Donald Trump’s decision to let Michael Wolff roam around the West Wing during his first year in office seems to have been as rash and ill-considered as his travel ban. Why he thought Wolff would be sympathetic or an ally is a mystery, and it’s not even clear that he should have trusted Wolff’s basic journalistic integrity. Wolff has always employed a degree of Gonzo journalism that is good for making a polemical point but not necessarily consistent with an objective retelling of the facts. There are three things I noted from Wolff’s article in the Hollywood Reporter that struck me as particularly important while being broadly corroborated enough by other sources to be credible.
Two of them have to do with observations of diminished capacity. In this first section, it’s clear that a preexisting tendency to repeat himself verbatim has grown noticeably more pronounced:
There was more: Everybody was painfully aware of the increasing pace of his repetitions. It used to be inside of 30 minutes he’d repeat, word-for-word and expression-for-expression, the same three stories — now it was within 10 minutes. Indeed, many of his tweets were the product of his repetitions — he just couldn’t stop saying something.
The way that reads, it seems almost like something that might result from a brain lesion like Drew Barrymore’s character in 50 First Dates whose anterograde amnesia causes her begin each day with no memory of the previous one. This is supported by a second segment in Wolff’s article where he claims that “at Mar-a-Lago, just before the new year, a heavily made-up Trump failed to recognize a succession of old friends.”
These are relevant allegations because they’re different in kind from simple observations about Trump’s basic character. They indicate that there may be a rather significant health issue that is progressive and growing at a fast enough pace to catch the notice even of people who interact with Trump on a daily basis.
The other point of note is the basic unanimity among everyone close to President Trump that he simply is incapable of doing the job.
Donald Trump’s small staff of factotums, advisors and family began, on Jan. 20, 2017, an experience that none of them, by any right or logic, thought they would — or, in many cases, should — have, being part of a Trump presidency. Hoping for the best, with their personal futures as well as the country’s future depending on it, my indelible impression of talking to them and observing them through much of the first year of his presidency, is that they all — 100 percent — came to believe he was incapable of functioning in his job.
Again, it’s described here as a problem of function more than character. Wolff may or may not faithfully quote his subjects, but these broader observations are where his style of journalism seeks to impart its value. We might look elsewhere for a reliable blow-by-blow retelling of the history of the Trump administration but there’s no substitute for the physical proximity Wolff enjoyed in the West Wing. I believe him when he says that there’s basically no one in the White House who thinks Trump can actually function as president.
I actually think that’s cause for some optimism. But it’s also further evidence that we’re working our way through a national emergency of the highest significance. Everything else should be a lower priority.
The repetition of stories is a classic sign of early dementia. My father-in-law is slipping deeper into Alzheimers, and it began with telling the same story three or four times in the course of an evening. The same words, the same inflection.
That repetition is why the NYT interview was edited and why the recording will never be released.
Supposition. But educated based on the history of The NYTimes covering up for Presidents and/or administrations. NYTimes readers should demand to see the full and unedited transcript of that interview.
OTOH, the public heard/saw Reagan in the ’04 debates and most heard/saw nothing wrong with him. Even as he wandered through a disjointed story about driving up the coast of California and that had no point to it, much less was responsive to what was being debated.
Trump, his family, his cronies and his total administration are liars. They lie without provocation, they lie without proof. It’s considered a strength by their fans and admirers…how smart they are to get what they want by whatever means!
The problem is, Trump and his ilk have lied so much and so often and about so many things that we cannot believe him, regardless. We are now trained to doubt every word coming out of his pinchy lips. And after Shaun Spicer and Sarah Huckabee Sanders, why would we ever believe a word they say?
I’m going to take a lot of what the new book says with a grain of salt, but I also believe I’m going to assume there’s truth in there as well. And the nuggets of truth will be proven to the detriment of Trump and his miserable band of liars.
And I hope they all come apart like the rotted beasts they are.
Agree — the rational position for the moment. Expect there are more nuggets of truth and less fiction in Wolff’s book than what is found in Ed Klein’s trash. But the book better supply concrete details to back of the claimed statements of opinion and gossip than what his article and the book excerpts published so far or it will end up on the fantasy shelf with Klein’s.
