To Pay Off His Election Debts, Trump Seems Prepared to Destroy the United States

Kimberly Strassel is struggling with cognitive dissonance. She’s trying to convince Republicans to reject the nomination of RJK Jr, whom she believes Trump named to head Health and Human Services only as electoral payback.

Welcome to the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. nomination, one of the more counterproductive Washington charades in recent history. Donald Trump has, in payback for late-stage election support, nominated a man for the vital cabinet position (health and human services) whom he once labeled a “Democrat Plant” and a bigger threat to the country than Joe Biden. Now meet the Republican senators, activists and influencers who are so clueless—and so blindly eager to salute the leader—that they can’t see the opportunity to save Mr. Trump from a deal he would never have made in other circumstances.

[snip]

It seems not to have occurred to Senate Republicans—who ought to have learned a little bit about Mr. Trump by now—that he needs a rescue here. No insider believes this is a heartfelt pick. Even political naïfs understand what happened: This agreement was entirely transactional. Mr. Trump saw an opportunity to gain RFK’s endorsement. The price was a promise of a big post. The president-elect is holding true to that deal as a businessman, so he won’t dare whisper misgivings for fear of leaks.

Instead Senate Republicans are playing monkey-see-monkey-do to an extent that even Mr. Trump must be exasperated. Nearly every GOP senator looks at Mr. Kennedy with wincing concern—knowing the havoc the anticapitalist big-government regulator can and will wreak on a Trump agenda. Yet no one steps up to save the president. If Joe Biden chose Hulk Hogan to be Treasury secretary, does anyone think Democrats would have let him step into that trap? But so desperate right now are Republicans to nod along that they are abdicating the real job of advice and consent—and protection.

Murdoch’s top columnist believes Trump needs to be saved from himself.

It comes with no small discomfort to admit that my approach to Trump’s nominations is not much different than [gulp] Strassel’s. I think Democrats, rather than fostering polarization by attacking Trump’s nominees as the partisan hacks they are, should instead frame the question in terms of the damage they’ll do to the US, the damage Republican Senators will own if they confirm them.

How hard can it be, after all, to convince Republicans that they don’t want to be responsible for letting Bobby Kennedy get rid of childhood vaccinations, revoking approval for the polio vaccine entirely, with the resultant death and destruction that’ll directly cause in their own states (as it did already in Samoa)?

How hard can it be, after all, to convince Republicans that the same billionaires who bankrupted Silicon Valley Bank then promptly begged for and got bailed out, shouldn’t be recommending the elimination of the FDIC?

That is, I think Democrats would be best served by laying out that if the Republicans approve these charlatans, they cannot claim they were not warned. They own the destruction Trump is embracing. If Trump gets his way on all these picks, it will be more destructive to the United States than dropping a nuke on NYC. And Republican Senators have a choice to sanction that … or try to prevent it.

All that said, in her valiant struggle to make sense of why the man she has blindly defended for years might take steps that will foreseeably do grave damage to harm the US, Strassel may simplify things somewhat when she imagines this is just about electoral payback.

For starters, much of the criticism Trump launched against RFK during the campaign was kayfabe, an attempt to appear to be on opposite sides as him, in a ploy to harm the Democratic ticket. That “charade,” as Strassel calls this, was about stealing Democratic votes, not feigned approval for RFK now.

Plus, Donald Trump is famous for reneging on his debts, whether personal or financial, and he would happily do so with RFK if he saw an advantage in it. Hell he has already reneged on the offer to Bill McGinley to be White House Counsel and given the job instead to David Warrington. While Elon Musk likely has a great deal of leverage over Trump for the foreseeable future, it’s hard to see how RFK could enforce any deal they made, if indeed they had one.

On the contrary, at least according to Trump whisperer Marc Caputo (citing Roger Stone, who has long been a professional Kennedy conspirator), Trump has affirmative reasons he wants RFK and … Tulsi Gabbard.

But the most critical fights for the president-elect, at least in regard to his immediate political legacy, center around Tulsi Gabbard and Robert Kennedy Jr., former Democrats tapped to head the nation’s sprawling intelligence and health bureaucracies, respectively.

