Month: July 2020

Michael Gerson noted in his Washington Post column of Friday, July 17 that in 2016 Trump argued that the country was in crisis. And “If everything was going to hell anyway, why not take a chance on a vivid but inexperienced leader? This turns out to have been a choice of monumental irresponsibility and immaturity.” Indeed it did, after three years of destroying the U.S. capability to lead the worldwide effort to mitigate the existential threat of climate change; reversing all previous efforts to do so; damaging American institutions; spreading divisiveness and immoral behavior everywhere; exploiting and exacerbating racial conflict and promoting ethnic hatred; wrecking American foreign policy by converting the U.S. from world leader to world’s sick-man-to-be-pitied; decimating our government’s bureaucracy by driving out many fine public servants while replacing them with arrogant, ignorant thugs; committing the civil equivalent of war crimes on our southern border by—among other abominations—tearing children from their parents’ arms and putting them in cages; trying to destroy truth along with the rule of law; referring to our free press as the enemy of the people (a popular Communist phrase); and committing other acts of evil as he proceeds to pursue reelection in his fourth year.

At the beginning of the year the United States was confronted by a real crisis as opposed to one of Trump’s own making: a deadly pandemic and resultant crashing of the economy. The pandemic had been long in coming. America’s superb, but seriously underfunded, public health sector had been warning about such a possibility for years. The World Health Organization gave a specific warning of the possible imminence of a pandemic in 2019 as did the U.S. intelligence community. Covid-19 was first clearly recognized by the world community in January of 2020.

As the situation rapidly worsened from January to March, while the health community began to take it more and more seriously, recommending by the end of February strong responsive measures, President Trump consistently downplayed the threat saying that someday it would just magically go away. This was the situation until the threat became overwhelmingly clear in the latter part of March and Trump was forced into supporting a lockdown of the economy and such other measures as social distancing. Thousands of Americans were becoming sick, hospitals were overwhelmed, patients were dying, and the economy tanking. Despite death, sickness and societal disintegration on an epic scale, Trump’s attention was fixed on the plunging Dow Jones. Understanding that the market would not snap back on its own, and against the strong advice of the health community, he began agitating to reopen the economy. He did this for the sole reason of protecting his reelection effort—without regard to the health of Americans.

What followed was predictable. Under pressure from Trump supporters around the country—some of whom engaged in armed protests and threats, the country began to open far too soon. This was particularly true in states where Trump henchmen and women were occupying the governor’s office—in Florida, Texas, Arizona and South Dakota. The public health community released a plan on how to reopen in the safest possible way, emphasizing a gradual approach with mask-wearing, social distancing and frequent hand washing along with as much testing and contact tracing as possible.

Some governors tried to be as responsive to such guidelines as they could, for example, those in Virginia, Michigan and Minnesota as well as those in such states as Ohio and Kentucky. Trump tweeted safely from his White House bubble, “LIBERATE MINNESOTA! LIBERATE MICHIGAN! LIBERATE VIRGINIA…!” Heavily armed protestors tried to intimidate the governors of these states—all Democrats—without success. On the other hand, the Trump governors reopened as fast as they could. With mixed messaging between Trump and the medical establishment, particularly in the Trump-led states, the interpretation was that there would be no more restrictions of any kind and social interactions returned to what they had been before the virus. After a lull of a few weeks, as predicted over and over by the scientific community, the coronavirus returned with overwhelming force, particularly in Florida, Texas and Arizona. This return of the virus gradually spread to the rest of the country except to the Northeast which had a severe attack of the virus in the spring and thereafter adhered strictly to the plan prepared by the scientists.

The return of the coronavirus was devastating. Florida broke all records for infections in a day and found itself ahead of most countries of the world for daily infections. The economy partially recovered, and Trump continued to minimize the virus. He disparaged social distancing. He claimed that the U.S. led the world in testing—a big lie—and he asserted over and over that the reason the U.S. had so many cases was that we did so much testing. Testing (of course) does not create cases; it finds the ones that are there. Trump touted a quack cure, a legitimate anti-malaria drug proven by the FDA to have no effect on the virus disease Covid-19 while for some people creating heart problems. He further suggested on national television that people should take injections of bleach to kill the virus. The virus might have been killed by such a procedure; the patient certainly would have been. Companies making Lysol and Clorox made public pleas that their customers not ingest their products.

The virus was now virtually out of control as a result of Trump’s self-serving policies to support his reelection, so much so that The Washington Post in its lead editorial on July 20 could say: “Time for a major reset. The virus is racing out of control. The United States is plunging ever deeper into a public health catastrophe. The coronavirus is in control of much of the country… President Trump has walked away and the nation is divided, and fractious… Warnings are flashing red almost everywhere.”

On July 21, 2020, there were 3,872,575 cases of Covid-19 recorded in the United States with 142,000 dead. On July 23rd the U.S. passed the level of four million cases with 144,000 deaths. Cases seemed to be appearing faster and faster. No matter what happens, Trump will remain in office until January 20 and if the virus continues as before (it may get worse) we will reach the level of 10 million more cases and 370,000 additional deaths by that date. Thus, should Vice President Biden win the election, his task will be to contain, reverse, and eliminate a disease that in the previous 10 months will have caused approximately 14 million cases and in the range of 510,000 deaths. He has stated that he can meet this challenge, that he knows what to do. He participated in stopping the Ebola, Swine flu and Zika epidemics. He can stop this disease, he believes.