I don’t find a single Republican Congresscritter believable.
Grassley told his townhall audience that once everything was vetted by Fusion GPS about their 20+ hour closed-door testimony, he would be willing to put it to committee vote to release it.
Now, not so much!
Is any Republican senator honest enough to say why their party is protecting this dangerous lunatic? Lindsey Graham? Jeff Flake? Even John McCain?
Leave aside the cesspool that is Devin Nunes and his cohort!
As far as evidence about the hours of transcripts for Wolff’s book – he has conversations recorded on tape – https://www.axios.com/how-michael-wolff-did-it-2522360813.html
. . . journalism” got at times, iirc, on at least one occasion when some Bushie or other denied a Woodward quote, he was similarly able to “go to the tape” and prove he’d quoted accurately.
If Wolff really does have that ability, that would be a very good thing indeed.
I hope Wolff is telling the truth.
And if he is, I not only hope but pray that Trump’s handlers can stop him from doing something truly mad until the seemingly endless Mueller thing deposes him or some sort of 25th amendment action removes him from power.
Let us pray, or be preyed upon.
AG
I agree with Arthur here – do you all sense weakness?
This is a moment where empires fall – not because they start wars, but because parlous weakness allows an inferior or smaller adversary to take them down.
This is the moment when the lioness leaps.
. . . in the White House
. . . yet none of them does a damn thing about it.
It’s personal privilege, power, and party over country with every one of them.
I took a break during lunch and watched Craig Melvin interview Katy Tur and Gabe Sherman about the book. Neither one is a huge Wolff fan – in fact, Wolff wrote an extremely critical review of Sherman’s previous book. But both said that while there may some doubt about the accuracy of Wolff’s longer quotes, the basic points in the book seemed true based on their reporting. What a comforting thought, that for the second time in my life we’re governed by someone with progressing dementia.
Our presidents get older and older.
Reagan was 68 when elected and that was considered very old then. Trump is 71, and Hill was a year behind him.
Our political parties need to better jobs of grooming, and earlier.
They do, and the American people need to do a better job at the voting booth. Whether that will happen is a big question.
Who’s absent from this analysis?
Someone from Vermont?
And running in 2020?
At the age of 78?
Remember, Sailing the Seas Depends on the Helmsman!
Oh but hes not a democrat isnt that what gets bleated over and over?
I will say this for the republicans, they are willing to dump their old leadership. Dem geriatrics hang on and scream wait your turn.
Carter was 54 his first year as POTUS
Clinton was 47
Obama was 48
H Clinton would have been the oldest democrat elected in a half century,
So it’s not `both sides’
.
Although way too early to speculate about front-runners for 2020, I would not be the least bit surprised if the eventual nominee for the Democratic Party is a 40-something or 50-something. Right now the 70-somethings like Biden and Sanders are in the spotlight, but eventually reality will set in. Could be wrong. No doubt the eventual nominee will be fundamentally flawed because “reasons” and I’ll see the blog posts and my twitter feed littered with myriad complaints. But that’s getting a bit far ahead of myself. Let’s stick to the 70-somethings being a non-factor by 2020.
Im thinking more about congress. Look at Ryan, hes a relatively young true believer 2 steps from the presidency. He is not about to compromise pre-emptively and he got his dream to fuck the poor. John Lewis has served admirably and inspirationally but what if we had a young black person in his seat now, seasoned and mentored. He might not be a ranking member but with the right leadership she could swiftly grow to be a vibrant voice. Older congressional members are slower to react to the vast changes in the wsy politics are done now even in than the Bush era. We need sharp minds and sharp bodies who are as comfortable with social media as a second skin and can react fast.
But as it happens a lot of the early opposition to Obama was that he was too young and that it would be best if he seasoned on the 2008 campaign. It was only his tremendous talent and intelligent non-democratic usage of caucuses that got him over. How many political talents that are prodigeous but not at obamas level have stunted careers being blocked by older members who are inferior but have seniority?
I see to remember something about WJC too like Tsongas dropping out? Not sure, was a tiny kid back then.
Frankly, I’m disgusted with the fact that our 3 branches of government are dominated by geriatrics.
