Take a deep breath. The oxygen you just pulled into your lungs that entered your bloodstream and nourished your mind was once in a tree.

The Amazon of North America, the Tongass is mostly a roadless, wilderness kingdom of mosses, lichens, salmon, deer, bald eagles and bears – all beneath ice-capped mountains, ribboned with blue glaciers, blanketed with green, shaggy stands of Sitka spruce, western red cedar and western hemlock. Trees up to 10 feet in diameter, 200 feet tall, and 800 years old. But while the Amazon is a tropical rainforest, the Tongass, found at the mid-latitudes, is a temperate rainforest, one of the rarest biomes on Earth (found only in coastal Alaska and British Columbia, the Pacific north-west, the southern coast of Chile, and the South Island of New Zealand).

A true old-growth forest, the Tongass represents a council of ancients. Indigenous Tlingit elders say it is rich with answers – even wisdom – if we ask the right questions and show proper restraint.

And what does the Trump administration intend to do with it?

Open it up for business.

Their plan, more than two years in the making and spearheaded by the Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski, secretary of agriculture, Sonny Perdue, and Alaska governor, Mike Dunleavy – all Republicans bereft of a science education and an ecological conscience – is simple and wrongheaded: put the Tongass back to work as a so-called “healthy” forest, according to Mr Perdue. How? By re-introducing large-scale clearcut logging and extensive road building on 9.3m acres. To do this, they must exempt Alaska from the 2001 US Forest Service “Roadless Rule”, an enlightened conservation initiative that applies to 39 states. In short, the Tongass would no longer be protected.

A final decision is likely to be released later this month.

Never mind that 96% of thousands of recent public comments say the Tongass should remain roadless to protect clean water, salmon streams, wildlife habitat and old-growth trees. Never mind as well that logging the Tongass would create few jobs while adding to an already bloated federal deficit.

Logging in Alaska is heavily subsidized.

Back in the 1970s, 80s and 90s, taxpaying Americans anted up an average of $30m a year. One deficit sale offered every 1,000 board feet of timber for less money than the cost of a cheeseburger. All while many of the trees were shipped “in the round” (as whole logs) to Asia to become rayon, cellophane and other throwaway consumer goods. Another sale generated only 2.5 cents on every dollar the Forest Service spent building roads and preparing paperwork.

And today? To build roads in the Tongass would cost taxpayers up to $500,000 a mile.

The wholesale destruction of our imperiled planet’s most life-sustaining forests has to stop

Anthropologist and former Alaska writer laureate Richard Nelson, who lived in Sitka, on the edge of the Tongass, once said he wasn’t bothered when he found a stump in the forest. What broke his heart was when he came upon a “forest of stumps”. Entire mountainsides, valleys and islands shorn of trees.

Yes, parts of the Tongass can be responsibly cut, and are. Many local Alaska economies use second-growth stands to harvest good building materials.

And yes, a ravaged forest will return, but not for a long time. The Alaska department of fish and game estimates that large, industrial-scale Tongass clearcuts need more than 200 years to “acquire the uneven-aged tree structure and understory characteristic of old growth”. That is, to be truly healthy and robust again. This according to scientists, not politicians.

The wholesale destruction of our imperiled planet’s most life-sustaining forests has to stop. How? A good first step: vote for politicians who make decisions based on solid science.

Between 2001 and 2017, 800m acres of tree cover (an area nearly 50 times larger than the Tongass) disappeared worldwide, all while global temperatures climbed, wild birds and mammals perished by the billions, and fires, hurricanes, tornadoes and droughts intensified. And since 2017? Witness Australia and California.

What few large, primal forests remain intact today, such the Tongass, become increasingly valuable for their ability to mitigate climate change. Scientists call this “pro-forestation”: the practice of leaving mature forests intact to reach their full ecological potential. The Tongass alone sequesters 3m tons of C02 annually, the equivalent of removing 650,000 gas-burning cars off the roads of the US every year.

