I’ve been taking a hiatus in my “Tweetizen Trump” posts, if only because making the same comments over and over again (“That’s untrue, Donald. That’s dangerous to say, Donald. That’s already been debunked, Donald. That’s a really childish thing to tweet, Donald.”) was getting old, at least to write.
But Trump’s obnoxious retweet of a stupid little video pastiche that makes it look like he hit Hillary Clinton with a golf ball HA-HA-HA is just so deranged as to warrant comment.
Never mind that the person who was retweeted has, himself, an awful history of racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, transphobic, etc., tweets, and that the President of the United States really should have people doing at least some general checkout of folk whom he’s retweeting so that he doesn’t get smeared by associating with such comments.
No, just the very nature of video clip is so ill-spirited, so mean and rude, as to just make me shake my head in astonishment. Even now, after so many months of Trump racing to the bottom of incivility.
The two arguments I’ve heard defending Trump’s retweet (or at least trying to defuse people’s objections over it) are:
1. “Oh, get over it, it’s just a joke.”
‘Tain’t funny, McGee.
Or maybe there are two kinds of people in the world: people who find faux violence funny, and people who don’t. Maybe this is related to why I don’t laugh at the Three Stooges. It’s not that I don’t have a sense of humor, it’s that humor that’s so bald-faced about humiliation and physical assault just doesn’t usually tickle my fancy.
Put that in the context of faked violence against a political opponent, as expressed (through retweet) by the most powerful political leader in the United States, and it becomes even less funny.
Which leads to …
2. “Well, what about person X who told a violent joke about Trump?”
I will note first that the “Well, he did it first!” is the most common excuse given by seven year-olds. And one that usually doesn’t go very far.
The most common example used here Kathy Griffin, who incited outrage from the Right (and many on the Left) for a picture with her holding a (faux) bloodied, severed head of Donald Trump.
As noted, a lot of folk on the Left were outraged by this, too, and condemned Griffin for it. As opposed to the folk on the Right who seem to think the golf ball thing is just a subject for yocks. And while Kathy Griffin was generally reviled (and commercially punished) for such imagery, Ted Nugent’s famously violent comments about then-President Obama only netted him an invitation to visit the Trump White House. (Yes, that’s a “he did it first” thing, but it’s also a sign of hypocrisy on the subject.)
Most importantly, though, Kathy Griffin is not only a private citizen, she is a comedian. She is expected to say and do things that outrage, that are caustic and mean. And if she steps over the line (as it seems she did), she can be easily fired (as she was), or just plain not paid attention to any longer.
Neither option is, sadly, available with Donald Trump, who, even as he visible and vocally longs to be the Most Admired President Ever, continues to piss on the dignity of the office. To the approving laughter of too many of his followers.
Trump’s vile retweet shows he’s an abnormal president
President Trump’s retweet of a clip showing him taking a golf swing then a clip of Hillary Clinton falling speaks volumes about the man.
Now you've mentioned it, Tweetizen Trump has been missing from my feed lately. I was wondering where you found the time and stamina to keep doing it.
It's a task reminiscent of a torture a US POW was subjected to in Vietnam: The commies forced him to move great piles of human excrement from one place to another (Cool Hand Luke style) — with his bare hands.
I checked out who Trump follows. (Coulter is still there, oddly enough.) Not all of his 45 followees are visible. I think you can set your account so that people can't see who follows you. There is some scope for diverting speculation as to who the invisible ones are.
+Travis Bird The time was largely due to being (still) unemployed. That hasn't changed, but the charm became replaced with a sense of drudgery, at which point I put it (as I call it) on hiatus, a few weeks back when Harvey hit.
+Travis Bird The "Tweetizen Trump" documentation task reminded me of Sisyphus. +Dave Hill, however, was able to end the torture.
Trump's tweets themselves, however, are probably intended to provide him with attention (positive and negative). And they work – it takes a catastrophic event to push Trump off the tops of our newsfeeds (and even then, he still manages to wriggle to the top again).
Before those points, the US Govt does not have the same freedoms that persons within its jurisdiction have. There are lots of things a US Govt official cannot do that a private person can, particularly acts aimed at an individual.
The US Govt (in the person of the current holder of the office of POTUS) joking about POTUS doing violence to a private individual is one. When that now-private individual was a political challenger for the office of POTUS, even worse — banana-republic strongman stuff.
+John E. Bredehoft It helped that the torture was self-imposed (though as CS Lewis asserted, I suspect so is Hell / Hades in general).
My theory of Trump's tweets is complicated. In part it's to draw attention. In part it's to publicly shame (as he sees it) his enemies. In part it's Monsters from the Id. In part it's political distraction and game-playing. In part it's a guy who's powerful but isolated shouting out into the ether in as unfiltered a way as possible.
Assuming we aren't all gathered around guttering fires roasting our lizard dinners and reminiscing with other survivors about the wonders of the Before Times, I expect there will be a lot of interesting writing done about Trump in about 20-50 years.
+Anne-Marie Clark The problem is, who can tell Trump he "cannot" do such a thing (except, ultimately, the Congress in the form of a bill of Impeachment)? He ignores ethics advice. He doubles down on media criticism, or even criticism from his ostensible political allies.
Yes, it's "banana-republic strongman stuff," but that's not an actionable offense, just "pissing on the dignity of the office," because he can.
+Dave Hill Mueller. 😉
+Anne-Marie Clark It's unclear that Mueller can actually file federal charges on his own (the theory has never been tested), and, if so, Trump can likely pardon himself (from federal charges). Regardless, I doubt that childishness of this sort is on his radar.
Of course, the real answer to "who can tell Trump he 'cannot' do such a thing" is the American electorate. Unfortunately, they don't get a chance to clearly send that message for another 3+ years, though they can start making it known in another 1+.
Find it here now:
chicagotribune.com
The Tribune and LA Times seem to move their links from a front page part of their site and leave links stranded.
+Dave Hill Ah, but Mueller (who is a lawyer, btw) has many more arrows in his legal quiver that just that. The pardon issue is easy: state charges. NY, to be specific. Meuller is working with AG Schneiderman. And Mueller just poached one of DOJ's top money laundering prosecutors. The violence tweets, etc., take Trump from financial criminal to thug. 😉
+Travis Bird Huh. I just reclicked on the article link I posted and it still worked for me.
+Anne-Marie Clark Oh, I have no doubt there are methods in the works. But that speaks to Trump's actual crimes. For doing the sort of sniggering japery I was posting about, though, there is little that can be directly done short of booting him from office for greater crimes.
+Dave Hill We have a much better chance of punishing him via the law than we do of making him grow up or be nice. I am ok with the legal remedies.
+Dave Hill
Mysteries of the Internet.