People talk about term limits. How about age limits?
Amen!
My motto for 2020 is never trust anyone over 70. If I had my way, I’d bump that down to 60. It really is way past time to pass the baton to the next generation.
The next generation: “Who, me?!”
Good to know that cynicism is not dead on this blog. I was getting worried there for a second. My faith has been restored.
I am serious. If Sanders, Corbyn have late chances to demonstrate old school progressive leadership, and wolves from Bill Clinton’s (and even Reagan’s) teams still call the shots, what is the next generation doing? If the baton has to be handed over, who is worth what?
So Kathleen Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Tulsi Gabbard (all of whom would be in that 40-something/50-something range, have plenty of experience governing, etc.) have all been sitting around twiddling their thumbs? Gotcha. Heck, Sherrod Brown, who would be a bit older than I’d want in a candidate (he’d be in his late 60s by the election year) but he’s been a vocal advocate for the interests of working folks. Guess that’s doing nothing as well? Huh. So it goes. Obviously none of these folks have declared a candidacy yet, but I would not be too surprised if a few of them do. Probably missing a few others. Not too many years ago, some young firebrand by the name of Obama came practically out of nowhere and landed a nomination and two terms in the White House. Apparently the Democratic Party wasn’t at the mercy of the 70 & 80-something crowd then either. Batons get passed. Change is inevitable, and nostalgia is overrated.
Are those leaders of the Generic Democrat kind?
I am afraid that would be the way to a more steaming hell… Is that leadership even?
Just When You Thought Democrats Couldn’t Get Any More Oblivious…
I backed Sanders in `16, but I wanted Gillibrand to run. You know why? Because besides being a progressive woman, she’s good at politics, something Hillary sucked at. Of course running in `16 would have been a suicide mission, and maybe she wouldn’t be talked about now.
It’s Good for Presidential Nominees to be Good at Politics
Anyone opposing Gillibrand with made up reasons (“she used to be a BlueDog!”) should go involve themselves in political realms outside of the electoral.
She is now on the progressive side of the aisle, supports increased min wages and single payer. She backs women’s rights and even led the move to eject Franken from the senate. But she was a blue dog and a member of the blue dog caucus back in 2007 and she even supported a balanced budget amendment. That particular stance is of some interest to me and would disqualify her in my mind if she still holds that nonsense. There is an article in Slate in December on her journey from conservative to liberal. But it is still early. So I got my popcorn.
I get the impression that the Democratic Party and the candidates it can offer (perhaps at any level of office, for all I know) is just never going to be good enough for you. Call it a hunch, but one based on a cumulative record of behavior – whether our own interactions or merely the ones I’ve observed over time. If my hunch is correct, I think your rather non-reply reply makes some sense to me. Good luck in your search for the Platonic Ideal of Progressivism.
We only communicate with non-reply replies, ha.
Quite indeed, I am increasingly skeptical of the Platonic virtues offered by Dems. I saw things in Eastern Europe, Greece, East Asia — and now more of the same in the West. It will be hard to disappoint me very much.
You said above: “Change is inevitable, and nostalgia is overrated.” Change is not necessary progress, right? Say, progress by Morre’s law has just ended. Some observe that progressive policies historically tend to deteriorate fast beyond the highest water mark of a society.
Whatever happens – the bottom line is that the folks in charge of the Democratic Party in whatever capacity, many of whom are arguably well past their prime, will have no choice but to cede power. How that happens will vary. Whoever takes their place will have a set of experiences and will react to a set of conditions that are drastically different from the circumstances of the Baby Boom generation. Better or worse? Won’t know until we get there. I meant it about nostalgia being overrated. In the US, nostalgia has been shoved down our throats for the last four-plus decades at least. Learned a lot from talking to folks who actually lived in the circumstances being romanticized. Mostly I learned that much of what was being sold as wonderful about some era in the past really sucked. The present? Has its pluses and minuses. The future? We’ll know when we get there. I do stand by one thing and am consistent: I have zero intention of voting for a Baby Boomer (or older) in the primaries come 2020. I can only hope that enough fellow Democrats have the good sense to do likewise. As I said earlier, time to pass the baton.