The better we understand science and indigenous wisdom, the better we’ll recognize the living Earth as a great teacher that’s fast becoming our ailing dependent. We each get three minutes without oxygen, and we’re not the only ones. It’s a matter of having a deep and abiding regard for all life.

Call it respect.

“What makes a place special is the way it buries itself inside the heart,” Nelson wrote in his memoir, The Island Within. “[N]ot whether it’s flat or rugged, rich or austere, wet or arid, gentle or harsh, warm or cold, wild or tame. Every place, like every person, is elevated by the love and respect shown toward it, and by the way in which its bounty is received.”

  • Kim Heacox is the author of books including The Only Kayak, a memoir, and Jimmy Bluefeather, the only novel to ever win the National Outdoor Book Award. He lives in Alaska, on the edge of the Tongass

As hearings begin, a ‘power grab without principle’ comes into view

MSNBC – MaddowBlog

As hearings begin, a ‘power grab without principle’ comes into view

A fundamental question hangs overhead: is there a coherent defense for launching a Supreme Court confirmation process right now?

 

Image:Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, meets with Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., at the Capitol on Sept. 30, 2020.

The Senate Judiciary Committee will, as promised, begin consideration today of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination, and under normal circumstances, the political world would be pondering a variety of routine questions. What are the nominee’s qualifications? What do we know about her ideology? And judicial temperament?

With Barrett, in particular, there are a series of more specific questions. How eager is the young conservative to tear down the Affordable Care Act? What about the jurist’s record of fierce opposition to reproductive rights? How seriously should senators consider her recent disclosure failures?

But as critically important as those questions are, as this week’s proceedings get underway, a more fundamental question hangs overhead: is there a coherent defense for launching this process right now? A recent Washington Post editorial rings true:

Mr. Trump is asking Senate Republicans to perpetrate a damaging injustice by ramming through a nominee on the eve of a presidential election. This move threatens to sully the court and aggravate suspicions over the coming election. Senate Republicans should be disgusted at playing the role they are being asked to play. But so far they seem shameless in their hypocrisy and wanton in their willingness to poison the workings of our democracy.

The editorial added that the GOP effort to ram through Barrett’s nomination, even as millions of ballots are being cast, is “a power grab without principle.”

Much of the American mainstream agrees. A new ABC News/Washington Post poll found that a 52% majority of the country believes the Senate “should delay filling the court’s current vacancy,” leaving the matter to the winner of next month’s presidential election. This is roughly in line with other recent polling on the matter.

What’s more, USA Today reported last week on a focus group with Republican women in swing states, each of whom voted for Donald Trump in 2016, and “none of them favored the idea of moving forward with a confirmation process before the election, and several said they were more likely to support Biden as a result.”

What’s more, there aren’t just issues of basic fairness to consider; there are also pandemic-era practical considerations.

There are 12 Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and two of them — Utah’s Mike Lee and North Carolina’s Thom Tillis — recently tested positive for the coronavirus. Common sense suggested the diagnoses should delay the proceedings, but Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) announced he would push ahead anyway.

Indeed, Graham, who was recently with Lee — indoors, without a mask — is refusing to even be tested for the virus. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), another Judiciary Committee member, has also said he will not take a test to determine whether he’s contracted the virus.

There’s no great mystery here: if Graham and/or Grassley were to get tested, they might receive discouraging news, at which point they’d have to go into quarantine, putting Barrett’s confirmation at risk. It’s hardly a stretch to think this explains their reluctance to get tested.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), a Judiciary Committee member facing a tough re-election fight, conceded over the weekend that it “would be smart” for senators on the panel to get tested before this week’s proceedings begin. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) aded over the weekend, in reference to Ernst’s comments, “She’s right, but will Senator Ernst do anything if Senators Graham and Grassley refuse? Or is this just an empty statement?”

These need not be rhetorical questions.

“Don’t cry for my White House staffers.”

