Trump New Lows Tracker. Bulletin No. 6 (Updates and Nos. 18-22)

It has been little more than a month since the last Bulletin, but our President has been far from idle in generating New Lows. There are also significant updates to three previous New Lows that deserve to be noted. The importance of collecting New Lows is that it is at least a rearguard action against normalizing the abnormal. Brian Klaas, in the Washington Post, asked the pertinent question of whether, after three years of Trump, we have lost our capacity to be shocked. Prompted by Trump’s posting of an outrageously Photoshopped picture of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer that would go unnoticed by many, he wrote:

Much of Trump’s undignified, childish or insulting behavior goes the same way. It reverberates across Twitter to his adoring fans. It provokes outrage to his staunch critics. But most Americans are never exposed to it at all. That makes a crucial difference to public perceptions. To the casual observer, Trump seems a lot more normal and acceptable than he is because his constantly abnormal behavior doesn’t break through to anyone except highly engaged voters.

Moreover, even highly engaged voters will be challenged to remember it all, but remember we must. And far worse than the behavior that is merely undignified, childish or insulting is behavior that does serious harm to people or policies but gets lost in the fog of “Trump being Trump.”

Updates

New Low No. 7 reported Trump’s attempt to market the Trump National Doral Golf Resort as the site for the G-7 Conference in 2020. That scheme was thwarted by immediate and wide criticism, but Trump did not give up seeking ways to profit personally from his office. On February 8, the Washington Post reported this news:

At Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club, the Secret Service was charged the $650 rate dozens of times in 2017, and a different rate, $396.15, dozens more times in 2018, according to documents from Trump’s visits.

And at the Trump National Golf Club Bedminster, the Secret Service was charged $17,000 a month to use a three-bedroom cottage on the property, an unusually high rent for homes in that area, according to receipts from 2017. Trump’s company billed the government even for days when Trump wasn’t there.

These payments appear to contradict the Trump Organization’s own statements about what it charges members of his government entourage. “If my father travels, they stay at our properties for free — meaning, like, cost for housekeeping,” Trump’s son Eric said in a Yahoo Finance interview last year.

The full extent of the Secret Service’s payments to Trump’s company is not known. The Secret Service has not listed them in public databases of federal spending, as is usually required for payments of $10,000.

New Low No. 8 reported President Trump’s bizarre alteration of a NOAA chart to redraw the anticipated path of Hurricane Dorian. The distortion was intended to make the hurricane’s route consistent with an earlier comment by Trump that had been mistaken. The item also reported on the heavy-handed pressure applied to NOAA and the Commerce Department to set aside the meteorological facts in order to support Trump’s version. Further details on the bludgeoning of the agencies were reported in a February 1 article in the Washington Post based on documents newly released under FOIA. As summarized by the Post:

A trove of documents released on Friday evening provides the clearest glimpse yet into how President Trump’s inaccurate statements, altered forecast map and tweets regarding Hurricane Dorian’s forecast path rattled top officials along with rank and file scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in September.

New Low No. 13 discussed Trump’s action (largely inspired by Fox News) ordering the Navy not to take disciplinary action against a Navy Seal, Edward Gallagher, after Gallagher’s court martial. Trump’s interference in the case resulted in the resignation (or dismissal) of Navy Secretary Richard Spencer. In a January 14, 2020 column, Thomas Friedman cited previous Times articles reporting on the gruesome details of Gallagher’s treatment of Iraqi prisoners and the disgust it inspired in fellow Seals, “You could tell he was perfectly O.K. with killing anybody that was moving.” Friedman then added a chilling coda:

Guess who the Trumps had over to Mar-a-Lago during the Christmas holidays — and who they didn’t invite? They welcomed Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher and his wife. 

As a further footnote, former Navy Secretary Spencer, a lifelong Republican, announced on February 7 that he supports Michael Bloomberg for president.

Recent New Lows

No. 18. Trump lies about healthcare. Trump utters so many lies about so many things so consistently, and makes so many outlandish claims, that it is hard to pick out any single lie or claim as deserving of special recognition. But a January 13 statement by Trump, about coverage of preexisting conditions, merited notice. As reported in the Washington Post :

Since he is unburdened by either integrity or any actual beliefs about most policy issues, President Trump is free to say just about anything about what he has done or will do. Like this howler from Monday morning:

What’s notable here isn’t the lie that “I was the person who saved Pre-Existing Conditions in your Healthcare.” He didn’t, of course — in fact, it was the Affordable Care Act that for the first time protected people with preexisting conditions, and Trump tried to repeal the ACA in Congress and now supports a lawsuit that would overturn that law root and branch.

No, what’s interesting is that he feels the need to make this preposterous claim. Trump obviously understands that for all Republicans’ dark warnings about how the Democrats’ Medicare-for-all idea would force you to use a government-issued home leech kit for all your medical needs and this will destroy their chances in the next election, this is an issue where Republicans remain tremendously vulnerable.

