What Category of Russian Asset IS Donald Trump? Yes, "Useful Idiot" Or Other...He Most Definitely IS One.

Is Trump a Russian asset? There is NO question about this. While he's not "run" by Russia, he clearly is in a state of always wanting to please Vladimir Putin. That's enough. At worst he is a direct asset, at least he is a "Useful Idiot", as he has proven time and time again.

Donald Trump is not a very educated, or very smart man. He is however a clever con man. The two are not the same.

The confusion comes in that he WAS once very well "educated" as a verb, but not very well educated as an adverb. On the one hand, "educated" as an adjective describes a state—you are then educated once you have undergone that process and acquired knowledge or skills.

When I was in university, I knew students who coasted through school, while I was studying nearly every second of every day. I entered higher education after serving in the military, so I was a bit older and more mature than most of my peers. I was using my VA benefits and felt a strong sense of obligation to make the most of those public funds. I was confident that I would leave with a better education than many of my friends. While some seemed to barely study, party often, and still had a natural brilliance that would serve them well after college, they were few and far between. As for the others, I knew some would struggle in the business world, while others, like Trump, seemed to fail upward, as if luck followed them around.

I was rewarded with my psychology department adviser once telling me that I was one of the top 10% of the top 10% of all psychology undergrads at any university. I questioned him on that, thinking he was just being nice. But he thought for a moment and then replied that he believed he was being very accurate in his assessment. Rough calculations on that offer being a part of 3,750 students. While that may be a lot, it's a nice group to be grouped within. And not the greater number of 337,500 psychology university students.

I only mention that to say, while I was tested at a higher than normal IQ, I'm no genius. I worked very hard for my education. To clarify that, my grades might not reflect it in you check my transcript. I remember thinking about that one day at university. I realized I could get an "A" on a paper, or I could instead get a lower grade but learn a lot more (that's the case, I won't bother here to justify the correctness of that). I took the education and knowledge over the better grade. After graduating no one ever checked my grades, just that I had the degree. I felt I made the correct decision.

Acquiring a university degree does not make one smart. You have to choose to do that. If you feel you are coasting, you're not trying hard enough. When you think you're at your limits, you're on the right path. Challenge yourself. Push your limits. I was always talking to my professors, mining their minds for all I could. Asking for more work. Taking the harder road to learn as much as possible. 

Trump, I am confident in saying, never did that. Just to talk to him you can see that is clear. No one ever said that about me after a conversation. 

One MUST maintain one's college degree over one's lifetime. Which Trump has never done. Because he's a narcissist and a very lazy man when it comes to intellectual pursuits. See, narcissists don't need to maintain or increase their perceived "brilliance" or "genius", because to them it's inherent. Trump's mind is akin to an over-ripened Durian fruit no one wanted. 

Where Trump stumbles into his ignorance being exposed, he avoids, feigns competence, deflects, misdirects, answers with a question or questions the questioner (or attacks the veracity of the questioner), manipulates, bullies, dissembles, tangents off from, obfuscates, minimizes, or lies. Or find a way to agree with the other person, in such a way so as to appear to be correct, only in a tangential, often ridiculous way, where often, people are so uncomfortable they merely wish for the situation to end and to move onto something, anything, else. 

People like Trump rely on that uncomfortableness. He also enjoys power abuse, which is another issue entirely (i.e., saying he was and doing it, brushing off "dandruff" from the shoulders of the President of France, a disgusting display of narcissistic abuse or power manipulation, humiliating power play, or dominance display. Putrid, small men do this who wish to appear powerful. It is not presidential. But when you're leader of the most powerful and richest country in the history of the world, what are others supposed to do to correct this type of bad behavior. Yeah, it's a trap. Like Trump abusing shaking hards obnoxiously, and pulling people into him. Something those of larger physical stature do when they are bullies.

The term "Russian asset" in espionage refers to individuals or entities that serve the interests of Russian intelligence agencies by providing information, influence, or support. In the case of former U.S. President Donald Trump, there is no definitive evidence to classify him as a Russian asset in the traditional espionage sense. However, his actions and associations have led to extensive scrutiny and debate regarding his relationship with Russia.

Associations and Financial Ties:

• Business Dealings: Trump's business activities have included dealings with entities linked to Russia. For instance, Deutsche Bank, which provided Trump with substantial loans, was implicated in facilitating Russian money laundering schemes. Trump's son, Donald Jr., remarked in 2008 that "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets."

  Wikipedia

• Campaign Connections: Investigations have revealed interactions between Trump associates and Russian officials during the 2016 presidential campaign. Notably, Paul Manafort, Trump's campaign chairman, had ties to Konstantin Kilimnik, alleged to be a Russian intelligence officer.

  Wikipedia

Public Perceptions and Claims:

• Some commentators have suggested that Trump's actions align with those expected of a Russian asset, citing his favorable stance toward Russia and President Vladimir Putin. For example, an article in Foreign Policy posited that Trump's behavior mirrors that of a Russian asset.

  Foreign Policy

• Conversely, fact-checking efforts have debunked specific claims, such as allegations that Trump was recruited by the KGB in the 1980s under the codename "Krasnov." These claims lack credible evidence.