Ego maniac trump’s disregard for anyone and anything except his narcissistic self interest. “Don’t Cry for Me Secret Service”

Lincoln Project Trolls Trump’s Balcony Stunt With Singalong ‘Evita’ Parody

Ed Mazza, Overnight Editor, HuffPost                     October 7, 2020

President Donald Trump marked his return to the White House on Monday from hospitalization for the coronovirus with a photo-op at the Truman Balcony ― a scene his critics likened to the iconic moment from the musical “Evita.”

Now his critics on the right turned that comparison into a song parody.

The Lincoln Project ― a group of never-Trump Republicans ― released “Covita,” a parody based on the musical’s showstopper:

The Lincoln Project did not say who sang the track. Asked on Twitter, co-founder Rick Wilson responded: “I’ll never tell.”

Patti LuPone, who originated the role on Broadway and won a Tony as Eva Peron, weighed in on Trump’s balcony appearance a day earlier on social media.

“I still have the lung power and I wore less makeup,” she wrote on Twitter. “This revival is closing November 3rd.”

The “Covita” video was one of several released by The Lincoln Project on Tuesday. The group also dropped a much more somber video on the toll of the infection amid Trump’s continuing efforts to downplay it:

Difference in class and empathy between President’s Obama and Clinton, Joe Biden and trump

Former President Barack Obama wished President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump good care and “a speedy recovery” on Friday after they were diagnosed with Covid – 19.

“Michelle and I are hopeful that they and others that have been affected by COVID 19 around the country are getting the care that they need, that they are going to be on the path to a speedy recovery, and it’s important I think for all of us to remember that even when we’re in the midst of big political battles with issues that have a lot at stake, that we’re all Americans and we’re all human beings, and we want to make sure everybody is healthy, Obama added in words echoing what Joe Biden said earlier today online and at a campaign speech in Michigan. “Michelle and I want to make sure we acknowledge the president and the first lady at this difficult time.”

Bill Clinton @BillClinton

We wish the President and First Lady a speedy recovery, and hope for the safety of the White House staff, the Secret Service, and others putting their lives on the line. This pandemic has affected so many. We must continue to protect ourselves, our families, and communities.

Image may contain: 1 person, text that says 'Joe Biden has pulled all negative ads out of respect for Trump. Joe Joe Biden is taking down his negative ads, going all-positive, the New York Times reports. That is what class and leadership looks like. like. Do you agree? CALL TO ACTIVISM'

What’s at stake in the SCOTUS : White House struggles to understand the ACA case it supports

MSNBC – MaddowBlog

White House struggles to understand the ACA case it supports

If the White House is going to fight to take health care benefits from millions of families, it should at least try to get the details right.
By Steve Benen,          Repeated from June 30, 2020
Image: Kayleigh McEnany

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany speaks during a press briefing at the White House on May 1, 2020.Evan Vucci / AP

Last week, Donald Trump and his team asked the Supreme Court to tear down the Affordable Care Act in its entirety, despite the ongoing pandemic. If the president succeeds in getting what he wants, his own country’s health care system would be left in shambles, and tens of millions of families would lose benefits they’ve come to rely on.

It was against this backdrop that White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany appeared on Fox News yesterday morning, and one of the co-hosts asked about the potential political fallout of destroying the existing system without having a replacement ready. The president’s chief spokesperson made the case that it’s actually Democrats who’ll have a political problem.

“Look, the American public looks at this and what they say is this: If Democrats passed an unconstitutional law several years ago, then it’s on Democrats to come forward with a solution.”

 

McEnany went on to argue that the Affordable Care Act represents a “government takeover of health care” (that’s not true), that the White House has “put forward solutions” (that’s not true), and that Democrats are moving toward “eliminating Medicare” (that’s not true).

There was, in other words, quite a bit wrong with the press secretary’s pitch. But let’s focus on two key elements.