Gabbard’s and Kennedy’s nominations, like Hegseth’s and Patel’s, have met resistance in pockets of the Senate. But Trump allies view the stakes differently. Confirming Gabbard and Kennedy is seen as an opportunity for the president-elect to cement his legacy of broadening the Republican coalition to include disaffected Democrats and independents. They note that the two are considered Blue MAGA rock stars among the Trump faithful. They’re both loved by the new influential podcasters whom Trump courted this election and give Trump the chance to burnish his anti-establishment bona fides.

“The appointments of RFK and Tulsi Gabbard represent a realignment in American politics that you saw in the election,” said Roger Stone, a longtime Trump friend and adviser. “He understands the historical significance of that realignment.”

For that reason, there is an expectation in Trump world that the president-elect will expend more of his political capital on Gabbard and Kennedy than on any of the other nominees. And that he could go apoplectic if their prospects begin to dim.

“Frankly, Pete [Hegseth] might not make it,” said one Trump adviser. “We’ll see. I’m not sure if the boss is willing to fight for that because there are people in our own camp who aren’t sure it’s worth it. But Kash [Patel] should get confirmed. And if they try to touch Tulsi and Kennedy, then it’s war.”

Added a second adviser: “If Tulsi or Bobby face real trouble, that’s when Trump will really start to fight. They represent the challenging of the status quo of the bureaucracy. That’s what MAGA is about.”

Now, Caputo is incredibly well-sourced in the vicinity of people like Stone, but he can be credulous.

And I’m not sure I believe that his sources believe what Bobby and Tulsi give you is some magical realignment among actual Democrats, who long ago dissociated from these nuts.

But I don’t doubt that the rat-fucker wing of Trump’s advisory team believes that Bobby and Tulsi do accomplish something. The question is whether some really smart politicos believe it’ll be a good thing to kill children and give dictators America’s secrets and let the richest men in the world destroy America’s banking system and the dollar exchange — whether they believe this will win lasting approval from America’s great disaffected masses. It might well! It certainly will expand the pool of disaffected Americans, and with it, increase the market for a strong man to respond to it all.

Or whether there’s some reason Trump is tempting Republican Senators to defy his plans to do great damage to the United States. Perhaps he intends to dare them to start defying him in bulk.

Or perhaps the rat-fucker wing of Trump’s entourage simply has an unknown reason they want to destroy America. Maybe Trump has other election debts — debts he’d get in more trouble for ignoring — that make him amenable to dropping policy bomb after policy bomb on America’s children.

But that’s sort of the point. You’ve got Kimberly Strassel up in arms because Trump is going to the mat for a conspiracist with a Democratic name who’ll get children killed. But it’s more likely to do with the policy bombs that RFK will help Trump drop than the specific conversations that led Bobby Jr to drop out of the race.

77 replies
  1. allan_in_upstate says:

    The idea that either RFK Jr or Gabbard could assist in a historic political realignment* is preposterous.
    That Caputo is willing to carry this water for his source(s) says more about Caputo than about the reasons
    Trump is nominating them. The simpler, more plausible explanation is that they hold similar conspiratorial
    views about the Deep State and Deep Bio-Medicine and, having no constituencies or power bases of their own,
    will do as they are told.

    * The head shots of the incoming GOP House Committee chairs tells us that the realignment might be a ways off:
    https://bsky.app/profile/nycsouthpaw.bsky.social/post/3ld76klvq6k2k

    • dopefish says:

      Caputo has been on the Trumpworld beat for The Bulwark (a media org consisting of never-Trumpers). If you read his piece, the mention of “realignment in American politics” was a direct quote from Roger Stone:

      “The appointments of RFK and Tulsi Gabbard represent a realignment in American politics that you saw in the election,” said Roger Stone, a longtime Trump friend and adviser. “He understands the historical significance of that realignment.”

      For that reason, there is an expectation in Trump world that the president-elect will expend more of his political capital on Gabbard and Kennedy than on any of the other nominees. And that he could go apoplectic if their prospects begin to dim.

      Caputo is not carrying water here, he’s just explaining to non-MAGAs what people like Roger Stone are saying about Trump’s most “controversial” (appalling, dangerous and unqualified) nominees.

  2. thesmokies says:

    “I think Democrats, rather than fostering polarization by attacking Trump’s nominees as the partisan hacks they are, should instead frame the question in terms of the damage they’ll do to the US, ….”