A few days ago, Trump gave a second term speech of sorts at the White House. He said in part, emblematic of his whole short speech: “So we have many exciting things we will be announcing over the next eight weeks: I would say things that nobody has ever contemplated, thought, thought possible, things we are gonna get done… You will see levels of detail and you will see levels of thought, that a lot of people believed very strongly we didn’t have in this country. We are going to get things done that they have wanted to see done for a long, long time. So I think we’ll start sometime on Tuesday.” Judging from this incoherent forecast, we can perhaps expect in the range of 30 million cases and one million deaths from Covid-19 and a resultant persistent depression level economy by the end of a Trump second term. This state of affairs would likely be accompanied by violence and poverty on a huge scale. Who in their right mind could vote for that, four more years of what we have now? By contrast, Canada, our near neighbor, has nearly 40 million people, 112,000 cases and 8,868 deaths. If they can do it why can’t we? The answer is, of course, leadership.

Donald Trump did not run for the presidency of the United States, he ran for the office of Dictator of a Banana Republic. Tirelessly he has pursued his goal of converting the United States into such a government and himself into its paramount person or dictator. He cares nothing for American history and traditions, nothing for its principles, nothing for its people—for any of its people—beyond himself and his goals. He will commit any sin, commit any illegal act, do any evil, destroy any person, wreck any government institution or policy and freely sacrifice any person, friend, foe, ally, associate or follower to his ends.

As Steve Schmidt, John McCain’s company manager, has said, Trump is, in the true English language meaning of these words, an imbecile and an idiot. He represents a level of incompetency not seen before in someone of authority in this country. His level of corruption knows no limit. He tries to destroy truth—lies and facts are indistinguishable to him. If it’s good for him, it’s true. If it is not, it’s fake. He is possessed by evil and knows or recognizes nothing beyond that. He inflicts his poison, his evil on all who touch him. He has destroyed much of our country already with his trademark divisiveness and oppressive social and ethnic hatred. He is, in the words of a prominent U.S. Senator: “The agent of the Devil in the Biblical sense.” It is long past time for his rule to end. He may have to be first voted out and then forced out but, the essential end of it all is overdue and should happen this November.

Our Founders knew people like this:

“A dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidding appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of the Republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues and ending tyrants.”

– Alexander Hamilton, 1788

“I have sworn on the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”

– Thomas Jefferson, 1800

“A constitution of government once changed from freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever.”

– John Adams, 1775

A lady asked Dr. Franklin, “Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy?” “A republic,” replied the Doctor, “if you can keep it.”

– Benjamin Franklin, 1787

“It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government.”

– George Washington, 1796

“The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the Republican model of government are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.”

– George Washington, 1789

“The liberty of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards and it is our duty to defend them against all attack…”

– Samuel Adams, 1771

“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.”

Benjamin Franklin – proposed for the Great Seal of the United States

John Jay

 

The coronavirus epidemic is almost entirely out of control. Florida recently broke the all-time state record for new Covid-19 infections in a single day, somewhat above 15,000. Then a few days later Florida recorded a higher rate putting the state within the five top jurisdictions in the world for new cases in a single day. As terrible as the epidemic in New York was, the highest number of new cases recorded in a single day was a little over 11,000. Texas and Arizona are also breaking records in new cases and in deaths from Covid-19. As of July 14—Bastille Day in France, but no holiday in the United States—the U.S. death total reached 136,000 with predictions of 200,000 deaths from Covid-19 by October 1^st and perhaps 300,000 by the end of the year. The 1918 pandemic, the greatest of all time, caused 675,000 deaths in the United States but lasted over three years in its acute stage. Of course, influenza is still with us but, partially controlled by annual inoculations. This virus, however, is more deadly than the flu and it looks as though—at least at present—that it will surpass the 1918 pandemic in U.S. deaths.

What next? Maybe there will be a vaccine, maybe not. In any case, Trump obviously believes that lies can again hoodwink the public and maybe the virus too. For months Trump said there was no problem and did nothing. Then for a few weeks he suddenly let scientists dictate our response. The virus abated in early April, the fourth month of the epidemic in the U.S. But the “Trump” economy tanked because of stay-at-home orders and, in a few weeks, he was demanding that the economy open without following the health rules our scientific community had developed. The Governors of Florida, Texas and Arizona being Trump stooges followed orders. Things were OK for a few weeks. Then, as predicted by scientists led by top epidemiologist, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the virus came roaring back, devastating the three states and reinfecting many other parts of the country where states had partially or wholly controlled the virus.

The virus is now virtually completely out of control. Trump, realizing this, has been blaming China but that ploy is becoming less plausible. Trump has begun blaming our top and most credible and effective leader in this struggle against the virus, Dr. Fauci, without himself as president ever presenting a national plan to the country for defeating the virus. Instead, chaos has run rampant in the country, with every governor, every mayor having to cope for himself or herself. Now Trump argues that he should be reelected to the presidency in the fall and given authorization to defeat the virus since the U.S. scientific community could not control—or rather was prevented by him from controlling—the virus. Will the alleged failure of American scientists be Trump’s Reichstag fire—the Hitler-implemented incident that Adolph Hitler used as justification to seize dictatorial powers in Germany?