  Euronews

While Donald Trump's actions and associations with Russian entities have raised questions about his relationship with Russia, there is no conclusive evidence to label him as a Russian asset in the espionage context. The available information suggests a complex interplay of business interests, political interactions, and public perceptions, but it does not substantiate claims of espionage or covert allegiance.

an asset doesn't necessarily have to be directly recruited by a foreign intelligence service to be considered a "useful asset" in espionage. The key point is whether the actions of that individual or entity benefit the interests of the country in question—in this case, Russia—regardless of direct involvement in espionage activities. Based on that, Donald Trump's actions and positions can be analyzed from a broader perspective to see how they could be interpreted as benefiting Russian interests, even if there’s no direct proof of him being a Russian spy.

Potential "Asset" Traits:

1. Favorable Rhetoric Toward Russia and Putin:

   • Throughout his presidency and beyond, Trump often expressed admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin. His reluctance to criticize Putin, even in the face of accusations of Russian interference in U.S. elections and aggression in Ukraine, could be seen as aligning with Russian interests.
   • For example, his comments like, "I don’t see any reason why it would be Russia", when questioned about Russia's interference in the 2016 election, were controversial and raised concerns about his stance on Russian actions.

2. Foreign Policy Decisions:

   • Trump’s foreign policy was seen by some as favorable to Russian interests. His decisions, such as withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, weakening NATO, and suggesting that the U.S. should reduce its commitments to the alliance, were viewed as aligning with Russia's goal of weakening Western unity.
   • His attempts to warm relations with Russia, including meetings with Putin, were perceived as potentially beneficial for Russia’s global position.

3. Business Ties with Russia:

   • Trump had numerous business ties to Russian entities, especially through his real estate dealings. The Trump Organization explored projects in Russia, though none materialized during his presidency, leading some to argue that Trump’s reluctance to challenge Russia could be influenced by potential business interests.
   • The claim by his son, Donald Jr., in 2008, that "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets" suggests that there were significant financial ties that may have been considered beneficial to Russian interests.

4. Public Perception and Influence:

   • Some analysts have argued that Trump’s divisive rhetoric, which often undermined democratic institutions and supported populist causes, played into Russian strategies to create instability in Western democracies.
   • His support for far-right movements, and skepticism about liberal democracies and NATO, could be seen as unwittingly helping Russian efforts to weaken these institutions and advance its geopolitical goals.

5. Cybersecurity and Election Interference:

   • The Russian government's interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election through hacking and disinformation campaigns was widely recognized as an effort to benefit Trump’s candidacy. While Trump himself wasn’t directly involved in the hacking, his victory (and the narrative of Russian support for him) helped sow division in the U.S. political system, benefiting Russian interests.
   • Trump's dismissiveness of the investigations into Russian interference, combined with his public statements questioning the legitimacy of U.S. intelligence agencies, helped cast doubt on the U.S. government's response to Russian actions.

If we look at the broader concept of what makes someone an asset in espionage—being someone whose actions or positions benefit the foreign power’s interests—then Donald Trump’s rhetoric, policy decisions, and business connections can certainly be interpreted as beneficial to Russian objectives. While there's no definitive evidence that he was knowingly acting as a "Russian agent" or that he was directly influenced by Russian intelligence agencies, his actions during his presidency and beyond have consistently aligned with Russian strategic interests, making him, in the eyes of some, a kind of unwitting asset.

This perspective doesn't require a direct line of accountability or recruitment by Russian intelligence, but rather a view that his actions indirectly served Russian goals on the global stage.

Analyzing former U.S. President Donald Trump's actions through the lens of benefiting Vladimir Putin involves assessing both direct and indirect influences over varying timeframes. While definitive evidence of covert collaboration is lacking, several actions during Trump's tenure suggest alignment with Russian interests.

Near-Term Benefits (2017–2021):

1. Policy Decisions Favoring Russia:

   • NATO Relations: Trump's expressed desire to reintegrate Russia into the G7, stating, "I’d love to have them back," was seen as a move that could benefit Putin's global standing.
     Politico Europe
   • Ukraine Conflict: Trump's attempts to broker peace in Ukraine often leaned towards Russian interests, with his proposed ceasefire plans being dismissed by Putin as insufficient.
     BILD

2. Business Connections:

   • Russian Investments: Despite Trump's claims of no financial interests in Russia, investigations revealed that Russian individuals invested at least $98 million in Trump-branded properties in southern Florida.
     Reuters
   • Real Estate Dealings: In 2008, Trump sold a Palm Beach mansion to Russian billionaire Dmitry Rybolovlev for $95 million, nearly double his purchase price, highlighting significant financial ties.
     Eric Swalwell

Distant Benefits (Pre-Presidency):

1. Financial Rescues:

   • In the 1990s, facing financial difficulties, Trump received investments from Russian oligarchs, which helped stabilize his business ventures.
     Foreign Policy

2. Business Endeavors:

   • Trump's 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and ongoing efforts to establish a Trump Tower in Moscow indicate longstanding business interests in Russia.
     Politico

Far-Distant Benefits (Post-Presidency):

1. Policy Continuity:

   • Post-presidency, Trump continued to express favorable views towards Putin, suggesting a sustained alignment with Russian interests.
     NPR

2. Asset Seizure and Enforcement Actions:

   • The dissolution of the KleptoCapture task force, initiated under Trump, led to the auctioning of the Russian-owned superyacht Amadea, reducing government maintenance costs.
     Financial Times

While these actions suggest a pattern of behavior that aligns with Russian interests, it's important to note that correlation does not imply direct causation. There is no conclusive evidence that Trump acted as an agent of Russia or that his actions were part of a coordinated effort to serve Russian strategic objectives. Nonetheless, the consistency of certain actions and policies during his tenure has led to discussions about the potential benefits they may have provided to Putin and Russia.