    Absolutely. Before the election, it was “not the odds, but the stakes” that the media should have but did not pursue. Now, it is not the promises, but the consequences. Focus on the likely and actual consequences based on research and practice. For example, based on plentiful evidence, remind America what the real consequences of more tax cuts for the rich will be.

  3. sfvalues says:

    I think the FDIC thing is about putting regulatory functions more directly under the control of political appointees (e.g., the Treasury) so they can be weaponized. Trump only needs to cause one bank run that he refuses to bail out for all the banks to fall in line and carry out his agenda to reward his allies and punish the people he wants to punish. I could see RFK, Jr. playing golf with Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and complaining that vaccine research is still getting privately funded; the next day the banks get a call. All kinds of synergies of corruption open up when you turn regulatory bodies into thugs.

    • gmokegmoke says:

      The squeals about “de-banking” from people like Marc Andreessen may have something to do with the assault on the FDIC as well as the CFPB.

  4. Mark Hooker says:

    Do we know that Trump has election debts? He raised a lot of money, and is raising even more for transition and inaugural.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Billionaires don’t drop a hundred million or more on an election campaign without expecting a lot of somethings in return. And they don’t arrange them after their guy wins.

      • thequickbrownfox says:

        He sued ABC for defamation. Reportedly, they are settling by paying 15 MILLION dollars towards his presidential library and are going to offer an apology.
        Everybody is scared shitless of him and will knuckle under. This country is F’d

        • Matt Foley says:

          $15 million for his library. To be paid within 10 days. Meanwhile, his victims still haven’t gotten their money.

          How many copies of The Art of the Deal will $15 million buy?

          No joke, I feel like I’m gonna be sick.

  5. ToldainDarkwater says:

    Trump is pretty clearly distancing himself from things, in his very Trumpy way: “We’re going to have a big discussion! It’s going to be the best and the biggest discussion ever!” Is what he’s saying. If he thought we should do it, that’s not what he would be saying.

    The “fun” part of this is that this is exactly a bog-standard politician thing to do, and yet here is fearless truth-teller Trump doing it.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Trump doesn’t mean “we” will have a discussion about anything. As you say, it’s a script, intended to distance himself from known likely outcomes.

  6. P J Evans says:

    They’re really planning to destroy the country: RFKjr’s lawyer, Alex Siri, wants to stop using vaccines until they’ve done “double blind tests” with the control group getting saline injections. Polio vaccine is high on that list! (And ethics be damned!)

      • klynn says:

        We do away with vaccinations and we destroy many sectors of society over night. 1) Travel and tourism will tank. No international visitors. Other countries will ban travel to the US. US citizens without vaccinations will not be able to travel out of the country.
        2)Medicine: our medical community will leave the US and refuse to work with unsafe, unvaccinated risk.
        3)Livestock and poultry production will be severely impacted.

        Any sane person will leave the country. There will be a brain drain of seismic proportions across high knowledge, high skill sectors. And higher ed will probably totally collapse. We will have zero national capacity.

        • CaboDano says:

          “Any sane person will leave the country”

          We left California for Mexico Mar. 4, 2020. Our sanity is intact, but we damn sure worry about you guys.

        • Lulu1964 says:

          I left the US for Mexico September 2022. Just returned from spending 2 weeks visiting Joshua Tree National Park most likely my last visit to the US

  7. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Every barn needs a lightning rod. Trump seems intent on having a Cabinet full of them.

    The multiple knock-on effects of each of these moves would be extensive and devastating. Eliminating one major vaccine, for example, such as polio, would ultimately isolate the country and its regions, and cut domestic and international travel, cooperation, and assistance. Imagine the resulting pariah status, the social distancing, the burden on education and religion, and on an overstretched medical system, paid for by the likes of UHC. And that’s just for starters.

    It would be like a gigantic DDoS attack on an entire society. It’s madness, but what’s the method? Chaos and destruction? Diseases are notorious for disregarding status and wealth.

    • Bruce Olsen says:

      “Diseases are notorious for disregarding status and wealth.”

      cf “The Masque of the Red Death”

      • Dark Phoenix says:

        “And now was acknowledged the presence of the Red Death. He had come like a thief in the night. And one by one dropped the revellers in the blood-bedewed halls of their revel, and died each in the despairing posture of his fall. And the life of the ebony clock went out with that of the last of the gay. And the flames of the tripods expired. And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all.”