No boomers amymore. Ever.
Like I said below,
Carter was 54 his first year as POTUS
Clinton was 47
Obama was 48
H Clinton was the exception.
.
I think the last Democratic President over 60 when elected to his first term was James Buchanan – representing a very different Democratic Party.
Representing a very different country.
.
The desperate WH attempts to somehow stop publication (defamation! non-disclosure agreement!) of political dissent and discussion make clear Trumper only conceives of himself as a CEO of FailedNation, Inc. and not as an American president subject to a somewhat, um, different legal regime. It also makes clear that he essentially has fools for lawyers, lick-spittles who simply refuse to give him straight advice. But I suppose no one knows precisely what some of these new Trumper “judges” will do, haha…
It also shows Der Trumper deeply fears the picture being painted by Wolff–Crackbrain Trump? Addled Donald? The “heavily made-up” Trumper is a wonderful touch!
Finally, who’s the colonel schlepping around the nuclear football these days, and how many private conversations has Mad Dog Mattis had with him?
Is Trump’s capable of comprehending what has so far been released from Wolff’s book? Doubtful. He doesn’t read and whatever he could get from TV in the past day has been limited.
What apparently escapes him is that Wolff is a free to write and promote a pack of lies (not saying he has) as Trump was to screech for years that Obama wasn’t ‘a natural born citizen.’ Funny how people like free speech when it’s their free speech but want authorities to shut down the free speech of others that they don’t like.
From the NY Times article – https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/world/asia/nuclear-button-trump-north-korea.html?_r=0
The maddening thing at this moment is that Trump’s appointments sabotaged the 25th Amendment action, and the Republican Congress apparently did not care.
Who exactly can talk this administration into a normal order of government and an new chief executive?
I’m seeing nothing but regime change on the horizon, and that moved forward by the so-called Republican conservatives.
Let’s see if Mueller has assembled so much damaging info on the whole Trump pack…including quite possibly Pence…that the Republican brand literally tanks in 2018. This is quite possible, and if it does, what occurs will be much more than a “regime change” as Republcans scramble to get out from underneath the chaos. If, however, Trump is deposed under the 25th Amendment, then the RatPub brand remains (relatively) unharmed.
We shall see…
Soon, I think.
AG
By his cabinet members?
By Pence who sings Hallelujah to Trump at the beginning of every meeting?
Mnuchin, Perry, Carson, DeVos?
Zinke, Pruitt?
Ha! Ha! Ha!
Ambition is a potent drug.
So is survival….physical and political survival.
If the hue and cry raises long enough and loud enough? If Trump appears to be inching along towards total inability to govern and/or taking truly dangerous actions? Many of his erstwhile so-called “allies” have already stated what they really think of him, and most of that bunch of lifelong hustlers you name above would be more than happy to have an “Et tu Bruté?” moment with him as well.
“Honor among thieves???”
Myturn to laugh.
AG
How so? None of those appointees (including Javanka) ever spent the sort of time, quantity and quality over many years, with Trump. Therefore, how were they supposed to assess any mental decline? For all any of us can know at this time, Trump may be no nuttier (or cognitively limited) today than he was thirty years ago. (Have we so soon forgotten that GWB was ignorant, intellectually limited, and often inappropriate? And his handlers made sure that the public didn’t see that much of him; so, his exposure compared to Trump was limited. Unfortunately, stupidity isn’t disqualifying for being POTUS.)
Trump will undergo the conventional presidential physical exam next week. Not required and there is no requirement that the results be released to anyone other than Trump. (Reagan had an annual exam for eight years and it’s not plausible that the physicians overlooked his cognitive deficits which should have warranted a cognitive assessment.)
The anecdotal reports on Trump and impressions of some from viewing Trump on TV are suggestive but weak to very weak. For example, from the NYTimes interview Charles Pierce essentially declared that Trump was fully in the grip of a form of senile dementia. But he completely overlooked that Trump had displayed the acquisition of new names and words (government operations) over the past year and was fluid in using them. OTOH, the NYTimes only released a limited and edited transcript. So, is the Times covering up for Trump or misleading readers like Pierce?