First, to hear McEnany tell it, if Supreme Court conservatives agree to destroy the existing health care system, it will be because Democrats “passed an unconstitutional law several years ago.” She’s confused: the pending ACA case is not a test of the original law’s constitutionality. That case has already come and gone.

Rather, the current case relates to the Republicans’ 2017 tax plan and the GOP’s apparent belief that it altered the ACA in such a way as to render it unconstitutional. It’s the sort of detail the White House really ought to know while it tries to take health care coverage from millions of families.

Second, it’s almost amusing to hear McEnany insist that it’s “on Democrats to come forward with a solution.” In other words, if Republicans make a mess, the White House expects Democrats to clean it up.

In reality, however, it’s Democrats who’ve already “come forward with a solution” — it’s the ACA, and it’s working — which they continue to take steps to improve. Meanwhile, it’s Republicans who’ve spent more than a decade promising to craft an alternative to “Obamacare” that does more and costs less.

At least so far, McEnany’s party has failed to keep that promise.

‘It’s Just F*ck-Up After F*ck-up’—Trump’s COVID Advisers at Their Breaking Point

‘It’s Just F*ck-Up After F*ck-up’—Trump’s COVID Advisers at Their Breaking Point

Erin Banco, Asawin Suebsaeng                October 2, 2020
Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/AP
Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/AP

 

The announcement that President Donald Trump, his wife, and a top White House aide contracted coronavirus threatened, on Friday, to bring unprecedented levels of tumult to the federal government.

But even as the president was rushed to the hospital at Walter Reed, for what the White House said would be days of observation, rest and testing, officials inside the administration said they didn’t anticipate much of a shakeup in their approach to combating COVID. There would reportedly be no official revised mask policy, which remained encouraged but not required. The White House’s COVID task force would not take on an enhanced role, after operating for months on fumes.

“It’s business as usual,” as one White House official put it, even as the pandemic had come bursting through their front door.

The approach may have seemed odd considering the stakes: the leader of the free world, silent and out of sight, helicoptered to a hospital to deal with a deadly virus. But, to a degree, it merely echoed the science-skeptical mindset that has gripped Trump and his team as it has approached a likely spike in COVID cases this fall. By Friday, even some of the president’s top boosters were wondering if it was all insane.

“I support [the president’s] re-election, I think he’s done an amazing job, I think he’s Ronald Reagan on steroids. But one thing I personally don’t understand is why people don’t wear masks. I don’t understand it. Why don’t they wear masks? The president should tell people to wear them!” businessman Shalabh “Shalli” Kumar, a Trump and GOP mega-donor and chair of the Republican Hindu Coalition, said on Friday afternoon. “I hope [the infection] is very minor, and I hope that there’s no negative impact on him or the first lady at all, or anybody else associated with them. I’m very concerned about this.”

Elsewhere in Trumpworld, there was anger and internal frustrations over how the virus in general and the president’s infection in particular had been handled. Among White House staff and the re-election effort, some advisers were furious that Trump wasn’t talked out of attending a high-roller fundraiser at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club on Thursday night, after the White House already learned of his exposure to the virus, two administration officials said. The senior official was also exasperated that the way the White House bungled the information rollout in the past couple days left the administration wide-open to allegations of yet another disastrous cover-up.

“It’s just fuck-up after fuck-up,” said a senior administration official who works with the coronavirus task force. “I don’t have much more to add [beyond] that.”

The anger expressed in some corners of Trumpworld on Friday was similar to the frustrations those inside the administration have come to feel. For weeks the president’s medical advisers have been increasingly on the outs. But in recent days officials have grown increasingly resigned to the idea that keeping the public informed about the threats the virus poses while maintaining favor with the president is an impossible task.

In the hours leading up to the president’s announcement of a new coronavirus testing initiative last week in the Rose Garden, officials at the Centers for Disease Control were left in the dark about the initiative’s actual details. Earlier in the day, Vice President Mike Pence and Adm. Brett Giroir, the administration’s coronavirus testing czar, had hosted a call with the nation’s governors, during which they said that the federal government planned to send states batches of Abbot BinaxNOW point-of-care tests, free of charge, with the hope that they use them for the reopening of schools.