Extras...

Here's Why Putin Could 'Hand Trump A Win' And Agree To Ceasefire Deal With Ukraine: Analyst

Who the f**k taught Donald Trump about the Alien Enemies Act of 1798? #dailyshow

And finally...

"Void and vacant": Our fool for a "POTUS" Trump says Biden pardons are nullified. Yeahhh NO. If that WAS true, the next democratic POTUS will just invalidate Trump's pardons of violent HIS insurrectionists HE sent to...Insurrection.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

 

Al Capone vs. Donald Trump: A Hypothetical Presidential Showdown

First up, wishing you all a very Happy St. Patrick's Day!

In Ireland, have you paid for your TV license? In Ireland, a TV license is required for any premises with a television set capable of receiving broadcast signals, including broken or smart TVs used for streaming.

Let's fact-check each claim in the image:

1. Patrick’s official color was blue, not green – Mostly true.

   • Early depictions of Saint Patrick, as well as the Order of St. Patrick (an 18th-century chivalric order), associated him with the color blue. However, green later became associated with him due to his use of the shamrock and Ireland's national identity.

2. Patrick wasn’t Irish; he was born of Roman parents in Scotland or Wales – True.

   • Historical sources suggest Patrick was born in Roman Britain (likely in modern-day Scotland or Wales) around the 4th-5th century AD to a Romanized family. He was kidnapped by Irish raiders and taken to Ireland as a slave before escaping and later returning as a missionary.

3. Patrick used a shamrock as a metaphor for the Holy Trinity. Four-leaf clovers have nothing to do with Patrick – Likely true, but not definitively proven.

   • The idea that Patrick used the shamrock to explain the Holy Trinity is a popular legend, but there is no direct historical evidence confirming it. However, the shamrock is closely linked with his legacy. Four-leaf clovers, which are rare mutations, are not part of this tradition.

4. Patrick’s birth name was Maewyn Succat. He changed it to Patricius as a priest name – Likely true.

   • Many sources indicate his original name was Maewyn Succat and that he took the name Patricius (Latin for "nobleman") upon becoming a priest.

5. Patrick was famed for driving all snakes out of Ireland, but the snakes were a metaphor for pagans. He was a mass murderer responsible for the deaths of many pagans – Partly true, partly misleading.

   • Ireland has no native snake population, and fossil records confirm that it never did after the Ice Age. The "driving out snakes" story is widely considered a metaphor for converting the Irish to Christianity and eliminating druidic practices.
   • However, there is no historical evidence that Patrick was personally involved in killing pagans. His writings suggest he was more focused on converting them rather than engaging in violence. While Christianity often replaced pagan traditions, framing him as a "mass murderer" is an exaggeration without historical backing.

Final Verdict:

Most of the claims in the image are based on truth, but some (especially the "mass murderer" claim) are misleading or speculative.

Moving on...

Petty wannabe dictator and convicted felon POTUS47 Trump once again comparing himself to murderer and criminal racketeer Al Capone:

I was attacked more than anybody in the history of our country. The great Al Capone was attacked only a small fraction of what I was attacked.

From video supplied by Acyn

Donald Trump's claim that he was "attacked more than anybody in the history of our country" and that "the great Al Capone was attacked only a small fraction of what I was attacked" is highly subjective and not factually accurate.

While Trump faced significant criticism, investigations, legal challenges, and media scrutiny during and after his presidency, it's difficult to compare the level of "attack" between him and historical figures like Al Capone. Capone, one of the most notorious criminals in American history, was the target of numerous law enforcement efforts, particularly by the federal government. 

He faced legal scrutiny for his criminal empire, which included bootlegging, gambling, and violent activities. However, Capone's public exposure and media attention, while significant during his time, were on a smaller scale compared to the modern media landscape in which Trump operated. Trump's presidency, especially given the rise of social media and 24/7 news coverage, subjected him to a unique level of scrutiny and political attacks.

Both men faced intense public and legal challenges, but comparing the two in terms of being "attacked" is not a straightforward or factual statement. Trump’s modern media environment, political climate, and legal controversies are fundamentally different from the circumstances Capone faced.

What "Grok", Elon Musk's AI on "X" (once Twitter) have to say on this?

"Yeah, Trump’s got a thing for comparing himself to Al Capone—he’s done it a bunch of times. Just a couple days ago, on March 14, 2025, he was at the Justice Department ranting about how he’s been “attacked more than anybody in the history of our country,” claiming Al Capone, “the great Alphonse Capone, legendary Scarface,” got off easy compared to him. He’s been trotting out this line for years—back in 2018, he said at a rally he’d been investigated more than Capone, and he’s kept it up, like in 2023 when he tied it to his legal battles. He seems to love the drama of it, casting himself as some persecuted outlaw figure, minus the fedora and tommy gun.