 

Michael Gerson had a few things to say about this in his July 14^th Post column entitled “Fauci will be Trumps most foolish attack:”  “When historians try to identify the most shameful documents from the Trump Administration a few are likely to stand out… But for rash, foolish irresponsibility, I’d nominate the opposition research paper recently circulated by the White House in an attempt to discredit the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ Anthony S. Fauci… As far as I know this official record is unique: a White House attack on the government’s leading infectious-disease scientist during a raging pandemic. It indicates an administration so far gone in rage, bitterness and paranoia that it can no longer be trusted to preserve American lives.” t Trump’s action is the equivalent of FDR’s putting out a press release declaring that General Eisenhower an incompetent general on the eve of the Normandy invasion.

By responding to the pandemic in terms of his own political interests, Trump appears not to care how much death, disease and economic pain are visited on the American people. In Gerson’s view the proper course for a leader against the pandemic is to make judgments “based on the best available information” and to make judgments that “have no other motive but the health of the public.” Trump fails on both counts; he does not make judgments based on the best information, opting at one point to consult a game show host for scientific analysis and all of his judgments are based on what he perceives as his own political interests.

In mid-April there was a moment when the virus was being contained at 25,000 new cases a day and four to six weeks more of enforceable stay at home orders might have driven the virus down to low sustainable levels as happened in Europe. But as Gerson puts it, Trump’s nerve failed him, and he gave in to populist demands to reopen and encouraged governors to reopen in a precipitous and dangerous manner. The result was catastrophe. Trump was “weak, weak, weak” at the defining moment.

There is perhaps another interpretation. Maybe Trump doesn’t want the virus to go away as he isn’t sure the economy will bounce back by November. In this case, the pandemic becomes his ticket to declaring an emergency in November and bypassing the election results to remain president should the vote goes against him. He has long admired dictators and he has several times expressed admiration for the Chinese decision to promote President Xi to paramount leader for life. A November emergency could be his chance. Trump doesn’t like such American principles as the rule of law, equal rights for all, free elections and the freedom of the press. He doesn’t even appear to like this country and its peoples, himself excluded of course. Such a move would put him on the list of America’s enemies where he would join people who thought or think as he does such as, Adolph Hitler, General Hideki Tojo, Vladimir Putin, Victor Orban and Xi Jinping.

CNN’s White House reporter Jim Acosta, after a discussion about Dr. Fauci, was asked who was left in the White House to restrain Trump.  He replied that there isn’t anyone but those who have drunk the Kool-Aid and relatives. It seems clear that all involved in this exercise of attacking our top epidemiologist at the height of the pandemic, an act so deeply contrary to the interests and the health of America, so severe a threat to our national security, that they have forever disqualified themselves, from the President on down, from serving even one more day in our national government and should be removed in the most expeditious way possible, never to return.

Our Founders clearly agree.

“That people who pay greater respect to a wealthy villain than an honest upright man in poverty, almost deserve to be enslaved; they plainly show that the wealth however it may be acquired, is in their esteem to be preferred to virtue… Surely you never will tamely suffer this country to be a den of thieves.” – John Hancock, 1774

“It is  substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government.” – George Washington, 1796

“A constitution of government once changed from freedom can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever.” –  John Adams, 1775

“Those who would give up essential liberty to produce a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin, 1755

John Jay

In the past year President Trump has expressed admiration of China’s creating the post of president for life. He indicated he would like to try that. Many took his comment as a joke, but it probably wasn’t.

Now would-be dictator Trump has found that he really does operate in a constitutional system. For the just-decided financial records cases in the Supreme Court, he had argued that he had, as president, “absolute immunity” from criminal proceedings and subpoenas from federal and state courts. The Supreme Court decided both cases against President Trump. The state court case resulted in the Chief Justice’s majority opinion, a concurring opinion and two dissenting opinions. The case was decided 7-2, All opinions rejected President Trump’s “absolute immunity argument,” the Chief Justice also noting in his opinion that no one was above the law in the American constitutional system. The vote against “absolute immunity” was 9-0. It is reminiscent of a similar vote on an argument by President Nixon seeking to shield the tape recordings of his possible criminal conversations at the White House. That argument was rejected by the same score, 9-0.

Turning to the election scheduled for November 3^rd in which Trump will be seeking a second term, one wonders what he might do after that to stay in office permanently—wrecking the American constitutional system—or at least trying mightily to do so. But he may not be elected to a second term. Reliable polls show 57 percent of American votes oppose him compared to only 27 percent for former Vice President Biden, his opponent. And unparalleled in American presidential history 49 percent “strongly” oppose him. Usually this number is small.

Some believe that if he can’t win the election, he will reject its outcome and try to stay in office. He will summon thousands of well-armed supporters to Washington to sow chaos. Already he is claiming, falsely, at every opportunity that mail-in ballots are subject to unlimited fraud and are essentially unreliable—despite the fact that mail-in ballots have been used by various jurisdictions in the United States for many years and that he himself has used them. Attorney General Barr, who seems intent on matching Trump lie for lie, supports his fake claims about mail-in ballots.