But neither Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert, nor CDC Director Robert Redfield were on the call. And when Trump ultimately unveiled the initiative at the Rose Garden, neither Redfield, Fauci nor Dr. Deborah Birx, the coordinator of the White House coronavirus task force, appeared alongside him. (Birx has been traveling across the country to work with colleges to slow community spread). Instead, the president turned to Pence, Giroir and Scott Atlas, an adviser to Trump on COVID-19 issues, to promote the new testing plan.

For those who continue to warn that the virus will infect and kill more Americans without serious attention paid toward stopping community spread, the frustrations have hit a boiling point.

“We used to meet seven days a week. Then five days a week. We’re now meeting one day a week and at most two times a week,” Fauci said during an interview with AIDS & LGBT rights activist Peter Staley last week. “The way things have evolved at the White House is that there has been a pivot away from the reliance on a daily type of a task force discussion… on policy making and policy implementation… more towards how are we going to get this country open again economically. There is another science person— Dr. Atlas— who is much more with the president than any of the other task force members particularly Debbie Birx who used to be in that position. This is a unique situation.”

Chris Wallace Tells Fox Viewers Not to Listen to Trump COVID Adviser Scott Atlas: ‘He Has No Training’

At the heart of the matter is Trump’s belief that his election hinges on convincing the public that the virus is not the threat his own science advisers say it is.

The president and his team have traveled across the country, greeting voters and other supporters without masks. Some of those events have been inside—including rallies—while others were held outdoors. And during the presidential debate on Tuesday, Trump publicly questioned the analysis of his own coronavirus officials, saying he did not agree with a timetable that a coronavirus vaccine would not reach the American people until well into next year.

But the current delta between Trump’s political objectives and scientific reality is, sources say, even worse than it appears publicly.

Over the last several weeks, officials within the CDC, including several working with the White House coronavirus task force, have grown increasingly frustrated with the president, who they say has sidelined the nation’s top scientists and health representatives in an effort to control the narrative around the pandemic’s spread. While most admit the CDC has made mistakes, including accidentally posting guidelines about COVID-19 aerosol transmission, officials say the president has pushed aside top health officials throughout the administration primarily because they have questioned his approach to responding to the virus.

Central to the dysfunction, officials say, is Atlas, a Rasputin-like figure who has increasingly gotten hold of the president’s ear.

Several officials who interact with the neuroradiologist expressed frustration that President Trump had put his trust in an individual who has little experience working on infectious disease outbreaks. Increasingly, those frustrations are bubbling to the surface in ways that would have been unheard of in past administrations.

“He’s doing things that you would do if you wanted to tear apart the task force,” one senior Trump administration official, who works closely with the group, said of Atlas. “The president was already doing a fine job ignoring much of the counsel coming out of the task force, but [Atlas’s ascension] has made it even worse.”

This official referenced several times this summer, during which the United States had seen coronavirus surges in various areas, when Trump was being briefed on virus data or worsening situations, and would reply, “What does Scott have to say,” or “What does Scott think?”

Trump had told senior officials in recent weeks he doesn’t see Atlas on TV enough and wants him booked on more programs and cable-news shows representing the administration’s policies, said a source with direct knowledge of the president’s wishes. But even Fox News—whose airwaves initially drew Trump to Atlas—has grown wary of putting him on some programs, owing to his policy prescriptions that are deemed by many to be out-of-touch with mainstream scientific and public-health opinion.

And within the administration, trust in Atlas is even lower. In the interview with Stanley, Fauci called out Atlas for undermining an assessment by Redfield that 90 percent of Americans are still susceptible to the virus.

