top of page
  • Fred

What Donald Trump Is.....And Isn't

"His Cruelty Really Has No Limits" - Patti Davis, Daughter of Ronald Reagan, on the evils of Donald Trump

Actually, Trump's cruelty has lots of limits. Patti Davis made the statement above in reference to Donald Trump's behavior toward Rep. Debbie Dingle. Debbie Dingle took over the seat in Michigan's 12th Congressional District after her husband retired after 60 years in office.

When John Dingle passed away earlier this year at the ripe old age of 92, he was given a burial service, with honors, at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia. A veteran of World War II, Dingle's Funeral was in the Nation's Capital and was attended by politicians and luminaries from all corners of America. The president at the time? Donald J. Trump.

Trump's heinous crime, according to Patti Davis? Insinuating to Debbie Dingle that her husband John is looking up at us from hell. Is that in bad form? Yes. Would I have said that? Ummm, not about John Dingle.

But this is America. Davis' cruelty remark was tone deaf as to what is happening in the world. How do I figure? Donald Trump has free speech, even as the president, to speak his mind.

Let me give you some hypothetical examples of CRUELTY.

Example #1: President Trump, in an act unprecedented in American History, ordered the caretakers of Arlington Nation Cemetery to exhume John Dingle and to send his body back to Dearborn, Michigan, stripping him of national honors.

Did this happen? Of course it didn't.

Example #2: President Trump, in an act unprecedented in American History, has Debbie Dingle arrested and held without charge in an American Prison.

Did this happen? Of course it didn't.

Example #3: President Trump, in an act unprecedented in American History, ordered the FBI to sabotage Debbie Dingle's property with the intent to injure or kill.

Did this happen? Of course it didn't.

What happened is that Donald Trump was mean. Sorry, but Free Speech protects "mean" speech. Even if the speech is unpopular or beneath a president. What Donald Trump didn't do was to take ACTION to prevent an opponent's speech.

You could argue that speech has consequences, and absolutely, it does, but what Donald Trump and media outlets like CNN do is spar. Mudslinging and nastiness on all sides. But let's return to the parameters of free speech.

The above gif is mean. CNN can write opinion pieces all day long and then hide behind the First Amendment. When Donald Trump likes a CNN meme, he is accused of tearing at the fabric of the Constitution when, in fact, he can cite the same liberties as the media outlet.

Potential examples of Trump really stopping CNN's free speech.

Example #1:

Donald Trump uses the FBI and the CIA to arrest journalists.

Has this happened? Of course it hasn't.

Example #2:

Donald Trump outlaws CNN. He sends in security forces to barricade the doors and seizes CNN's assets. CNN becomes a government controlled propaganda arm.

Has this happened? Of course it hasn't.

Example #3:

Donald Trump suspends CNN's broadcasting license. Every day without a license incurs millions of dollars in fines.

Has this happened? Of course it hasn't.

The gif is simply in bad taste. You take a run at Trump, he takes a run at you, whether a politician, media outlet, or private citizen. When I think of cruel leaders that obstruct speech, I think of Stalin and Hitler. Leaders that killed their own citizens by the millions to solidify their power and to silence their enemies. Let's review the list of CNN journalists in American prisons today for reporting on Donald Trump.

Let's review the list of CNN journalists that have won Pulitzer's from Americas jails. That list also numbers zero.

Don't get me wrong, there's a real danger being a journalist in this world. Now there are dozens of reporters in the world paying the price for being journalists, in places like China, Turkey, and Egypt.

According to CNN itself, the number of journalists in jail in America and Canada for being reporters? Zero.

And let's go a step farther. Donald Trump shouldn't verbally attack private citizens like Robert DeNiro. That's true.

Inversely, Robert DeNiro hates Trump. That's his right, but you know where I listen to DeNiro? On Micheal Moore's podcast. In a nation of hate, did Trump restrict DeNiro's or Moore's liberties?

Of course he hasn't. Donald Trump has engaged in political theatre.

Did Donald Trump throw DeNiro in jail or prevent him from earning a living? Uh, no. Robert DeNiro, at age 76, is winning awards by the arm full for starring in Martin Scorsese's The Irishman (now on Netflix). He is using his renewed national platform to slam Trump. In theory, Trump should incarcerate DeNiro on the basis of The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle alone.

If you are red from screaming at your monitor.


Yes he did. And he was impeached.

The problem is that:

In 2018 Trump cut aid to Pakistan unless they met certain conditions.

I 100% supported Trump in cutting aid to Pakistan.

Technically though, I think he could have been impeached for that.

I believe that every president since Carter has tied foreign aid to certain countries based on American parameters. The difference between Trump and those presidents? Vitriol.

Should Trump have made that Ukrainian deal? Of course he shouldn't have, that was a shady deal, but if you think that's the only time a president has tied foreign aid by dictating another countries policies, you are naive. Just because you or I aren't aware of it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

And the funny part is even his opponents continue to miss the irony of impeachment. I just read an article about Bernie Sanders saying the he would "absolutely" use foreign aid as leverage against Israel's government to keep them from building further settlements in the West Bank. The year of the article? 2019.

Ummm, Bernie Sanders is running for president on the platform of an impeachable offense????


Tulsi Gabbard for 2024?

One of the most intriguing chess moves by any presidential candidate was Tulsi Gabbard voting present during the House's Impeachment Trial of Donald Trump.

I think Gabbard knows she's not winning next year and she's playing the long game. She is championing herself as an independent voice.

There are 3 scenarios that set up very nicely for Gabbard in 2024.

  • Trump wins in 2020

In that case, by voting present, she doesn't tie herself into other Democrats that lost to a wildly unpopular Trump. How do I figure? Dem candidates that went on the record for impeachment, then lost to Trump, will have the stink of being losers by the time 2024 comes around and Trump can't run again. I would handicap Gabbard as a Top 3 Democratic Candidate in 2024 in that scenario.

  • Sanders or Warren win in 2020

I'm telling you, if you vote in socialism, the stock market is going to tank. If the stock market tanks, you are going into a recession. If you have a deep recession, you could have an extremely unpopular president vs. a republican candidate representing a deeply divided party. Gabbard could not only run third party, but be the face of a third party. Starting next year, she would be running a four year presidential campaign.

  • Bloomberg wins in 2020

I think if Americans vote in a billionaire on the Republican side (Trump) and then vote in a billionaire on the Democratic side (Bloomberg), there is going to be a real groundswell for a grounded third party candidate in 2024. Enter Tulsi Gabbard.....


By the way, Patti Davis' net worth? $30 Million for being an "activist."

45 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page