  8. CitizenSane77 says:

    Aside from reasons being to repay debts or drop policy bombs, I also think these big name, high level appointments are a way to…
    1. Allow Trump to further distance himself and the Republican party away from “RINOS” and their policies. RFK and Tulsi are like Trump and not really Republican or Democrat. But it’s certain they aren’t RINOS and won’t oppose him.

    2. Allow Trump to pass blame if these big name appointments fail. RFK ran for prez and Trump can pin any blame on an unhealthy America on him.

    I’m not clear what incentive Trump would have to “destroy” America or eliminate vaccines. Vengeance only? How does killing vaccines afford him vengeance? I tend to agree that a lot of this isn’t so much about repaying debt, but about a narcissist wanting others to view how he sees his reflection in the pond. And if Trump’s voters approve of these appointments and policy bombs, it’ll put more pressure on Republican office holders and “RINOS” to support more of Trump’s decisions and policy. Trump wants to slowly push his Republican dissenters out, and increased pressure from independents may be the play here.

    I also think Trump may just not care about these appointments as much as we do. He largely ran to avoid legal accountability and, his desire for power and to “win”. Now that he won, why rock the boat of his voters or go against his promises for RFK or Tulsi to hold high level positions if there’s no incentive for him to not give them the positions? Although, if they go against him or if there are incentives for Trump to fire them, he’ll do so in a heartbeat.

    But now, he may not really care.

    • CitizenSane77 says:

      To clarify the reason for Trump appointing RFK to avoid blame, Trump choosing the wrong people has been a major criticism of his supporters. If his base wants him to appoint RFK, which they mostly do, he can pin any blame for inaction or failure on not only RFK, but supporters as well. “Hey, you wanted him, you got him. But don’t blame me if his policy bombs bring back Polio”.

      • Krisy Gosney says:

        Actually, all Trump has to do is tell his supporters that the old polio is not back. This is not THAT polio. THIS is Kung Olio- made in a secret lab in China. And they’ll all fall in line being pissed off at the shocking and unavoidable Kung Olio.

    • gmokegmoke says:

      “I’m not clear what incentive Trump would have to ‘destroy’ America….”

      If you consider the rumor that Trmp has been a Russian asset since the 1980s, some clarity might arrive.

      Besides, since a lifetime of evidence points to the idea that Trmp cares only about himself and his interests, why would he care about the destruction of USAmerica as long as he gets his profit off the top?

      • CitizenSane77 says:

        Sorry but this “rumor” is ridiculous. He may have debts and even blackmail compromat, but a Russian asset since the 80s is conspiracy theory BS like the far right peddles.

        I just don’t think the Department of Health is an arm of government Trump cares about or would use to enact revenge on his enemies.

        • chum'sfriend says:

          “The day after the ad appeared, a piece in the New York Times suggested that the “nobody” in question might enter the 1988 Republican presidential primaries against George H. W. Bush.” … “Even though the new asset was, relatively speaking, insignificant, Shvets remembered his name-Donald J. Trump.” page 94, “American Kompromat “ by Craig Unger.

        • gmokegmoke says:

          “He may have debts and even blackmail compromat…” and thus may be liable to pressure from those, possibly Putin’s people, who hold those debts and kompromat. That makes him an investment if not an asset.

          I suspect that Trmp has been played every time he has met with those in Russian intelligence. That does not mean he’s a spy or a traitor but most certainly a possible tool, even as a “useful idiot.”

          That’s not a conspiracy theory. That’s just logic.

          However, I have thought it would be interesting if Trmp was actually a traitorous spy and his handlers were his first and third wives. It would make a good thriller plot.

          PS: The two bona fide known spies I’ve met in my life were both exceedingly charming people. I don’t believe Trmp is exceedingly charming.

        • Rayne says:

          Assets are not necessarily spies. That should be more clear. Trump is too easily manipulated to be a credible, trustworthy spy.

        • P J Evans says:

          He’s an asset in the sense that he says and does things that help them toward their goals – which are not *our* goals.