Could the plan be to create widespread chaos in the days after the election? The sheer volume of voters who will opt for mail ballots because of the pandemic will be beyond anything in American experience. If the vote is close, it could be weeks before a winner is clearly determined. Currently it appears that Joe Biden will win by a wide, irrefutable margin; he is 11 points ahead in Minnesota and Michigan—swing states in 2016 and 10 points ahead in Pennsylvania. Some polls show Biden ahead by well over 10 points nationally. These are landslide numbers. But this lead could narrow by election day.

If the vote is close enough that a winner cannot be declared for some time, Trump’s possible plan to create violent chaos in Washington and other cities by rejecting a mail-in election as fraudulent could be a major threat. He would ask the Supreme Court to rule as they did in Bush v. Gore in 2000. His armed mobs could try to intimidate both the Supreme Court and also the Electors spread around the country in state capitols. But the Supreme Court appears to have made clear in the two opinions on financial records that does Trump not have “absolute immunity” nor will they be Trump’s enablers should he attempt some extra-constitutional ploy in relation to the election. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs also delivered a similar message as well after Trump co-opted the Chairman and the Secretary of Defense to associate themselves with his bizarre photo-op in front of St. John’s Church across Lafayette Square from the White House, having violently clearing peaceful demonstrators from the square.

We must all be alert to this threat. It hangs over the election like a black cloud and only the American people with a decisive vote on November 3^rd can dispel it. As the Washington Post in the lead editorial, “Unforgiveable” said on July 11^th, “The president seems to be doing his best, within the confines of the U.S. constitutional system, to emulate the gangster leadership of Russian president Vladimir Putin, a man whose ruinous reign Mr. Trump has always admired. If the country needed any more evidence Friday [after commuting the sentence of a guilty Roger Stone] confirmed that the greatest threat to the Republic is the president himself.” In the same vein Roger Cohen in his July 11^th New York Times column entitled “The Most Dangerous Phase of Trump’s Rule” opines that “…the overarching threat the United States faces in the run-up to the November 3^rd election is from Trump. The fascism in the air is on the far right of the political spectrum… Trump is preparing the ground to contest any loss to Joe Biden and remain president, aided no doubt by Attorney General William Barr’s Justice Department. I know its unthinkable. So was the Reichstag fire…”

“If the federal government should overpass the just grounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have found, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.” – Alexander Hamilton, 1788

“We should be unfaithful to ourselves, if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties, if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous and independent elections. If an election is to be determined by a majority of a single vote, and that can be procured by a party, through artifice or corruption, the government may be the choice of a party, for its own ends, not of the nation for the national good.” – John Adams, 1799

John Jay

After many years of negotiation, on July 18, 2015 an agreement limiting nuclear capability and technology—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the JCPOA, often just called the Iran Agreement—was concluded between Iran and P5+1, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. It was in actuality an agreement between the United Nations Security Council, represented by the P5+1 with Iran as to what Iran must do to restore itself as a compliant party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to return to being a full-fledge member of the world community. It was approved by 15 to 0 vote in Security Council, the United States (of course) voting in the affirmative like all other members of the Council. It entered into force ninety days later on October 18, 2015. The obligation under the Agreement of the United States was to lift its economic sanctions against Iran in phases as provided for in the Agreement. Of course, the agreement was not perfect but, it was nevertheless a tour de force which largely cut back Iran’s capability to build a nuclear weapon and came with broad, highly intrusive verification and monitoring obligations from which it would be impossible to break out without immediate detection and nearly immediate return of a very harsh sanctions environment. The Agreement could never be resurrected if it did not survive.

When the Agreement entered into force, the period of time in which Iran could break out and build a nuclear weapon increased from a few weeks to 10-12 months. One of the preambular paragraphs read, “Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire nuclear weapons.” No other country in the world has ever made such an unequivocal and unconditional commitment. The Agreement reaffirmed American world leadership. Second, the JCPOA places well defined time limits on Iran’s nuclear weapon program of ten to fifteen years, immeasurably enhancing confidence during the Agreement’s term that Iran will not seek or acquire a nuclear weapon. Third, it provides the basis for transparency of procurement and verification of nuclear activities so that the International Atomic Energy Agency—inspecting on 24/7/365 basis—can determine whether Iran’s program is exclusively peaceful.

Then, Donald Trump was elected and early on announced that he would withdraw from the Iran Agreement and reinstate US sanctions. The following year Mike Pompeo was appointed the Secretary of State and the U.S. announced its withdrawal on May 18, 2018. There was talk of regime change. Trump and Pompeo had no alternate plan, of course, just get tough with Iran. The Europeans tried to keep it going but the U.S. put secondary sanctions on European companies that did business with Iran so that effort soon failed. The U.S. had no plan, no policy. Republicans seem to like that; the Bush Administration took us into Iraq with no plan. The result was catastrophe. It seemed that might be the case here and as of today that is what it is: China has signed a huge cooperation agreement with Iran. There will be increased military cooperation and joint military training.