No. 19. Trump dismisses injuries from Iran’s missile attack on U.S. base. Despite, or perhaps because of, Trump’s personal history as a draft dodger, he likes to proclaim himself as the military’s greatest friend. But any empathy Trump might feel for military personnel cannot survive a conflict with his ego or political posture. So it was with the traumatic brain injuries (TBI) suffered by Americans at the al-Asad base in Iraq when an Iranian missile attack retaliated for the killing of General Qassem Soleimani.

After the attack, Trump announced with great satisfaction that there had been no casualties from it. Soon, however, it was reported that 34 soldiers had been flown to Germany for treatment for TBI. When Trump was asked about their injuries, while attending the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 22, he quickly downplayed them as “headaches” and “not very serious.” Through ignorance or design, he clearly understated the seriousness of the injuries. On January 24, The Veterans of Foreign Wars issued a stinging rebuke and demanded that Trump apologize for having minimized the injuries. As we know, however, apologies are not in the Trump playbook.

After Trump made similar comments at a media luncheon at the White House on February 4, Newsweek examined the issue in some detail in a February 5 article and concluded that Trump’s appraisal was simply wrong:

TBI can range from concussion, which is the most underreported and underdiagnosed from of brain trauma, all the way to devastating injuries that cause coma and even death. However, all forms of TBI can have a long-lasting impact on the health of the individual, as well as society at large. According to the Brain Trauma Foundation, for persons under the age of 45, TBI is the leading cause of death and disability, and the economic impact has been estimated in the United States to be $76.5 billion.

In the military, TBI is an especially big problem. Since 2000, more than 400,000 members of the military have been victims of TBI, according to the Department of Defense. Of the 64 service members diagnosed with TBI from the Iranian missile attack so far, 39 have returned to duty after being treated, likely indicating a milder form of TBI, such as a concussion. However, even a mild TBI can result in long-lasting consequences, which must not be diminished.

On February 10, the Defense Department stated that it now believed there were 109 cases of TBI sustained at al-Asad. Of those injured, 76 had returned to duty, but 21 had been taken to the United States for further treatment while others were being treated in Germany or were en route from Iraq to Germany for treatment. Unlike Mr. Gallagher, they should not expect invitations from the White House.

No. 20. Trump’s State of the Union Performance. Trump’s State of the Union message was seen by many as one of the more effective speeches of his presidency. While the speech was clearly intended primarily as a campaign event, Trump stuck to the teleprompter, and the result was considerably less offensive than the unhinged polemics he routinely fires off at arenas filled with his fervent fans. Nevertheless, there were two moments at which Trump indulged his personal and political instincts.

The first one came just before Trump’s address when he handed Speaker Pelosi a copy of the address in accordance with custom, but pointedly declined to shake hands with her. For her part, Pelosi retaliated at the close of the speech by conspicuously shredding her copy. While I can appreciate how Pelosi felt about the speech, her action was an unfortunate mistake. She would have been better advised to recall the advice attributed to George Bernard Shaw not to wrestle with a pig, “You just get dirty and the pig enjoys it.”

During his address, Trump recognized some eleven featured guests, generally to make political point. The practice of introducing guests at the State of the Union address began under President Ronald Reagan; it was expanded by succeeding presidents and now has arguably gotten out of hand. With one notable exception, the guests Trump introduced were, as usual, sympathetic, and in many cases admirable. The one exception was Rush Limbaugh, who Trump not only introduced but beamed upon as Melania bedecked him with a Presidential Medal of Freedom.

The kindest terms to describe Limbaugh are “controversial” and “divisive.” More on target are racist, bigoted and misogynistic. Eric Segall, writing in Dorf on Law, collected just a few choice Limbaugh utterances:

Feminism was established so that ugly broads could have easy access to the mainstream.

The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies.

If any race of people should not have guilt about slavery, it’s caucasians.

Holocaust? Ninety million Indians? Only four million left? They all have casinos, what’s to complain about?

Having noted that Republicans gave Limbaugh a standing ovation (while Democrats sat in stony silence), Segall concluded:

An entire political party celebrated a man who once told an African American woman radio caller to “take the bone out of your nose,” and once called an engaged and responsible female Georgetown Law Student a “slut” for fighting for birth control. And the intelligentsia on the right, whether pundit, politician, or academic, said nothing. They are the enablers of American evil.

Segall’s skewering of the “intelligentsia on the right” for its silence seems painfully on target. But the ever-reliable Jennifer Rubin was not among the guilty. Of Limbaugh she said:

He is the embodiment of divisive, hateful right-wing media rhetoric, which, just like Trump, casts Democrats as evil and the media as enemies of the people.