"As for dismantling the U.S. government, he’s definitely swinging a wrecking ball. Since taking office this term, he’s moved fast—signed an executive order on March 15, 2025, to gut the Voice of America and its parent agency, the U.S. Agency for Global Media, putting over 1,300 staff on leave. He’s also got the Department of Education in his crosshairs—draft orders floating around since early March aim to slash it, with staff already cut by nearly 50%. Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is fueling this, axing federal jobs and contracts left and right. Trump’s pushing a “back to the states” line, but critics say it’s more about centralizing power his way—Capone-style control, not federalism. Congress could still block some of this, but he’s testing how far executive power can stretch. Chaos is the vibe, and he’s leaning into it."

End Grok's comment.

In the annals of American history, few figures are as synonymous with crime and corruption as Al Capone. The notorious gangster, who ruled Chicago’s underworld during the Prohibition era, built an empire on violence, intimidation, and illegal activities. 

But what if Capone had moved from the world of organized crime to the Oval Office? How would his leadership style compare to that of Donald Trump, the 45th and foolishly re-elected as 47th president of the United States, whose tenure has been repeatedly marked by chaos, controversy, legal battles, and a distinctively authoritarian (if not criminal) approach to politics?

Al Capone: From Criminal Empire to the White House?

Al Capone, known for his ruthless control over Chicago’s criminal underworld, was far more focused on maintaining power through illegal means than pursuing political office. His crimes, including bootlegging, gambling, and violent intimidation, made him a household name in the 1920s. But if Capone had risen to the presidency, would he have adjusted his methods to fit the role, or would his criminal tendencies have persisted?

Given Capone’s ability to navigate corrupt systems and exert influence over local political figures, there’s a possibility he might have moderated his tactics once in power. His ability to leverage his wealth and influence within the criminal world was impressive, but the presidency would require more than just brute force and bribery. In all likelihood, Capone would have had to adjust his operations to avoid direct criminal involvement in his presidential actions. He may have played a more subtle hand, using under-the-table deals to maintain control without the need for open violence or criminal enterprises.

While we’ll never know for sure, Capone's presidency could have been a dark but restrained version of leadership — at least in comparison to his violent reign over Chicago. He would likely have utilized his understanding of corruption to play the system without relying on overt violence, aligning more with backroom deals and manipulation.

Donald Trump: A Presidency Defined by Division and Controversy

Donald Trump’s presidency, on the other hand, is known for its bold, public approach to leadership — often defined by inflammatory rhetoric, divisive policies, and legal and ethical controversies. Unlike Capone, who kept his criminal actions largely hidden from the public eye, Trump’s actions were frequently front-page news. His presidency was marked by inflammatory statements, aggressive actions against perceived enemies, and frequent clashes with the media, the judiciary, and political opponents.

A key comparison between Trump and Capone lies in their use of intimidation. Trump has been criticized for fostering a climate of division, particularly through his rhetoric. From accusing the media of "fake news" to using social media as a tool to attack critics, Trump relied heavily on psychological manipulation and the cultivation of fear — both of which are tactics Capone mastered in his own criminal network. Trump’s supporters, many of whom echoed his hostile sentiments, even engaged in violent actions, most infamously on January 6, 2021, when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol, an event that many critics argue Trump helped incite.

While Capone might have been a more covert figure in politics, Trump’s approach was front and center, often invoking legal and ethical questions. The Capitol insurrection and subsequent legal issues surrounding Trump’s presidency, including multiple lawsuits and investigations, mirror the chaos and lawlessness Capone embodied in his crime syndicate. Unlike Capone, who might have been constrained by the legal framework of the presidency, Trump seemed to thrive in the chaos, pushing boundaries that sometimes appeared designed to challenge the very systems that held him accountable.

Capone’s Relations with Foreign Powers vs. Trump’s Ties to Russia

One area where Capone and Trump differ markedly is in their interactions with foreign powers. Capone was a domestic figure, focused on local influence and illegal enterprises. He didn’t concern himself with international politics, let alone forge relationships with foreign leaders. His criminal dealings were confined to American shores, and while he might have used international connections in his bootlegging trade, he was primarily concerned with keeping power within the United States.

Trump, however, cultivated controversial relationships with foreign leaders, most notably Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump’s interactions with Putin were often seen as too friendly or even compromising, leading to widespread speculation about whether Trump’s policies were influenced by his admiration for the Russian leader. This contrast between Capone’s narrow focus on domestic criminal enterprise and Trump’s broader international political engagements highlights a key difference in how the two would have conducted foreign policy as president.

The Legacy of Trump’s Leadership and Its Parallels to Capone

In evaluating whether Capone would have made a better president than Trump, we must consider what type of leadership we are comparing. Capone’s leadership was grounded in manipulation and violence, but once in a position of formal authority, he might have recognized the necessity of tempering his methods to fit the role. Trump’s leadership, on the other hand, was defined by a tendency to amplify his controversial and divisive tactics. Where Capone might have toned down his criminal activities in a bid for legitimacy, Trump enhanced his combative and polarizing approach, frequently pushing the limits of the law and political norms.

While it’s difficult to definitively answer which would have been “better,” Capone’s reign might have been quieter, more calculated, and less publicly chaotic, whereas Trump’s presidency left a lasting mark on American democracy, for better or worse, with his brand of unapologetic bravado.

Conclusion: A Study in Power and Influence

In the end, both Al Capone and Donald Trump represent the complex nature of power and influence in America. While Capone’s rise to power was through illegal and violent means, Trump’s presidency was defined by a different type of intimidation, grounded in politics, media, and law. Would Capone have been more restrained in office? Perhaps, but the fact remains that both figures used their influence to manipulate, divide, and control — each in their own way.