China will likely still help Iran with its alleged nuclear weapon arrangement with North Korea. In 2013 the London Times reported that one of the leaders of the Iran nuclear weapon program was in attendance at the third North Korean test. There were indications that Iran had an agreement with North Korea for them to supply nuclear warheads to Iran in a crisis. This North Korean test was to demonstrate the compatibility of Iran’s mainstay missile, the Shahab-3, with the North Korean mainstay medium range missile. The test was successful. Iran’s mainstay missile is compatible with North Korean nuclear weapons. The Iranian official apparently traveled to and from North Korea across China.

China also will build free trade zones in Iran and the Persian Gulf and two ports on the Gulf of Oman near to the Straits of Hormuz. Iran will also be provided with a 5G network, high speed rail and airports.  The total of the investment over time will be $400 billion.

This is a strategic disaster of the first magnitude. Iran will be able to dominate the Middle East with China’s help. This foolish policy of ours has driven Iran straight into the arms of China at great cost to the United States.

The Founders would have taken a dim view of such a misguided and reckless policy that the United States has pursued.

“Observe good faith and justice toward all nations, cultivate peace and harmony with all…” – George Washington, 1796

“Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances, with any portion of the foreign world: so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements.” – George Washington, 1796

“The natural cure for an ill administration in a popular or representative constitution is a change of men.” – Alexander Hamilton, 1788

John Jay

 

Alexander Hamilton expressed the following in the Federalist Papers in 1788:

“Nothing is more to be desired than that every practical obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the union?”

Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers to support the ratification of the Constitution by the 13 former colonies, then independent states. But in writing this passage Hamilton today seems to have been peering into the future. Isn’t that exactly what President Donald J. Trump is, a “creature” of Vladimir Putin, president of Russia? Afraid to contradict him; accepting Putin’s view of possible Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election publicly against the findings of his own intelligence agencies; meeting with him with no other Americans present and refusing to report what was discussed; he “always finds a way to let Putin win.” This conclusion served as the title of an article in the Washington Post Outlook section on July 5 by former Ambassador Michael McFaul.

That article begins as follows, commenting on an incident already widely reported by many news services: “Russian President Vladimir Putin appears to have paid Taliban rebels in Afghanistan to kill U.S. soldiers. Having resulted in one American death and maybe more, these Russian bounties reportedly produced the desired outcome. While deeply disturbing, this effort led by Putin is not surprising. It follows a clear pattern of ignoring international norms, rules and laws—and daring the United States to do anything about it…. More alarming is President Trump’s response: nothing. This too follows a pattern of fealty before Putin, as the president has consistently praised Putin, dismissed Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, never criticized Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and uttered not a word about violation of human rights and growing atrocities.”

Trump claims he was never briefed on the matter and his national security council spokesman has stated that “the veracity of the allegations continue to be evaluated.” But on February 27 this information did appear in the Presidential Daily Brief. According to Ambassador McFaul who worked at the National Security Council before his appointment to Russia, “only the most serious intelligence findings [appear] in that most precious of intelligence products.” All presidents before Trump tried to read the PDB first thing every day. But even if Trump didn’t read the February 27 briefing—he reads almost nothing which explains a lot—his national security advisor who also gets the PDB has an obligation to discuss it with him. Perhaps Trump was truly unaware of this intelligence before it became public, but as soon as he was made aware of it, without even reviewing it, he promptly labeled it as “just another hoax” clearly indicating that his allegiance is to Putin not to his own intelligence officials and to American soldiers serving the country in a war situation. This behavior is demonstrably a direct threat to American independence and American democracy. For any other president it would have meant instant impeachment. But most Republicans in Congress enable and cover up this blatant anti-American behavior. Four more years of such deference will reduce the United States to a vassal of Russia.

Another Founder also had something to say about this sort of authority.

“We should be unfaithful to ourselves, if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties, if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous and independent elections. If an election is to be determined by a majority of a single vote and that, can be procured by a party, through artifice or corruption, the government may be the choice of a party, for its own ends, not of the nation for the national good. If that solitary suffrage can be obtained by foreign nations by flattery or menace, by fraud or violence, by terror intrigue or venality, the government may not b– 1797e the choice of the America people, but of foreign nations. It may be foreign nations who govern us, and not We the People who govern ourselves.” – John Adams, 1797

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. – George Washington, 1796

John Jay

Attorney General Bob Barr has always been known as a conservative. He has been Attorney General before, for President George H.W. Bush. In those days he was thought of as a principled conservative and an excellent Attorney General. Some believe he has tarnished that reputation in his service as Attorney General for President Trump. As reported by Mattathias Schwartz in his article “The Advocate” in the New York Times Magazine of June 7, the columnist Michael Gerson has said that Barr is committed to the “hierarchical” and authoritarian “premise” that a top-down ordering of society will produce a more moral society. “In a 2019 speech at the University of Notre Dame he put forth that ‘piety lay at the heart of the Founders’ model of self-government, which depended on religious values to restrain human passions. ‘The Founding generation were Christians,’ Barr said. Goodness flows from ‘a transcendent Supreme Being’ through ‘individual morality’ to form the social order. Reason and experience merely serve to inform the infallible divine law. That law, he said, is under threat from ‘militant secularists’ including ‘so-called progressives,’ who call on the state ‘to mitigate the social costs of personal misconduct and irresponsibility.’ At their feet, Barr places mental illness, drug overdoses, violence and suicide. All these things, he said, are getting worse. All are ‘the bitter results of the new secular age.’”