“I thought it was extraordinary inappropriate for him [Atlas] in a press conference like that to contradict the director of CDC as opposed to saying ‘you know, it is a complicated issue and I think I’d like to sit down and discuss this with the people from the CDC’,” Fauci said. “And then what has happened, he’s a smart guy, no doubt about it, but he tends to cherry-pick data.”

Redfield has also been quoted speaking critically about Atlas, saying—in comments overheard by NBC last week, that “everything” Atlas “says is false.” Multiple officials working with the task force, meanwhile, have said that Atlas, the president and other advisers have downplayed case numbers and complicated their efforts to inform the public about how local communities can stop the spread of the virus by issuing public health ordinates, such as mask mandates, and by recommending stricter lockdown measures.

On Friday, hours before Trump was flown to Walter Reed, Atlas was quoted as predicting the president would make “a complete and full and rapid recovery.”

There was, he insisted, “zero reason to panic.”

A Disgusting Night for Democracy

OLIVIER DOULIERY / AFP / GETTY 

The 90-minute spectacle tonight calls into question the value of having any “debates” of this sort ever again. No one knows more about public life than he or she did before this disaster began; some people know less; and everyone feels and looks worse.

Start with the supposed moderator, Chris Wallace. It became obvious five minutes in that Donald Trump’s strategy was to interrupt, yell, insult, and disrupt as often as he could. This is a strategy that can work only if no one gets in the way of it, and Chris Wallace just let it go on. Maybe Wallace was caught by surprise by Trump’s bellicosity and primate-dominance. (But—c’mon.) Even so, two or three minutes of this should have been enough to adjust. He didn’t adjust. And he let Trump roll over him.

Maybe—I don’t know—the negotiated debate rules prevented Wallace from selectively cutting off the speakers’ mics. Even so, there are ways for the people supposedly in charge of an event to demonstrate that in fact they are in charge. Wallace made clear early on that he was not.

Trump’s instincts are taken from pro wrestling, as with his famous stunt of shaving Vince McMahon’s head. Thus Trump was unconstrained by norms or unenforced rules; Wallace did not enforce the rules, and the result, as it would be in a brawl or an unrefereed sporting match, was one person unconstrained by any of the norms of “allotted time” or “take your turn” or “respectful disagreement,” and another who was half the time constrained by those expectations, and the other half taking the bait in some way.

I recorded a whole detailed minute-by-minute annotation of the debate as it unfolded, but I’m not going to dignify this disaster with any details. It was a giant mess. Did the spectacle change any votes? Who knows. Maybe some people were revved up for Trump by his assertiveness. Maybe other people—I’d guess a larger number, but it’s just a guess—were repelled by his bullying tactics.Was Biden correctly playing the long game, by turning all topics from Trump’s favored terrain (It’s about me) to Biden’s theme (It’s about you) and addressing the camera rather than Wallace or Trump?

Will either side’s strategy pay off ? I can’t say. And—just for this second—I don’t care. I’ll think about that tomorrow.

But for tonight I’ll say this was a disgusting moment for democracy. Donald Trump made it so, and Chris Wallace let him. I hope there are no more debates before this election. If they happen, I won’t waste another minute of my life watching them.

The modern presidential debate was invented in 1960. We may have seen the end of its useful life this evening.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

James Fallows is a staff writer at The Atlantic and has written for the magazine since the late 1970s. He has reported extensively from outside the United States and once worked as President Jimmy Carter’s chief speechwriter. He and his wife, Deborah Fallows, are the authors of the 2018 book Our Towns: A 100,000-Mile Journey Into the Heart of America, which was a national best seller and is the basis of a forthcoming HBO documentary.

Has our nation hit rock bottom yet?

Chicago Suntimes

Has our nation hit rock bottom yet?

Why do Trump supporters ignore the ruin he inflicts on the country? Try viewing it through the lens of addiction.
By Neil Steinberg              September 20, 2020

Drug use on Lower Wacker Drive in late 2016.
Drug use on Lower Wacker Drive in late 2016. Using drugs on a street off Lower Wacker Drive in late 2016. Neil Steinberg/Sun-Times

Almost four years ago I was tagging along with medical workers from the Night Ministry. We found ourselves standing before three people sprawled in a nest of blankets and sleeping bags off Lower Wacker Drive.