Ultimately, the comparison between Capone and Trump reminds us that the ways power is wielded — whether through crime, politics, or both — can leave a deep and lasting impact on the nation.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Trump still really wants to win a Nobel Peace Prize? - LOL Nope.

Trump still really wants to win a Nobel Peace Prize

Uh, nope. No more chance than Putin has.

Donald Trump has virtually no chance of winning the Nobel Peace Prize for several key reasons:

1. His Record on Peace – The prize typically goes to individuals or organizations that have made a lasting contribution to world peace. Despite some diplomatic efforts (such as the Abraham Accords), Trump’s tenure saw heightened global tensions, including near-war escalations with Iran, trade wars with China, and alienation of key allies.

2. January 6th & Undermining Democracy – Encouraging an insurrection against a peaceful transfer of power is the opposite of what the Nobel Peace Prize represents. The committee tends to avoid awarding figures who contribute to domestic or global instability.

3. Praise for Dictators & Authoritarians – Trump has openly admired leaders like Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong-un, and Mohammed bin Salman, figures widely condemned for human rights abuses and aggression. His actions often empowered authoritarian regimes rather than fostering peace.

4. Ukraine & NATO Undermining – His comments about letting Russia do "whatever the hell they want" to NATO allies, along with his history of withholding military aid from Ukraine for political gain, make him an unlikely candidate for a peace prize.

5. Nobel Committee’s Criteria – The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded based on actual results, not just nominations. While Trump has been nominated (as anyone can be), his record does not align with past winners who worked toward diplomacy, reconciliation, or disarmament.

While Trump might want a Nobel Prize to match Obama, the reality is that his actions have consistently disqualified him from serious consideration.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Taking A Look At Just Who And What CFPOTUS47 Donald Trump IS

Let's take a brief look at just who and what CFPOTUS47 (our 1st and only Convicted Felon POTUS in history).

Donald Trump actually IS, aside from the propaganda and lies about him (so unnecessary as he's actually pretty despicable all on his own), a poor example of a human being, or a leader. Simply tell the truth about the man. There's absolutely no need to exaggerate or lie about him. Because he already IS a...

• Convicted Felon
• Civilly Liable for Sexual Abuse
• Indicted Defendant
• Fraudster Racketeer
• Obstructionist
• Tax Cheat
• Defamer
• Election Interference
• Seditionist
• Insurrectionist
• Corporate Criminal
• Charity Fraudster
• University Scammer
• Classified Documents Hoarder...

Now take a look at his psychological makeup:

• Malignant Narcissist
• Malignant Pathological Liar
• Megalomaniac
• Sociopath
• Gaslighter
• Delusional
• Grandiose
• Vindictive
• Paranoid
• unEmpathetic
• Compulsive Manipulator
• Attention-Seeker
• Extreme Projectionist
• Obsessive Grudge-Holder
• Impulse-Control Deficient...

For a bit more on this... 

The Link Between Early Trauma and Narcissistic Personality Disorder

Also...

How to Spot a Narcissistic Sociopath - Is a Sociopathic Narcissist the Same Thing as a Narcissistic Sociopath?

Now, let's consider what kind of a childhood environment leads to building an adult of such a pathetic character:

• Cold
• Authoritarian
• Absent Parenting
• Excessive Praise/Grandiosity Indoctrination
• Exposure to Deception & Corruption
• Lack of Consequences for Bad Behavior
• Extreme Sibling Rivalry/Isolation
• Early Signs of Manipulative/Antisocial Behavior
• Obsession with Status/Power...

This is who just enough Americans were fooled (MaGAFooled) into believing was a swell idea as the man to hold the most powerful office in the history of Humanity.

Mary Trump, a clinical psychologist and Donald Trump's niece has extensively discussed the dysfunctional nature of her uncle's childhood, particularly in her 2020 memoir, Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World's Most Dangerous Man. 

She describes the Trump family as "malignantly dysfunctional," attributing this dysfunction to their patriarch, Fred Trump Sr., whom she characterizes as a "high-functioning sociopath" who lacked empathy and used his family members as pawns.

theguardian.com

Mary notes that Donald Trump's mother, also named Mary, was "emotionally and physically absent," and his father, Fred, was even more so. She writes that Fred "seemed to have no emotional needs at all."

vogue.com

In her book, Mary Trump also discusses how Fred Sr.'s treatment of his children, including Donald, led to lasting psychological impacts. She observes that Fred Sr.'s cruel influence ensured that Donald would have limited access to his range of emotions.

en.wikipedia.org

These insights suggest that Donald Trump's upbringing was marked by emotional neglect and manipulation, contributing to the complex personality traits he exhibits today.

So what IS needed to be POTUS?

Being President of the United States requires a unique blend of qualities and emotional health to handle the immense pressures and responsibilities of the role. Here are some essential qualities:

1. Emotional Resilience: The ability to manage stress, setbacks, and personal challenges while maintaining focus and composure. The president must make tough decisions in high-pressure environments and stay calm under fire.

2. Empathy and Compassion: Understanding and connecting with people across diverse backgrounds and issues is essential. This emotional intelligence helps in leading a nation and building relationships with citizens, world leaders, and lawmakers.