This is not the populism and crypto-fascism of his boss. It is a philosophy we can imagine being spoken by a Cardinal/advisor to a European monarch of limited intelligence. The Founders from Washington, Hamilton and Jefferson on down would have been startled to have heard themselves described in such a manner. They all were in reality Deists, children of the Enlightenment, believing in the sanctity of reason.

In its lead editorial of May 10, 2020, “Mr. Barr and the Perversion of Justice,” the New York Times notes Barr’s claim that “history is written by the winners” (perhaps he considers himself such) and asserts that he is abusing his power not to write, but to erase, some of the most important lessons of American history. “The Watergate scandal with its revelations of how dangerous a renegade White House could be, led to reforms meant to ensure an independent Justice Department, one faithful to the law rather than to the Oval Office.

“The nation had seen firsthand how much harm a president with no respect for the law could do—particularly when he used the Justice Department, under a compliant attorney general to protect allies, punish adversaries and cover up wrongdoing.

“Among the key reforms were stronger transparency and ethics rules, like the creation of independent inspectors general to root out waste, fraud and abuse in the executive branch…

“To Mr. Barr, their reforms were obstacles to a vision of a virtually unbound executive. For decades he has pushed to give presidents—Republican presidents anyway—maximum authority with minimum oversight. In a 2018 memo criticizing the Russia investigation, he argued that the president ‘alone is the Executive Branch’ in whom the ‘Constitution vests all federal law enforcement power, and hence prosecutorial discretion.’ For the attorney general that discretion includes cases involving the president’s own conduct.”

Such a vision of the presidency could be as described as a Super Nixonian White House. The editorial quotes Douglas Kmiec, Head of the Office of Legal Counsel at DOJ for Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush as well as Donald Ayre, Deputy Attorney General under George H.W. Bush. The former asserts, “George III would have loved it” and the latter that the America Bill Barr wants is “a Banana Republic where all are subject to the whims of a dictatorial president and his henchmen.”

The editorial correctly asserts, “The nation’s founders did not wage a war for independence from a tyrant who considered himself to embody the law so that the republic would tolerate another executive who considers himself above the law.” As James Madison put it in the Federalist Papers No. 47, “An elective despotism was not the government we fought for…but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.”

General Michael Hayden, a former CIA Director, has said that Bill Barr reminds him of David Addington who subscribed to the same philosophy:  “…if the president wants it, most time he gets it and it’s legal.” Barr has enabled Trump at every turn, discredited the Mueller investigation, covered up Trump’s efforts to gain foreign influence in the election, and go easy on General Flynn and Roger Stone. Now his lead task is helping Trump subvert the election. Barr is doing this in four ways.

First, Barr is actively undoing the work of the Department of Justice to address the counterintelligence threat exposed during the 2016 election. Trump and Barr want the Russians back.

Second, Barr is castigating the work by federal law enforcement that sought to hold accountable those who undermined the 2016 elections.

Third, Barr is making clear that those who work with Trump to subvert the elections will get special treatment from DOJ if Trump is reelected. Rudolph Giuliani with his criminal activities in Ukraine and elsewhere is being protected. That necessity explains why the chief prosecutor in the Southern District of New York was fired.

Fourth, any attorney general committed to his job and who wants to serve the American would be fighting disinformation. Barr is doing the opposite, lying about mail-in ballots being especially vulnerable to fraud, without any evidence because there isn’t any. Rather than “open the floodgates of potential fraud” as Barr claims, main-in ballots—since they are paper not electronic—are a strong defense against election interference by Russia, China and others. In 2016, disinformation such as this was coming from Putin. Now it’s coming from Trump and Barr, but maybe that’s the same thing. In addition, Barr appears to be hinting at indictments of Biden and Obama, right before the election—a move certain to cause a scandal.

Our Founders would despise these new Super Nixons.

“If it be asked, what is the most sacred duty and the greatest source of our security in a Republic? The answer would be, an inviolable respect for the Constitution and Laws—the first growing out of the last…a sacred respect for the constitutional law is the vital principle, the sustaining energy of a free government.” — Alexander Hamilton, 1794

“I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” — Thomas Jefferson, 1800

“ I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation had a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another.” — George Washington, 1796

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican government.” — George Washington, 1796

John Jay

Prominent statesmen with good reason are today sounding the alarm that the world community is entering a new Cold War. These senior statesmen and respected individuals are correct to be concerned; the world indeed has fallen into an enormous crisis—if not a new Cold War. Today’s crisis is not yet as dangerous as was the Cold War, but it could become so or worse soon. This is an age featuring a fundamental failure of leadership worldwide; the collapse of institutions; the abandonment of the relevance of facts, truth and honesty; the rise of ignorant, incompetent, arrogant, fascistic leaders; a looming climate crisis that may destroy human civilization in a few decades; the erosion of controls over much smaller, but still hugely lethal nuclear-weapon stockpiles; the risk of the rapid weakening of non-proliferation commitments, which could lead to nuclear weapon proliferated worldwide—what John F. Kennedy saw as “the greatest possible danger and hazard;” a virulent viral pandemic and resultant decline in economies throughout the world, all rolled into a vast witches brew threatening humanity.