  9. Amateur Lawyer At Work says:

    Of the four obviously unqualified, I can see Trump only going to the mats for Hegseth. Trump wants “his generals” more than anything else. RFK is merely about trolling unless somehow RFK has a recorded quid-pro-quo, which I have trouble believing. Generals willing to give orders against US citizens are the keys to using the military as domestic enforcers, clearing a “Deep State” of people willing to resist or slow-walk massively-authoritarian changes, and any potential “make-up consolation term” or other efforts to prevent a reversion to democratic norms.

    • Chris Real says:

      Quick question for Marcy:

      Was Christopher Wray’s resignation clever or cowardly?

      Digby says cowardly, but I’ve seen others say he is cleverly doing something to bollocks some plans of Trump.

      What do you say?

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Most of Trump’s nominees so far are “obviously unqualified.”

      Trump might go to the mats for Hegseth, more likely for Patel, but it’s also possible he’ll consider discarding him, and use the hoopla to hide something else.

      • Amateur Lawyer At Work says:

        Wray “obeyed in advance” rather than force Trump to deploy some lame excuse because he’s too undisciplined for much else.
        I’m up in air about Patel vs. Hegseth. Hegseth is a virulent white/Christian nationalist, who is probably a little…curious about certain social movements from the 1930s but Patel wants personal revenge. The question is whether enough others at the FBI “obey in advance” to make Patel redundant.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          I don’t think lack of discipline or vanity are Wray’s problems. But his excuse that he was trying to save the FBI’s staff from trauma doesn’t fly, given that his likely successor is the manifestly unqualified Kash Patel.

          Patel will subject FBI staff to endless humiliation and trauma. He may want personal revenge, but his forte is as a gofer for his patrons. The question is what do they want.

  10. Purple Martin says:

    As to “…frame the question in terms of the damage they’ll do to the US, the damage Republican Senators will own if they confirm them,” a couple weeks ago I pretty much hid the same point in a late-night, way too long, and pretty muddled comment around the Advice & Consent process. It was one of the last comments in a string that had long played itself out—I’m surprised Rayne let it through but, hey, it was even later for her. I’m sure almost no one saw it (thankfully), so I hope you’ll indulge me with the half-as-long (280 words), copy-edited version.
    __________

    Let’s conduct an exercise to place all Trump Advice & Consent-required Article I nominees into a sycophant Tranche (finance term for a rated class of bonds in a bundled security), ranked by strength of argument against Senate consent:

    Tranche 1: Anti-Qualified. Specific disqualification for presenting an unacceptable risk of exceptionally severe damage to strategic U.S. national interests/security, either by breaking their department’s capabilities or using agency powers to attack those considered the president’s enemies. Tranche 1 consists at least of AG Matt Gaetz (moot); SECDEF Pete Hegseth; DNI Tulsi Gabbard; HHS Sec Robert Kennedy Jr.; FBI Director Kash Patel.

    Tranche 2: Unqualified. Total lack of experience, knowledge and abilities needed to direct a primary, statutorily-defined federal mission. The largest tranche, examples include Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy; Navy Secretary John Phelan; NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker.

    Tranche 3: Minimal Qualifications. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem; Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins; Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer.

    Tranche 4: Traditional Qualifications. The smallest tranche, examples include Secretary of State Marco Rubio; AG Pam Bondi; Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.

    So, after hearings to determine each nominee’s qualifying, unqualifying, anti-qualifying, and overall risk factors, the Senate—including R’s wanting to preserve our constitutional republic, representative democracy, a working government, and global leadership—should vote to:

    1. Deny Article II consent to Traunch 1, (as a single but temporally-separated-multipart decision).
    2. Deny consent of specific high-risk-to-U.S.-interests Traunch 2 members, but likely approve some.
    3. Likely approve most of Traunch 3.
    4. Approve Traunch 4.

    I hope some R Senators will realize the largest part of all the pain inflicted already happened with the Gaetz withdrawal. Each additional rejection will cause a smaller amount of additional pain, and stacking rejections will reduce that even further.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Puppy Killer Kristi Noem and Pam Bondi I would rate as unqualified. Noem is hopelessly unqualified to run the sprawling, mega-budgeted, armed federal agency, which has never passed an accounting audit that is DHS. Bondi might be minimally qualified to run DoJ, were she not hopelessly biased in favor of Trump.