In the early stages of dementia, only a trained clinician (free of bias and prejudices) and in a one-on-one session(s) with a patient can make a valid assessment. Difficult to imagine that Trump would voluntarily subject himself to a cognitive wellness exam. And unless or until he exhibits more florid indications of dementia, Pence isn’t going initiate or join (a requirement) an invocation of Section 4 (25th Amendment). For good reason — imagine a temporarily removed Trump returning with a valid assessment report of no evidence of dementia.
Think of the snakes in the cabinet, and that VP – anyone who did a 25th amendment on Mr Trump would make sure he didn’t return. Without a 2nd thought.
Wouldn’t be Constitutional on their part. Section 4 provides the president with the right to present evidence that he’s fit.
I was thinking more of what someone like Trump would do after he returned to office. Lots of heads would roll (metaphorically speaking).
Just one hypothetical on top of another hypothetical to explain why Pence and others won’t be hasty to invoke Section 4. From all appearances Trump is nowhere near the obvious signs of dementia that Reagan was by ’94 and he deteriorated further over the next four years. Yet, as needed he remained able to put on a show for a limited amount of time.
Not suggesting that people stop watching Trump (as if they could with so many doing Trump 24/7). But all these diagnoses of dementia from totally biased, non-medical professionals using recorded images and rumors and gossip from similarly unqualified people is a waste of time and creates yet another left-right fight. If it’s there and progressing rapidly, everyone will see it soon enough.
Yes, I can see why Putin would prefer democrats stop talking about it.
Interesting though, the same `we will see it soon enough’ attitude was not followed when Clinton fainted. At that time you engaged in speculation she might be suffering from neurological issues.
Of course it was just a coincidence that right wing media (cough Breitbart cough), helped by Russians on social media, was speculating the exact same thing.
.
–sigh– Are you really that daft?
I rubbished Ed Klein’s Clinton books (that had the rightwingers all agog) as fictionalized trash (if there were any truth in them, it was insignificant and inconsequential). No Trumpster would do that. (Nor does a rational person concoct out of nothing what Putin thinks/feels.) While at the moment I’m assuming that Wolff didn’t make up what he put in the book and therefore, more truth should be in it, it’s still speculation and opinions by others that aren’t more insightful than what many on the outside have observed. (I for one have never deviated from describing Trump as ignorant and intellectually limited, a racist and misogynist, narcissistic and thin-skinned, and those that surround him aren’t much different. You think that is praise and admiration? Sheesh.) I’m also not going to ignore the history of this book genre (or the record of those that write them that rarely inspires confidence in the work): lots of buzz and excitement (and fury among the supporters of the subject) during the pre-publication and excerpt phase that drives up sales (the formuala for marketing them is well-established), then the critiques/reviews come in identifying all the errors and unsupported opinions and speculation, and within six months the book ends up on the remainder shelf and is forgotten by everyone other than those that want to believe every word of it.
I also assure that my response to any politician (including Trump and Putin) that collapses on camera and is thrown into a vehicle like a rag-doll by security will be exactly the same as it was when Clinton collapsed. That’s not evidence of a healthy and fit human being, particularly when it was preceded by at least one prior episode that led to hospitalization and rehab. Ford’s and Dole’s stumbling and falling were evidence of declines (all one body) that suggested they were physically fit enough to be POTUS. As was Reagan’s confusion lapses that could be seen early in his presidency (and I pointed out to others). Nor am I ignoring that Trump needed two hands to hold a glass and bottle and take a sip of water. (Obviously a weakness in his dominant right arm/hand, but is it temporary golfing over-exertion or deterioration of motor skills? Even though you can’t acknowledge it, I’m very consistent and non-partisan in my observations as to physical and mental fitness of public officials.
stooge
sto͞oj/
noun
.
dupe
d(y)o͞op
verb
1. deceive; trick.
“the newspaper was duped into publishing an untrue story”
synonyms: deceive, trick, hoodwink, hoax, swindle, defraud, cheat, double-cross;
noun
1. a victim of deception.
“knowing accomplices or unknowing dupes”
synonyms: victim, gull, pawn, puppet, instrument
I meant what I said – see other posting.
