The case has been made out literally since the 2019 inauguration that established Donald Trump as the president of the United States. It was immediately obvious that this was not only a man with deep psychological infirmities but an almost non-existent connection to truth and reality.
If there was any doubt that was convincingly erased in January with the publication of Michael Wolff's insider tell all, "Fire and Fury." Quite the book and still well worth reading.
Within the week a lot of us will be reading Bob Woodward's "Fear: Trump in the White House." Early reviews indicate that it will be an indictment of the president's unfitness for office.
We got primed for the release of "Fear" by yesterday's anonymous op-ed in the New York Times, "I am part of the resistance within the Trump administration."
Trump obviously is unhinged. He's not mentally sound. Apparently that was not a fatal flaw to his real estate career or his reality TV show. The presidency, however, is neither a real estate concern nor a TV show.
Trump insists he's really smart and really sane despite the mountain of anecdotal evidence to the contrary. That matters because he's America's commander in chief, the guy who can theoretically plunge the world into nuclear Armageddon.
A suggestion, a modest proposal. The idea came to me when I saw a photo of a bunker housing B-61 free fall or "gravity" nuclear bombs. Nobody, not even the bunker janitor, gets near those weapons without intensive screening and clearance.
Individuals go through extensive testing to screen out all but those who are "emotionally stable, physically capable, and who have demonstrated reliability and professional competence."
Everyone is screened except, it appears, the president of the United States.
Isn't it time Congress changed that? Shouldn't every president-elect have to go through, pre-inauguration, a week of battery tests, lengthy psychiatric interviews and extensive background checks? I went through it (almost half a century ago) and it's not difficult but it is intensive and will demonstrate if a person can be considered for training or subsequent handling of nukes.
They didn't get Trump before he was sworn in but the accumulated evidence demands that he be put under scrutiny now, right now.
It's a good thought, Mound, but Congress is currently in the hands of people every bit as deranged as Trump. I doubt there's much appetite for a complete bar on Republican presidents. Would Dubya have passed? A second term Reagan?
ReplyDeleteCap
That's a really bad idea--because if you think that any anti-Wall Street and/or any anti-military-industrial complex candidate would ever pass muster under such a screening you are deluded. The "intelligence" community would claim that they are a "threat," immediately classify the results and another safe neoliberal would be installed in what would essentially be a deep state coup d'etat.
ReplyDeleteFace it--Trump WON. He is America. I hate it too, but having unelected, unaccountable government officials choose the president would drive the final nail into the coffin of American "democracy."
You don't have a democracy, you have a kaikistocracy, and since Citizen's United, an Ogliarchy, run by Russia, Nazi's and traitors.
DeleteCap, Congress is in the hands of people every bit as morally bereft as Trump, to be sure, but I can't say they're remotely as unhinged.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Congress needs more say on certain decisions.
ReplyDeleteUU
ReplyDeleteKarl, I'm not suggesting that president-elects be screened for their suitability to serve as president, merely for access to the "football" and the authority to order a nuclear, first strike.
There is a solid debate underway whether, since the introduction of the "nuclear triad," there is any justification for the football in any case. The risk of an enemy "decapitation" strike has greatly diminished thanks to America's considerable nuclear submarine force.
Since the retaliation "mutually assured destruction" option is secure, why the need for a presidential hair-trigger capability?
What, I wonder, does emotionally stable, physically capable, and have demonstrated reliability and professional competence mean when the duty of screened personnel is to facilitate the successful maintenance and use of a device designed to threaten others with the extinction of all human life.
ReplyDeleteTrump is a sympton of a much wider societal mental illness. I don't feel safe with him or any of the 'screened' lunatics involved in nuclear preparedness.
As an antidote to all the excitement these days what with the current Congress conducting its pre-induction of the latest Justice to SCOTUS and the Oped in the NYT by a supposed anonymous senior WH operative, there is a humorous Oped in a small newspaper called the "Babylon Bee" and yes, it looks like they include an Evangelical Section, but this seems to be a bit of lark supposedly written by an "anonymous USA Presdent".
ReplyDeleteNot even Kim, Jung-Un is that mad. Anyong.
ReplyDeleteA perfectly reasonable proposal, Mound. Unfortunately, Reason exited stage right quite awhile ago.
ReplyDeleteSE, if you ever met them you would realize they don't deserve your pejorative of "lunatic." I'll put it down to your ignorance.
ReplyDelete