3. Emotional Stability: Presidents often face criticism, loss, and difficult decisions. An emotionally stable individual can maintain their focus, avoid overreaction, and lead with a clear vision despite external pressures.

4. Self-Confidence: Confidence in one's decisions is necessary, especially when faced with uncertainty. The ability to trust your instincts and not second-guess decisions in critical moments is essential.

5. Integrity: Ethical decision-making and trustworthiness are core to the role. The president must be able to stand by their beliefs, even in the face of public or political adversity.

6. Adaptability: Flexibility to adjust to new challenges, domestic and international situations, and the changing needs of the country. This includes handling crises effectively.

7. Communication Skills: The ability to inspire, educate, and lead the nation through speeches, meetings, and public appearances is vital. Clear, persuasive communication helps in rallying people and explaining difficult issues.

8. Judgment: The ability to make sound decisions that balance many factors, including short-term and long-term consequences, national security, and public welfare. The president must prioritize and make tough choices without personal bias.

9. Patience and Perseverance: Political and legislative progress can be slow, and working with Congress or foreign leaders can be frustrating. The ability to persist through these challenges while keeping the ultimate goal in mind is crucial.

10. Humility: A strong president recognizes the power of the office is derived from the people, not personal entitlement. This involves a willingness to learn from others, admit mistakes, and work collaboratively.

Emotional health is vital to maintaining these qualities. Presidents who are in touch with their own emotions, can navigate stress, and make thoughtful decisions tend to lead more effectively.

Moving on from the sheer and utter nightmare that IS our current POTUS...

 Dealings with Dictators: A Ceo's Guide to Defending Democracy

‘If You Compromise With Totalitarian Systems, You Pay a High Price’

Mathias Döpfner's new book urges US & Europe to join in a “Freedom Trade Alliance” against China, Russia & other autocracies.

'Threat to the republic': How Trump squandered goodwill and sent Dems into resistance

OK, OK, but what about the Trump supporter? Republicans turning on their Party and country, MaGA (Undeserving of a capital "A" in America until they stop their sedition and support of insurrection and their chief insurrectionist). Let's take a quick look at what and who would support such a defective person and criminal leader.

What does this say about MaGA & Trump supporters who relish support of such a "person"? Such a mental patient and criminal?

The steadfast support of Donald Trump's base, despite his controversial actions and statements, has been the subject of extensive psychological and sociopolitical analysis. 

Several factors contribute to this phenomenon:

1. Perceived Mythical Leadership

Many supporters view Trump as a larger-than-life figure endowed with extraordinary abilities to combat perceived societal threats. This perception fosters a deep emotional connection and unwavering loyalty.

sesp.northwestern.edu

2. Authoritarian Personality Traits

Research indicates that individuals with a preference for clear hierarchies and strong leadership gravitate towards Trump. Traits such as right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation are prevalent among his supporters.

jspp.psychopen.eu

3. Shared Psychological Dynamics

The concept of "shared psychosis" suggests a psychological alignment between Trump and his followers, characterized by a mutual reinforcement of beliefs and behaviors. This dynamic can lead to a collective dismissal of opposing viewpoints and facts.

scientificamerican.com

4. Cultural and Economic Factors

Economic hardship, cultural displacement, and a sense of lost status contribute to the appeal of Trump's message. His rhetoric resonates with individuals who feel marginalized by societal changes.

newlinesmag.com

In summary, the fervent support for Trump among his base is a multifaceted phenomenon, rooted in psychological predispositions, cultural identities, and perceived existential threats.

But how about as related to the great narcissist's personality defects and criminal behaviors?

The unwavering support for Trump, despite his well-documented personality defects and criminal behaviors, suggests several psychological and sociological phenomena at play among his followers:

1. Cult of Personality

• Many supporters see Trump as a "strongman" who can break the rules for a greater cause.
• His narcissism, lies, and bullying are reframed as "strength" rather than defects.

2. Shared Narcissism & Projection

• Some followers identify with Trump's grandiosity and self-victimization, seeing their struggles reflected in his defiance.
• His refusal to admit fault aligns with their own aversion to accountability.

3. Cognitive Dissonance & Motivated Reasoning

• Instead of acknowledging his faults, supporters rationalize them ("he's fighting for us," "he's being unfairly targeted").
• The more he's accused, the more they dig in, seeing him as a victim of corruption.

4. Authoritarian Psychology

• Many supporters value dominance, rule-breaking, and loyalty over ethics or truth.
• Trump's disregard for the law is perceived as a necessary tactic against "the enemy."

5. Desensitization & Normalization of Corruption

• Scandals become white noise, and his behavior seems less shocking over time.
• His constant legal troubles are spun as proof of a corrupt system, rather than evidence of his own wrongdoing.

6. Parasitic Relationship with a Demagogue

• Trump provides his followers with identity, meaning, and purpose.
• To abandon him would mean admitting they were deceived, which is psychologically unbearable.

Would we like to make a deeper analysis of any of these points?

Good grief! Not really.

I think we know all we need to know about him, and them.

Ending on something humorous...