She continued:

In a sense, Limbaugh is the perfect idol for Trump and his cultist followers, who seal themselves off from reality and immerse themselves in conspiracy theories. A president who considers himself as president of only his supporters and who has debased and cheapened our language and our politics, making the reprehensible perfectly acceptable, would of course want to honor someone of Limbaugh’s ilk.

No. 21.  Trump’s Post-Acquittal Antics. Trump’s post-acquittal behavior has been widely covered in the media and requires little further comment. It featured two central elements: disparaging rants about his perceived enemies and dismissal of government employees whom Trump believed were disloyal. Both elements brought further discredit to his presidency and gave further cause for concern over what may lie ahead.

Trump’s rants were delivered on February 6, the day after he was acquitted. The first took place at a venue that was, even for Trump, astonishingly inappropriate: the National Prayer Breakfast. Trump rose to speak immediately after a thoughtful and moving address by the chairman of the event, Arthur Brooks, who urged audience members to obey the Biblical admonition to love their enemies. Trump began, “I don’t know if Arthur is going to like what I say.” He then proceeded to assail those he perceives as his enemies. The low points of his unseemly diatribe came when he chose to impugn explicitly the religious faith of both Mitt Romney and Nancy Pelosi.

Later that morning, in the East Room of the White House, Trump pressed on with his peculiar approach of exulting in a victory while bitterly bewailing his victimhood. The East Room was packed with toadies including Capitol Hill Republicans, Cabinet members, television pundits, White House advisers and campaign operatives. As David Nakamura reported in the Washington Post, they were treated to a Trump who was “angry, raw, vindictive, aggrieved — reflecting the id of a president who has seethed for months with rage against his enemies. This was the State of Trump.”

The following day, Friday, Trump carried out a purge; it was a small purge, involving only three individuals, but there will clearly be more to come. First, so far, were National Security Council officials, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and his brother Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, both of whom were summarily escorted out of the White House. Alexander Vindman had testified, under subpoena, about his deep concerns over Trump’s telephone conversation with the Ukraine president. His brother did not testify or have any other connection with the Ukraine matter, and his only apparent sin was that of consanguinity. Friday also saw the abrupt firing of the United States Ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland. It will be recalled that Sondland had testified, also under subpoena, that there was indeed a quid pro quo and that everyone knew of it.

Neither Vindman was deprived of employment since both returned to duty in the Pentagon. On the other hand, Trump suggested on Tuesday that Alexander Vindman might be subject to military discipline. His suggestion was absurd, and quite unlikely to be taken up by the Army, but if Trump is re-elected, it would be hard to feel optimistic about the chances of either Vindman being promoted to full Colonel. In any case, there was utterly no excuse for the gratuitously demeaning method of their expulsion from the White House. Gordon Sondland will return to private life, sadder and wiser and poorer for the $1,000,000 donation that brought him an ambassadorship. All ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the president, but Sondland, too, could have been allowed to depart with a modicum dignity. Whatever the eventual harm to these individuals, Trump’s treatment of them was an exercise in petty vindictiveness.

Richard Nixon learned an important lesson too late. When he departed the White House after his resignation, he spoke to the White House staff with an emotional message that included these poignant lines:

Always give your best, never get discouraged, never be petty; always remember, others may hate you, but those who hate you don’t win unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself.

It is a truth that Donald Trump might ponder, but surely will not.

No. 22. Trump’s interference in the Roger Stone case. On Monday, the Justice Department filed a memorandum with Judge Amy Berman Jackson recommending a 7-9 year sentence for Roger Stone. Stone is a long-time friend and associate of Donald Trump who was convicted of lying to Congress and obstructing the Mueller investigation. The recommendation did not sit well with Trump who, in a tweet on Tuesday morning, just after midnight, criticized the sentencing recommendation as “horrible and very unfair.” As he had after the jury’s guilty verdict, he attacked federal law enforcement officials, saying “the real crimes were on the other side.” He later added “Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!”

Later on Tuesday, the Department of Justice sprang into action. The Department filed a memorandum asserting that a recommendation of 7 to 9 years was excessive and withdrawing the earlier memorandum; it did not, however, make any new recommendation. The reaction of the lawyers who had filed the initial recommendation was swift and decisive: all four withdrew from the case, and one left the government. Still later on Tuesday, Trump posted a tweet attacking Judge Jackson. If I were Stone’s attorney, I would not regard that as helpful to my client. What happens now remains to be seen, but this is clearly not the end of the story.

The Justice Department has insisted that its action was not influenced by Trump, through Twitter or otherwise. That claim will undoubtedly be probed, perhaps by Judge Jackson and certainly by the House Judiciary Committee: it was announced on Wednesday that Barr will testify before the Committee next month. Whatever the truth of the Department’s claim of independence may be, Trump corrupted the process and, once again, stained the reputation of the Department.