      • Purple Martin says:

        Glad you called those two out. Rationale for placement in a tranche was part of the detail I took out. Traditionally Qualified is used instead of Qualified because rejection of such choices must go beyond just relevant knowledge and experience. I used Pam Bondi as as an example of someone who might be moved from Tranche 4 to Tranche 1, per your reasoning. But to start, a large-state two term Attorney General is in line with past DoJ AG nominations.

        For Unqualified, need someone like the Big-Dick-Toilet Salesman—absolutely zero experience in either Foreign, or Military affairs—for NATO Ambassador. So, used Kristi Noam because I wanted a Minimally Qualified edge case.

        A governor checks off the large organization management box Pete Hegseth doesn’t. A governor was the first Homeland Security Secretary (Pennsylvania’s Tom Ridge, as was the third (Arizona’s Janet Napolitano). Noam has experience coordinating disaster response action with Homeland Security resources (floods mostly). It’s acknowledged, as you noticed, that she did that pretty poorly, which is what keeps her Minimally Qualified, with a chance of moving to Tranche 1 because of risk potential.

        By the way, all four Anti-Qualified members also fit in Unqualified, which is closer to Marcy’s point of the risk they present—but Tranch 1 rules!. I hope the Tranche 1 use hearings use something like Executive Order 13526’s expected damage descriptions used for information classification for the risk presented by nominees:

        exceptionally grave damage (Top Secret)
        serious damage (Secret)
        damage ( Confidential)

        And finally, here’s how I closed the to-long first version I mentioned (including the asterisk attached to Tranche 2), so thanks for the input:
        ____________
        Names are just suggestions…additional placements welcomed! I have some hopes for the Senate here, and more than just four R’s most often mentioned.
        _____
        *Per Alexander Hamilton Federalist 76:
        …people who had no other merit than that…of possessing the necessary insignificance and pliancy to render them the obsequious instruments of [the president’s] pleasure.”

  11. Krisy Gosney says:

    Some Canadian clinics are going to make a shit-ton providing wealthy American’s children with the proper vaccines at the proper ages.

  12. Yogarhythms says:

    Marcy,
    Debts have never motivated Trump. He doesn’t pay. As a nurse I remember the death and destruction the last pandemic wrought under Trump’s watch. 1 million US covid fatalities got him re-elected. RFK’s leadership of HHS will oversee CDC, NIH, NLM, Medical research agency. Reducing the above agencies to third world levels of competency through RFK’s leadership cements Trump’s legacy. By all means Republicans owning nominee confirmations will be campaign posters in 2026.

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You attempted to publish this comment as “Yogarhytms” triggering auto-moderation; it has been edited to reflect your established username. Please check your browser’s cache and autofill; future comments may not publish if username does not match. /~Rayne]

  13. Zinsky123 says:

    There was a discussion on Sirius XM Progress today about what might happen if Trump and Co. stopped requiring polio or MMR or DPT vaccinations. One guest said that even the announcement of curtailment of polio vaccine in children in America would trigger huge repercussions including bans on Americans traveling, shipments of American goods or food substances could be banned or severely limited and it would cause huge retaliation from other countries. Other countries might not let us ever play in any of their reindeer games….

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      RFK Jr and Aaron Siri want to stop requiring all vaccinations. They also want to withdraw FDA approval for them, including polio. Presumably, they would halt funding for vaccination and research programs. If you do that, it’s hard to see how you vaccinate any Americans. That would quickly enlarge the space available for diseases to replicate and spread.

      Polio, for example, is a virus that only affects humans. It’s easily transmitted by the 75% of infected humans who are asymptomatic. About 1% of cases lead to paralysis. In a population of 330 million, that’s a lot.

      RFK Jr and Siri only have eyes for the vanishingly small number of adverse reactions to a phenomenally well-proven vaccine. They willfully ignore the hundreds of millions in this country who benefit from them.

      • P J Evans says:

        Worse, they think that researchers should run double-blind tests on vaccines, with a control group of *actual living humans* getting saline solution. Which is extremely unethical. For stuff that’s been in use for more than 30 years, that’s even worse: those are safe and effective vaccines, or they have been pulled years ago.