Trump Names Himself Principal Ballerina of Kennedy Center Ballet
from The Borowitz Report
"Announcing a purge of the company’s ballerinas, Trump declared on Truth Social, “I will soon be announcing a new roster of ballerinas, with an amazing principal ballerina, DONALD J. TRUMP.
"He said he was “disgusted” to discover that all of the company’s current ballerinas were women, a state of affairs that he blamed on DEI." More

Why is America "Trumpomuskovia"? A New Name for a New Regime - Timothy Snyder (from Dec 09, 2024)

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

CFPOTUS47 Donald Trump's Kakistocratic Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth

 Starting here with neutral commentary on Secretary of Defense Hegseth:

Military Effort to Scrub Diversity Programs Leads to Dead Websites and Confusion

And...

As Hegseth Takes Charge at the Pentagon, Here's What Changes Could Be in Store

Moving on now with the obvious commentary on this situation...

Convicted Felon now again POTUS Donald Trump's new Kakistocracy: 

Pete Hegseth's recent confirmation as Secretary of Defense has been accompanied by significant controversy due to past allegations of sexual assault, alcohol abuse, and misconduct. These concerns have led to questions about his ability to manage the immense responsibilities and pressures associated with leading the Department of Defense.

During his confirmation process, Hegseth faced allegations of sexual assault dating back to 2017, which he settled out of court. Additionally, his former sister-in-law provided a sworn affidavit detailing instances of excessive alcohol consumption and emotionally abusive behavior. Despite these allegations, Hegseth and his supporters have dismissed them as politically motivated attacks.

WSJ

The role of Secretary of Defense is one of the most demanding positions in the U.S. government, requiring sound judgment, integrity, and the ability to handle high-pressure situations. Given Hegseth's history, there are concerns about how he will manage the stress inherent in overseeing the nation's military operations. His past behavior raises questions about his decision-making capabilities and his commitment to maintaining the ethical standards expected of someone in his position.

As Hegseth assumes leadership of the Pentagon, it will be crucial to monitor how he addresses these concerns and whether he can uphold the responsibilities of his office effectively. The military community and the public will be watching closely to see if he can navigate the challenges ahead without the personal issues that have marred his past.

Pete Hegseth Confirmed as Defense Secretary Amid Controversy

what is reasonable in how he handles this pressure considering the personality of such a person's past failures to run far smaller organizations?

It is reasonable to expect that Pete Hegseth's leadership of the Department of Defense will reflect his personality traits, management style, and past behavior, both positive and negative. Given the immense pressure of running the world's largest organization, here are some considerations based on his past:

1. Reliance on Public Image

• Hegseth's media background suggests he will likely focus on projecting strength and charisma to the public. This could help rally confidence among certain constituencies but may also deflect attention from substantive organizational challenges.

2. Delegation vs. Micromanagement

• If his history of struggling to manage smaller organizations holds true, he may face difficulties handling the complexities of the Pentagon. Effective delegation to skilled subordinates could mitigate this, but a lack of trust or micromanagement might exacerbate inefficiencies.

3. Handling of Accountability

• Given allegations of deflecting blame and downplaying personal responsibility in his past, there’s a concern he might respond to crises defensively rather than transparently. This could erode trust within the military ranks and the public if problems arise.

4. Response to Stress

• High-stress environments tend to magnify a leader's pre-existing tendencies. If his past issues with substance abuse and impulsivity resurface, they could undermine his decision-making during critical moments. Alternatively, if he's worked to address these issues, it could provide a chance for personal redemption and effective leadership.

5. Potential for Overconfidence

• Hegseth's ideological fervor and confidence in his beliefs may push him toward aggressive policy decisions or reforms. While decisiveness can be valuable, overconfidence could lead to rash or poorly executed strategies, particularly in military or geopolitical matters.

6. Support Systems

• Whether he surrounds himself with experienced advisors or loyalists will significantly affect his capacity to manage the department. Experienced advisors could compensate for his shortcomings, whereas an insular team could magnify them.

What’s Reasonable to Expect?

• High public visibility and likely controversial policy stances as he works to align the Pentagon with his administration's political goals.
• Potential struggles with the organizational complexity and internal resistance, especially if he takes an authoritarian or combative approach.
• Public criticism or internal fallout if past personal issues resurface under the stress of the role.
• The possibility of high turnover among senior staff if his leadership style clashes with the Pentagon's culture.

His success or failure will depend heavily on whether he can adapt his leadership style to the realities of the role, manage his personal weaknesses, and build trust within the organization. However, his past challenges managing smaller organizations suggest this will be a steep learning curve.

Hegseth said if he gets the job, he did, he would just quite drinking alcohol because that works so well with alcoholics?

The idea that Pete Hegseth claimed he would "just quit drinking" if confirmed as Secretary of Defense raises red flags for several reasons, especially considering the stress and responsibilities tied to the role. Here’s a breakdown:

1. Oversimplification of Alcohol Dependency

• If Hegseth has struggled with alcohol abuse in the past, simply deciding to quit "cold turkey" without acknowledging the complexity of addiction or seeking support is often insufficient. Long-term recovery typically requires structured intervention, therapy, or programs like Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), particularly under high-stress circumstances.

2. The Stress of the Role

• Leading the Pentagon is among the most high-pressure jobs in the world. Stress is a significant trigger for relapse among individuals recovering from substance abuse. Without a clear and credible plan to manage stress and maintain sobriety, his promise might falter when tested.

3. Impact on Decision-Making

• The stakes at the Pentagon involve life-and-death decisions, long-term military strategy, and national security. Leadership under the influence—or impaired by withdrawal, stress, or untreated addiction—could have catastrophic consequences.