Cold War solutions such as balance of power, mutually assured destruction, early warning and the balance of terror—the successful tools of the Cold War—have little relevance to today’s crisis. Neither advocacy of rapid action nor commitment to eliminate nuclear weapons on a firm timescale could address a threat with so many parts. But well-educated, experienced, principled leaders dedicated to idealism may be able to see common cause, seek solutions and negotiated structures, and reverse the erosion of democracy through a commitment to rationality, excellence, transparency, scientific excellence, understanding and patience.

Many of today’s leaders have moved to an authoritarian crypto-fascist philosophy—e.g., in Hungary, Turkey, Egypt, India, the Philippines, China, Brazil, North Korea (a special case), the United States, and others. Some of these leaders are also populist in their politics, most notably Trump in the United States and Bolsonaro in Brazil and—although not authoritarian—Boris Johnson in the United Kingdom. The populists are notable for their complete inability to do anything worthwhile with competence.

At this point let us consider an example of such leadership failure in the midst of enormous crisis: the Trump administration’s recent policy toward the pandemic. This administration exhibits many of the ills mentioned above: failure of leadership; abandonment of the relevance of facts, of truth and honesty; the rise of ignorant, incompetent, arrogant, fascistic leaders; refusal to do anything to ameliorate the climate crisis—indeed—acting in ways making it worse; hostility to science; and a laxity about controls over nuclear weapons as demonstrated by rejection of treaties providing such control. President Trump and Kim Jong Un of North Korea, to mention one series of incidents with respect to nuclear weapons, resembled toddlers in a playpen as they argued about who has the biggest nuclear button.

It is worth noting that the three countries in the world least successful in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic are three countries currently led by avowed populist leaders: the United States, Brazil and Great Britain. On July 10, Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke to the European Parliament in connection with Germany’s assumption of the EU Presidency saying in part: “You cannot fight the pandemic with lies and disinformation or with hate and incitement of hatred. The limits of populism are being laid bare.”

And how has the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic gone in the United States? The New York Times reported on June 28 that after weeks of lockdown Americans, pushed by President Trump, began a rapid reopening even though the country needed to stay shut down longer. Many states—mostly with Republican governors—took their foot off the brake as Mr. Trump cheered them on. In addition to ending the shutdown far too soon, experts advised that the states urgently needed to establish a robust system for tracking and containing any new cases—through testing, monitoring and contact tracing. Without such steps the pandemic would just come roaring back. But the precious time gained by the lockdown, with the virus gradually being largely contained, was squandered, and thus the abortive lockdown was a complete failure. On July 3, Michael Gerson wrote in his column titled, “Trump’s infantile conception of strength:” “His (President Trump’s) handling of the COVID-19 pandemic has been lethally incompetent as well as economically ruinous.” There never has been a consistent, reliable federal government policy; everything was pushed off to the governors. The result? Across the country, the approach varied state by state.

Fareed Zakaria noted in his Washington Post column of July  10 “The U.S. must rebuild its government:” “Americans accepted extensive lockdowns far more readily than many predicted. But this period of suffering was meant to buy time for the government to set up systems of testing, tracing and isolation… In truth it squandered this time. Although Trump declared in May, ‘We’ve prevailed on testing,’ his goal of 5 million tests a day, with testing available at every Walmart and CVS, is still just a dream. Most states still don’t have comprehensive testing or contact tracing in place.”

This is what comes from President Trump’s refusal to assume leadership and establish a national policy in one of the great crises in our history. The United States could have beaten the epidemic under sensible, rational leadership—we have the scientific talent to do it. Trump was warned of this risk several times, most recently by the Intelligence Community; months before that by the World Health Organization (from which the U.S. announced its withdrawal on July 9) and by Vice President Biden in January of 2020. Now the United States has, with 4-5% of world population, a quarter of Covid-19 cases and over 130,000 deaths.

To further narrow our focus to just one emblematic issue, consider the wearing of masks, which has been identified by the national health community as an essential public health measure that the United States must adopt. President Trump refused to wear a mask and encouraged his followers to do the same. At the same time Trump required everyone at the White House to wear a mask and be tested every day, his followers made mask-wearing a political act.

As a result of the early end of lockdowns, with an accompanying failure to observe social distancing and unwillingness to wear masks, a wildfire of virus has broken out in the Republican states of Florida, Texas and Arizona and is spreading rapidly to the rest of the country. In Texas, as case numbers of Covid-19 began to soar, Governor Abbott commenced to establish countermeasures, but other state leaders continued to resist any constraints on their freedom of action. As reported in the New York Times on July 5, “Lt. Governor Dan Patrick of Texas declared himself ‘tired’ of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease doctor: ‘I don’t need his advice anymore,” Mr. Patrick said. Comments like the following were heard in restaurants, “It seems like he’s [Governor Abbott] been influenced by Fauci and the left” and in reference to the wearing of masks, “we’re done with all that.”