At first I held back. Then, I gingerly nudged forward, afraid they’d clam up as soon as I took out my notebook. But they didn’t. They answered whatever question I asked — their names, what drugs they were taking. I could take pictures. They weren’t embarrassed. They didn’t care about anything except getting those drugs inside themselves.

Addiction does that. You are locked into feeling that pleasure, or relief, or passing sense of normality. End of the story. You don’t care about the damage you’re inflicting upon yourself or others. You don’t care that the addiction is killing you. You could shake this emaciated woman and ask what her younger self would think of what she’s become. She’d stare back at you, hollow-eyed and uncomprehending. She doesn’t bother to eat food; what does she care about lost dreams?

That’s why I have to laugh when my somehow still idealistic friends wonder when Donald Trump’s base will abandon him. When they will finally see the ruin his presidency has caused this country and regret their role in supporting it. That’s easy: never. They’ll never give him up, just as many addicts never quit their substances, except by dying.

The concept of addiction is the best way to make sense of our country today. Trump makes his followers feel good. He soothes the ache in their broken parts. Like heroin, he makes them feel safe and secure even while doing the exact opposite. They’re not safe and secure, but on the street, endangered, living in a country wracked by a pandemic that their drug of choice trivializes and ignores. They’re teetering on an economic cliff, while shivering at pipe-dream fears about socialized medicine.

What do they care of deterioration of American democratic institutions? They’re in denial. That’s like asking a drunk driver whether his tires are properly inflated. All he cares about is how much is left in the half pint.

Sure, change is possible. I got sober 15 years ago next week, for those keeping score. But it took a life-jolting crisis. As to why 200,000 Americans dying from presidential incompetence isn’t such a crisis, and why his supporters don’t turn from his confused chaos, well, they’re still lost in their addiction. Anything can be rationalized away. Your friend shoots up, walks into the bathroom and dies. You’re sorry, but you’re still going to shoot up yourself in two hours, because that’s what you do.

Crowd members cheer toward cameras before the arrival of President Donald Trump to a Make America Great Again rally on September 19, 2020 in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

Crowd members cheer toward cameras before the arrival of President Donald Trump to a Make America Great Again rally on September 19, 2020 in Fayetteville, North Carolina.
A crowd waits for President Donald Trump to arrive for a rally Saturday in Fayetteville, North Carolina. Getty

Trump fans can still brush away the whole pandemic: no worse than the flu, numbers exaggerated, whatever Fox News told them last night, lodged in their brain and vibrating. I don’t try to tell Trump fans they’re dupes suckered by a fraud. Why bother? Interventions usually fail. Al-Anon teaches relatives of the addicted to disengage. Let the sufferer figure it out. The addict has to want to change, and for that, they usually have to hit bottom.

Has our country hit bottom yet? I sure hope so, though hope is of very little value here. There are hells below this one, and we may be heading there.

Unless we’re not. If Joe Biden manages to both win the election and keep Trump from holding onto power anyway — and I can’t say which is the greater challenge — Trump supporters won’t automatically reform. Just the opposite. They’ll spend years smearing their faces against liquor store windows, gazing at their lost passion, licking their lips and wishing for just one more slug of Make America Great Again. Hating those who took away the man who made them feel alive. Give them time. Meanwhile, we must care for ourselves, and the United States, and look forward to the day when our fellow citizens may recover clear-eyed love of country and rejoin us at dinner. That day may never come.

Trump supporters will howl, but I’ll share a secret: When you’re an addict, you stop mattering, eventually. That’s the worst fate. You sit there with your barfly friends, complaining about the raw deal you got, or take your drugs huddled in some grimy lower rung of hell, while your far-off family picks itself up and goes on without you.