4. Pattern of Dismissiveness

• A statement like this reflects a dismissive attitude toward the seriousness of addiction. It suggests a lack of understanding or acknowledgment of the need for accountability, professional help, and long-term planning, which may extend to how he approaches other challenges in the role.

5. Historical Parallels

• Leaders who have struggled with substance abuse while in power—if untreated—often face scrutiny over their ability to perform their duties. If Hegseth’s approach is superficial or fails to address the root causes of any alcohol-related issues, it could lead to significant public and internal backlash.

Reasonable Expectations:

• Establishing a Plan: If he genuinely intends to quit drinking, it’s reasonable to expect him to engage with professional support systems, openly or privately, to ensure he can maintain sobriety.
• Transparency: The public and military personnel might expect updates or reassurances about his ability to handle the role effectively, given the doubts raised by his history.
• Building Trust: Sobriety claims alone won’t assuage concerns. His leadership decisions, consistency, and ability to handle stress will ultimately determine if he can overcome this shadow from his past.

Quitting alcohol cold turkey might sound decisive, but for those with a history of substance abuse, it’s rarely a sustainable or effective solution, especially when faced with the unprecedented pressure of running the Pentagon.

Few expect Pete to be successful which supports CFPOTUS47 Donald Trump's kakistocracy concept of running our government.

The appointment of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense has intensified discussions about the concept of "kakistocracy," defined as governance by the least qualified or most unscrupulous individuals. Critics argue that Hegseth's limited experience and controversial past exemplify this notion, suggesting that his leadership may not meet the demands of overseeing the Department of Defense.

Default

Vice President J.D. Vance has described Hegseth as a "disrupter," emphasizing the need for significant changes within the Pentagon. This perspective aligns with the administration's broader approach of appointing individuals who challenge established norms.

Politico

However, concerns persist that such appointments prioritize loyalty and ideological alignment over competence, potentially undermining effective governance. The narrow confirmation of Hegseth, with Vice President Vance casting a tie-breaking vote, underscores the contentious nature of his selection and reflects broader apprehensions about the administration's commitment to qualified leadership.

Time

In summary, Hegseth's appointment is viewed by some as indicative of a governance style that favors disruption and loyalty over traditional qualifications, reinforcing concerns about a "kakistocracy" within the current administration.

Hegseth's Appointment and the Debate Over 'Kakistocracy'

As for kakistocracy, Tulsi Gabbard comes to mind.

The association of Tulsi Gabbard with the concept of kakistocracy is likely grounded in her controversial political trajectory, polarizing views, and alliances that have garnered criticism from across the political spectrum. While some see her as an independent thinker willing to challenge orthodoxy, others argue that her actions and rhetoric undermine democratic principles or prioritize personal ambition over governance quality.

Why Some Might Connect Gabbard to Kakistocracy:

1. Shifts in Political Alignment: Gabbard’s shift from being a Democratic congresswoman to aligning with more right-wing causes and media outlets has led to accusations of opportunism and inconsistency in her political philosophy.

2. Controversial Foreign Policy Positions:

   • Her frequent criticism of U.S. foreign policy, including her meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, was perceived by some as legitimizing authoritarian regimes.
   • Critics argue that her non-interventionist stance sometimes aligns with dictators rather than promoting human rights.

3. Media Role Post-Congress:

   • Gabbard’s move into media, often appearing on conservative platforms, has fueled skepticism about her motivations. This has led to accusations that she prioritizes public visibility over meaningful policy contributions.

4. Reputation for Disruption:

   • Like figures associated with kakistocracy, Gabbard has been labeled a "disrupter." While disruption can bring reform, it can also result in instability or governance challenges when not paired with clear and competent leadership.

Counterpoints:

• Support from Independents and Libertarians: Many supporters praise Gabbard’s willingness to address issues like military-industrial overreach, corruption, and censorship.
• Military Service: Her experience as a combat veteran and her advocacy for veteran-related issues have earned her respect in some circles.

Ultimately, whether Tulsi Gabbard fits into the framework of a kakistocracy depends on one’s perspective. Supporters view her as a principled outlier, while critics see her as a figure whose actions may contribute to governance by those ill-suited for leadership.

IF one were shooting for a kakistocracy, Donald Trump has been following a path supporting that is his intention.

The term "kakistocracy," derived from the Greek words "kakistos" (meaning "worst") and "kratos" (meaning "rule"), refers to governance by the least qualified or most unscrupulous individuals. Critics have applied this term to former President Donald Trump's administration, citing several factors that they argue support this characterization.

1. Appointment of Unqualified Loyalists:

• Trump has been noted for nominating individuals to key positions based on loyalty rather than expertise. This approach is seen as undermining the Constitution's vision of merit-based governance.
  Default

2. Disregard for Established Norms:

• His administration has been characterized by a willingness to flout established political and ethical norms, leading to concerns about the erosion of democratic institutions.
  The Fulcrum

3. Polarizing Leadership Style:

• Trump's leadership has been marked by divisive rhetoric and actions that have deepened political polarization, which some argue is indicative of governance by the least suitable individuals.
  The Atlantic

These factors contribute to the argument that Trump's leadership aligns with the concept of a kakistocracy, where governance is conducted by individuals considered the least qualified or most unscrupulous.

Compiled with the aid of ChatGPT