Kathleen Parker reported in the Washington Post on June 28 from South Carolina: “Leave it to South Carolinians to ignore warnings and urgent suggestions that wearing a mask and physically distancing can drastically reduce the rate of infection. This is Trump country, after all. South Carolina,” Parker reports, “is also home to a not small number of religious charismatics, who believe that the wearing of masks is Satan’s handiwork, designed to block the breath of God. Why there’s talk that even Episcopalians are passing around snakes these days. But seriously, how can officials fight a highly contagious and sometimes deadly disease against such stubborn resistance? Fortunately, the Bible’s authors thought of that too: shame.” Shame can be a powerful and effective weapon for good. It stopped many from smoking cigarettes. Arguably, concludes Parker, “In the new economy of shame the good guys wear masks.”

The following comes from Max Boot in his July 2 Washington Post column, “Welcome to the United States of Idiocy:” “We have an irrational, incompetent president who spent months denying the reality of the disease (remember when he claimed it would ‘miraculously’ go away by April), while suggesting cures including a risky malaria drug and bleach injections. Now President Trump is holding rallies in places such as Tulsa where the disease is surging. Campaign aides even removed signs from the arena urging rally goers to practice social distancing… Republican governors in states like Florida…Texas and Arizona…were slow to declare lockdowns and quick to end them. They also refused to enforce statewide mask mandates—and in the case of Texas and Arizona tried to prevent municipalities from imposing their own more strict rules—even though studies show that wearing masks can reduce transmission by as much as 85 percent.”

Taking their cue from the President, others see masks as the devil’s work. Quoting Max Boot again, “An Ohio state legislator said, ‘I don’t want to cover people’s faces’ because we’re created in the image and likeness of God.’ A Palm Beach, Fla. woman complained that masks ‘throw God’s wonderful breathing system out the door’ while a fellow Palm Beach resident denounced mask advocates for ‘practicing the Devil’s law.’”

How have we reached this pass—where wearing a mask, a modest medical practice that can save many thousands of lives, is denounced by some as the work of the devil? “…we have no one but ourselves to blame. Nobody forced so many Americans to act so recklessly—first by placing their faith in a president who doesn’t deserve it, and now in ignoring widely publicized scientific findings. We are living—and now dying—in an idiocracy of our creation,” concludes Mr. Boot.

Karen Hughes, a former Counsellor to the President and Under Secretary of State in the George W. Bush Administration, asserts in her Washington Post column, “Mask-wearing is a moral issue.” She writes, “I’ve watched in alarm and dismay as the course of action recommended by all our nation’s infectious-disease experts has been shunned by many of my fellow conservatives and Republicans. President Trump, Vice President Pence and many governors either refuse to wear a mask or wear one only occasionally sending inconsistent messages about the importance of wearing masks even as COVID-19 spreads at record levels.

“…Wearing a mask is not about protecting you; it protects others from the possibility that you are exhaling virus particles at them. A recent University of Washington study projected that 30,000 fewer people will die by October if 95% of us wear masks in public.

“… Like too much else in our country, this issue has been politicized, egged on by a president whose inexplicable refusal to wear a mask sets a terrible example. Unfortunately, his actions gave cover for too many Republican governors to bow to the strident voices opposed to government restrictions on personal liberty, rather than calling on all of us to act on our personal responsibility to protect others.

“While wearing a mask is not a political issue, it is a moral one. The choice and stakes are clear; the minor inconvenience of donning a mask vs. potentially threatening other people’s lives, the options are not equal on any scale of duty, honor, citizenship, or service to God and others. Amid a deadly virus pandemic, wearing a mask is the only responsible course of action.”

And, a comment on the President’s actions from Steve Schmidt, lifelong Republican, aide to Senator Lamar Alexander and the Campaign Manager for John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign. “Donald Trump has been the worst president this country has ever had. And I don’t say that hyperbolically. He is. But he is a consequential president. And he has brought this country in three short years to a place of weakness that is simply unimaginable if you were pondering where we are today from the day where Barack Obama left office. And there were a lot of us on that day who were deeply skeptical and very worried about what a Trump presidency would be. But this is a moment of unparalleled national humiliation, of weakness.

“When you listen to the President, these are the musings of an imbecile. An idiot. And I don’t use those words to name call. I use them because they are the precise words of the English language to describe his behavior. His comportment. His actions. We’ve never seen a level of incompetence, a level of ineptitude so staggering on a daily basis by anybody in the history of the country who’s ever been charged with substantial responsibilities.

“It’s just astonishing that this man is president of the United States. The man, the con man, from New York City. Many bankruptcies, failed businesses, a reality show, that branded him as something that he never was. A successful businessman. Well, he’s the President of the United States now, and the man who said he would make the country great again. And he’s brought death, suffering, and economic collapse on truly an epic scale. And let’s be clear. This isn’t happening in every country around the world. This place. Our place. Our home. Our country. The United States. We are the epicenter. We are the place where you’re the most likely to die from this disease. We’re the ones with the most shattered economy. And we are because of the fool that sits in the Oval Office behind the Resolute Desk.”

Finally, a first and last word—simple and straightforward—from a Founder:

“The national cure for an ill administration in a popular or representative constitution is a change of men.” — Alexander Hamilton, 1788

John Jay