Writing About a Fantasy Trump Instead of a Real One
Daily Bell, Jan 25 2017
Don’t look now: It’s President Pence! Donald Trump can be deposed, even without impeachment – Salon
Mainstream media is going well beyond general speculation over a Trump impeachment. They’re now speculating on numerous ways that Trump could be removed from office through the 25th Amendment. The idea is that Trump is not sane. He is entirely enamored of himself and is running the presidency based on how the outside world sees his actions. His behavior is nothing more than a fantastical response to this outside perception and has little to do with any logical, internal perspective. More:
The 25th Amendment was added to the Constitution after the assassination of JFK, and provides for the replacement of the vice president if the office becomes vacant. So it led indirectly to the presidency of Gerald Ford, the only Pindosi president who was never elected to any national office. But Article 4 of the 25th Amendment is about something else entirely. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
This article speculates that the 25th Amendment under Article Four could be used to get rid of Trump, because he was delusional and thus not entirely sane. It makes this argument in detail and is not written in a tongue and cheek kind of way. The article spends a great deal of time analyzing Trump in a great deal of detail, which is unusual given that Trump has only been in office for a few days. In fact, the article is unusual because it digs up “facts” that are entirely based on rumor and innuendo. It says that Donald Trump is in over his head and is thus “unprepared and unfit” to be president. He believed that his privileged existence gave him the right to run Pindostan, even though it did not. He convinced people that he was qualified because he was rich, even though being rich was simply a matter of status. People assumed that his wealth was generated by a deep-seated work ethic and above average intelligence when it was no such thing.
Trump’s incessant bragging, his lack of empathy or remorse, his pathological lying and even his bizarre appearance were signs of an unstable personality. It was obvious to many of us that something was not right. The presidential transition was a dumpster fire with endless resignations, rumors and public humiliations.
The article continues along these lines, stating that Trump’s first few days have encompassed one surreal event after another. His appearance at CIA headquarters was inappropriate because he treated it as if it were an appearance at a local gym. He then followed up by sending Sean Spicer out to insist that his inauguration crowd was the biggest ever, even though it was not. From our point of view, this article represents a certain kind of faux analysis. The author, Heather Digby Parton, known as Digby, is a contributing writer to Salon. She is taking extraordinary liberties with Trump, analyzing his personality as president after only a couple of days in office. She anticipates that Trump may continue to unravel and that his problems will get worse, thus triggering, potentially, the 25th Amendment. She writes:
Trump is running his administration almost entirely in reaction to what he sees in the media. He sounds as if he is unable to handle the stress and is using avoidance mechanisms.
She covers his entire campaign in a paragraph or two and denigrates it as a kind of charade. She anticipates that over time his personality will continue to degrade and that he may eventually end up being so out of touch that he will be seen as psychologically unfit. None of this is rooted in reality. It is all rumor and hearsay.The entire article is a kind of charade built on speculation that is being accepted by the writer as fact. This is certainly the way that a number of people think about Trump, however. Their conviction about Trump is so strong that they can write entire articles without real proof. If they were writing about ordinary people, they would have a good deal more trouble.