        • Greg Hunter says:

          Polio was a discussion topic of my youth and became a bigger topic when I got married as my father-in-law had contracted polio while stationed at Fort Polk as a LT in the US Army. He was drafted in 1955 after graduating from The Ohio State University. George Smith was coveted by the US Army as he had walked on to play golf at OSU and they promptly won the Big 10 Championship 3 times. Jack Nicklaus would eventually tie George’s low score at OSU and I remember seeing video of him playing with Joe Louis and he also played Babe Didrikson Zaharias.

          I vaguely remember him saying that he had participated or gotten a shot for polio when he got to Fort Polk and he opined he got the placebo. George recovered from polio for a year at Walter Reed and never played golf again, which is why Jack Nicklaus was the first star professional golfer from OSU and not the second.

          Placebo studies have already been done and some kids ended up on the short end of the stick. PS George would always claim were it not for polio he would not have had a family.

          https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1114166/#sec4

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Yeah, there are reasons the kind of placebo studies RFK Jr advocates for are grossly unethical. Among them, because they lead to avoidable suffering and death, which violates the Hippocratic Oath.

          The understandable reluctance to do them is a roadblock Kennedy is throwing into the path of continued use of drugs that save millions – basically, an entire society – from harm. His conduct appears to be psycopathic.

      • posaune says:

        Not hard to imagine the burden on parents to obtain health insurance approvals for a child’s treatment of polio, communicable disease etc. It’s already hard enough to get approval (payments) for any procedure without fighting by appeal; with public health entirely in chaos, it will be impossible. So utterly destructive of everything: families, education, employment, transportation, economics. . . everything. And that’s the goal.

      • Matt Foley says:

        Repubs need to repeal nanny state seat belt laws so we can end all these seat belt injuries. MAGA Christians know the real solution is a law requiring drivers to display a plastic Jesus on their dashboard.

  14. Inner Monologue says:

    If these prohibitions get off the ground, the chaos will be long term. Think public school districts, private schools, hospitals, organized sports, etc. Think faith-based worship services. They’re already struggling with decreased attendance. Back in the day, people had to quarantine in their homes with a warning sign on the front door. Public health departments were strong. Not if these prohibitions take effect. It’ll be dangerous for everyone. We’ll be pariahs. Canada and Mexico will seal off their borders in the first twenty minutes, as they should.

  15. JAFO_NAL says:

    The chaos is the goal, not a side effect. The more disfunctional the government is, the easier the grift and the ability to skate becomes. The specifics of who gets what position aren’t important to Trump, just that whoever is in place is a loyal sycophant who protects him and hides or furthers the grift while he takes advantage of his immunity. I’m sure Putin is hoping the coming US government dysfunction happens rapidly enough to save his failing war in Ukraine. Trump will consider it worthwhile if he gets a hotel deal or large cryptocurrency “investment” in return.
    Much thanks to Marcy and the many contributors to the discussion here for providing an island of rationality and critical analysis. Resistance is not futile.

    • Inner Monologue says:

      You are correct. But, it matters not if he talks word salad merely to distract. The genuine reactions of fear and panic reflect that his words are analogous to shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Why newer editions of the same type think they are somehow different from those who came before them is sort of funny. In the words of Churchill: “Dictators ride to and fro upon tigers which they dare not dismount. And the tigers are getting hungry.”

    • GolfPopper says:

      While there are probably many different forces behind Trump’s decision, I think you are right that creating chaos to enable looting of the United States is a big one.

      The Texas legislature has just introduced a bill to create a “strategic bitcoin reserve” which is being touted as a model for national legislation to do the same. A pump & dump scheme around cryptocurrency, fueled by the United States government, seems near-certain to happen. (Other, perhaps not so obvious, pillaging schemes seem likely to be in the planning stages.)

  16. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Given how few debts Trump ever pays off, I’d say he’s committed to destroying the US, regardless of his debt load.

  17. dopefish says:

    OT: the BBC has an article saying that ABC News will pay $15 million to Trump to settle a defamation lawsuit he filed against them after a show on March 10th when George Stephanopoulos was interviewing Nancy Mace. The lawsuit was over Stephanopoulos’ supposedly defamatory statement that “judges and two separate juries have found [Trump] liable for rape”.