IF this move was successful, it would be for keeps.
He’s not in the early stages. I’ve had a number of family members go into dementia and he’s a lot worse than they were.
I agree. At the opening of today’s White House press briefing they started with a video presentation by Trump……while Trump was in the building!
That’s a sure tell. I said long ago that the final evidence would be the WH staff gathering Trump up and pulling him from a meeting. I don’t think we are far.
The bar is so low for him. If he gets through the State of the Union without rolling all over himself we will get shouts of “Presidential!”
.
The last of my grandparents has Alzheimer’s. I remember when it would have been early stage – and that was about a decade and a half ago, and that individual was more put together at the time than Dolt 45 is now.
Ian Kershaw’s massive two-volume biography Hitler revealed similar behavior patterns amongst underlings and hangers-on, from Drexler and the other German Workers’ Party members in the early days of the mid-1920s all the way through to the infamous Wannsee Conference in ’42 when the main elements of the “Final Solution” were (apparently) confirmed to go forward.
What’s especially alarming in both contexts is how so many people are nurturing a clear, growing awareness that something alarmingly wrong is happening, but how, despite this, nobody seems willing or able to do anything about it; nobody accepts that it’s their rôle or that they must.
It’s interesting how many comments — here and elsewhere — express indignation or outrage at this particular aspect of the situation. I feel the same way myself: What’s wrong with these people? But historical evidence shows, unfortunately, that it’s the most likely behavior pattern for these sorts of situations (not just in extreme Nazi cases but in much more innocuous instances we’re all familiar with, in corporate environments; planning vacations etc. “How did we get here?” “Who’s idea was this?” “Why didn’t we stop ourselves?” It’s probably based on universal elements of communal psychology and sociology that despots and other bad actors exploit, either deliberately or just instinctively).
Its also the case that the US is so huge that it turns only slowly. Insiders might be so inside they dont think Trump could do much damage.
Isn’t Trump supposed to get a physical Jan 12?
We’ll see if Politico has got it right that there were tapes soon.
As we claw our way through all this, Trump’s age and is mental decline is bound to translate down the line for 2020 when it comes to polling for older white men. The electorate will remember what happens when you elect an old white man so Bernie & perhaps Joe Biden will face a real uphill climb.
I find it delicious that the guy who campaigned on the basis of lies, conspiracies and trash books like Clinton Cash and consistently claimed Hillary was ill, mentally incapacitated, chased the birth issue until Fall when he was forced to give it up…is himself being taken down by his own lies, conspiracies and mental failings.
Will this physical be performed by a real doctor, or that kook he normally sees?
January 12th by Rear Admiral Ronny L. Jackson
Physician to the President, The White House
However, he can only release whatever parts of his report that Trump approves for release.
Thanks. That means he won’t be able to release anything beyond his pulse/ox reading.
back in the days of the Obama admin, where there was still transparency, here’s what we got from his physical exam.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/papers_pdf/122456.pdf
Wow. That is one seriously healthy human.
Hoping for the best, with their personal futures as well as the country’s future depending on it, my indelible impression of talking to them and observing them through much of the first year of his presidency, is that they all — 100 percent — came to believe he was incapable of functioning in his job.
However good he is at reporting, Wolff may have to worry about a visit from the grammar police.
I’m not sure what, if anything, you’re advocating here. The options before us seem to be:
2A. Assume that the Democratic Party has this capability. Credibility of this is under review, everywhere outside of the DP.
2B. Assume that the Democratic Party is not reliable on its own to achieve this; stand up “Independent Political Organizations” that function like parties but use the DP ballot line (ie the Sanders strategy, up and down the ballot). This is the currently preferred tactic of the non-DP left.
Both variants 2A and 2B assume that we have all the time in the world to play the electoral politics game from now through November. The article you quote here, to name only one source, calls this into question.
3. Mount massive campaigns of civil disobedience against the government, a la current events in Iran. While it addresses some of the shortcomings in #2 above, it does not address the Trump problem. In any case I see no sign of a broad constituency for this idea.
I fail to see what you find in that first sentence that leads you to be optimistic.
As long as nobody does anything we should not be surprised that nothing changes.