  18. bgThenNow says:

    Does anyone have analysis about what immunity by the Supremes was anticipating? Is Roberts a ChristoFascist? Certainly at least Thomas and Alito would be in that camp, but do they not actually believe. in the rule of law? Is the end of the checks and balances of three branches of government intentional? Does their view of the Constitution/Originalist/Federalist version comport with this type of outcome? The looting of the Treasury? Destruction of everything that came before? Are they as incapable as His voters of critical analysis? Who is there to stop Him? Surely they have to see His worst instincts. I just can’t fathom it. I guess the history of this time does not matter? Roberts’ legacy? WTAF?

    • bgThenNow says:

      I hope the Democratic House/Senate staffers and all the constitutional lawyers are keeping track of all of the for the hearings, that they are coordinating and prepping to make sure all of this is part of any confirmation process.

  19. Error Prone says:

    It is interesting that Dec 6 Howie Klein wrote along the same lines: https://www.downwithtyranny.com/post/which-nominees-is-trump-fine-seeing-fail-and-which-ones-will-he-actually-fight-for

    Kennedy is one thing. Tulsi another. Tulsi would be good for the spooks, things might differ from what they’ve been getting away with if she’s confirmed. She might even, as not a careerist intelligence persona, do good things for the nation in curbing the machine.

    Kennedy is just a pile of trouble and is the one that likely should fail confirmation. Tulsi might face a spook uprising, behind silence of course, so – the one thing I think certain, she will not go to Syria to talk to the new guy before her committee hearings.

    How you and Klein came to the same Caputo sourcing, and how you differ is still rattling around my head to where I’ll not post any wrong stuff about it. We’ll see.

  20. wetzel-rhymes-with says:

    Why is Trump destroying America? Mary was the mystic of the two, but it was Fred who cursed the world. Even though he was all business, Fred wouldn’t let his wife hold their newborn son by the wisp of baby hair when she dipped him in the River, though she had planned to dip his whole body, especially his ankles! It’s the classic story of vanity. There was a lack of faith. You don’t hear much about Mary Anne, but she dipped baby Donald in the River Styx by his penis to make his golden hair immortal under the direction of Fred, who had become convinced his own hair cream was working though he doubted it.

    Trump could form a new Rome but for the waters at the root of the universe, where all rivers and steams regather, there is Goddess daughter of Oceanus and Tethys, Styx, and she is angry at Trump’s unpropitiated Baptism in her waters. Trump is a renegade who thought he had it made, but the hangman of Styx is coming for the bounty. The Furies are out from the Underworld to recover the Golden Coiffure of Aeneus, if I am interpreting things right, but his possession of the Coiffure is driving the Furies mad. It’s not Donald but the Furies who come at night and pull it out his hair painfully, the hair of Shiva holding up the River Ganges. It hurts as they peck at him, Donald whirling about in a dream of flight like a Macy’s Day Parade balloon with little wings on his feet. Anyway, that’s how I’m making sense of why Donald Trump is destroying America. It’s either that or Vladimir Putin.

  21. Stephen Calhoun says:

    I read ‘debt’ broadly, referring, then, to transactional debt similar to repaying a favor.

    I understand one aspect about Trump that is clear bit among the elements of his make-up which are little commented upon anymore. Trump remains seriously mentally ill. This has, amazingly, been normalized, so, his anti-social personality disorder and malignant narcissism is a feature, not a bug. So, Trump is bold and politically incorrect and, apparently, is at once an anti-hero and a King Cyrus the Great. (The American Cyrus: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/12/5/354)

    What is about to unfold is a chaos that may well intentionally ravage the constitutional order. For example, I do not see how developing an oligarchy oriented around grift, tribute, and MAGA fan service will not cause severe economic problems. If the economy is to become intentionally tumultuous why would the mid-term elections be allowed to happen?

    Likewise don’t the political implications of weaponizing financial regulation; the DOH; DHS; and the military, suggest hammer blows against the constitutional order?

    Yet, the main reason I see jeopardy with respect to the mid-terms is, in my inexpert opinion, that Trump will not allow a third impeachment.

    The history books will be unsparing. The historical record for authoritarianism is not full of praise. Are most sleep-walking?

Comments are closed.