An insider psychologist's view of the t rump's psyche

https://www.presidentprofiles.com/Kennedy-Bush/Richard-M-Nixon-Dirty-tricks.html

 

Reasonable people might agree or disagree with Nixon’s domestic and foreign policies, and in most respects these policies were pragmatic and reasoned responses to the problems facing the nation. The expansive interpretation of constitutional prerogatives was not without precedent either; great presidents—Washington, Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Truman—had also expanded their powers and minimized legislative authority. Such constitutional trench warfare was part of the political game and could be refereed by the courts and the voters.

But the Nixon presidency had a darker side, a cancer eating away at its legitimacy and the bonds of trust and faith between rulers and ruled. Nixon did not play politics; he practiced war.

What President Ford later referred to as “our long national nightmare” was not a few isolated incidents relating to the 1972 reelection campaign. Rather it was an integral part of the White House political operation from the very first days of Nixon’s presidency. The White House in 1969 compiled an “enemies list” containing the names of two hundred people it viewed as political opponents, including politicians, actors, university presidents, and other well-known figures. There was a “shortlist” targeted for immediate political retribution. Background investigations were conducted by White House operatives to find “dirt” that could be leaked to newspapers. Targets of these investigations included Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Democratic Speaker of the House Carl Albert. At a meeting of White House staffers on 7 September 1972, Nixon went so far as to order one or two “spies” to be included in the Secret Service detail assigned to Edward Kennedy, believing that if they got lucky and could catch him with a woman companion, it would “ruin him for '76.” (There is no evidence that the order was ever carried out.)

The White House used government agencies to harass its opponents. The special services staff of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was ordered to conduct audits of organizations opposed to Nixon’s policies, and did so until the practice was discontinued by Treasury Secretary George Shultz. The CIA’s Special Operations Group conducted “Operation Chaos,” which involved spying on New Left and black militant organizations. The Secret Service files on persons who are threats to the president ordinarily include deranged people who threaten the president’s life, but during the Nixon administration the files ballooned to forty-seven thousand names, including political opponents. On 28 May 1971, Nixon ordered chief of staff H. R. Haldeman to use wiretaps against leading Democrats, including Kennedy, Edmund S. Muskie, and Hubert Humphrey. “Keep after 'em,” he told Haldeman. “Maybe we can get a scandal on any, any of the leading Democrats.”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), acting on presidential orders, wiretapped people without obtaining judicial warrants, including people in sensitive government positions. Kissinger himself ordered taps placed on staffers he thought were leaking classified information to the press. Then other officials ordered taps on each other, as factions within the White House attempted to discredit others. Attorney General John Mitchell had the FBI tap John Sears, his competitor as campaign adviser to the president. Alexander Haig ordered a tap on speechwriter William Safire. The Joint Chiefs of Staff used a navy ensign assigned to the NSC’s communications section to spy on Henry Kissinger, who had his own tap on a defense department official close to Secretary of Defense Laird. Taps placed on Morton Halperin and Anthony Lake were used to gather information on the Muskie candidacy, since these former NSC officials were advisers to his campaign. Altogether seventeen FBI taps on government officials or newsmen were uncovered: seven on NSC staffers, three on White House aides, one on a Defense Department official, two on State Department officials, and four on newsmen.

The White House Special Investigations Unit, directed by Egil Krogh and David Young, hired a group of “Plumbers” to conduct special assignments. Howard Hunt, one of their operatives, conducted an investigation of Edward Kennedy, hoping to obtain damaging information about the accident at Chap-paquiddick in which Kennedy drove his car off a bridge and a young female passenger drowned. Hunt also forged State Department cables to make it appear that President Kennedy had been directly involved in the assassination of President Diem of South Vietnam in 1963, and attempted to peddle them to Lifemagazine.

Hunt also organized an operation, ordered by John Ehrlichman, a presidential aide, to obtain damaging information on Daniel Ellsberg, a critic of the Vietnam War. In June 1971, Ellsberg had given the New York Timescopies of a history of the Vietnam War that had been commissioned by the Pentagon. The “Pentagon Papers” related to the Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson years, but Kissinger persuaded Nixon that the credibility of American statecraft was at stake; other nations would not trust the United States to keep its secrets or protect its allies. He argued that publication of the papers must be stopped. The government won a temporary injunction in federal district court against the Times, barring further publication—the first time such an order had been issued in American history—but other papers then printed their copies. The ban was lifted and in the Pentagon Papers case the Supreme Court rejected the use of a preliminary injunction as a violation of the First Amendment.

Ellsberg was targeted for retribution. The Plumb-ers believed, on the basis of a wiretap of his conversations with Morton Halperin, that Ellsberg used drugs and had an unorthodox sex life. They then burglarized the offices of his psychiatrist, Dr. Lewis Fielding, to obtain confidential transcripts or notes of their conversations. Ehrlichman decided that no more of these operations would be conducted, and shortly thereafter the Plumbers unit was disbanded, although other operations continued.


 

Before Ted Cruz, There Was Donald Segretti, Nixon’s Master of Dirty Tricks
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is backpedaling for allegedly using dirty tricks to bolster his campaign.

But for Republicans, such schemes fit a long tradition.
LEON LAZAROFF, FEB 23, 2016

www _ thestreet _ com/politics/before-ted-cruz-there-was-donald-segretti-nixon-s-master-of-dirty-tricks-13468103

Of course, lets not forget trump’s Stone of vandalism

Roger Stone: a master of the political dirty trick Ed Pilkington in New York, Jan 26, 2019, Guardian Beginning with Richard Nixon in the early 1970s, the former adviser for Donald Trump has made a career of ruthless campaigning

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/25/roger-stone-a-master-of-the-political-dirty-trick

The 66-year-old was one of the “ratfuckers” who engaged in dirty tricks on behalf of Richard Nixon in the early 1970s, when he was still a teenager. From there he carved out a career in the dark arts of ruthless campaigning, working for Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole and latterly Donald Trump.

His attachment to Nixon is enduring, literally so in the form of the disgraced former president’s grinning face tattooed on his back. As Stone emerged from a Fort Lauderdale courthouse following his indictment later on Friday, he alluded to his hero by making the same “V for victory” pose that Nixon adopted in 1974 as he boarded Marine One for the last time.

An arch conspiracy theorist, Stone embraced “fake news” before the term existed. His blurring of the lines between real and make-believe goes so far that it is hard to tell where the real Roger Stone ends and the fictitious Roger Stone begins, replete with top hat and tails, chauffeur-driven Jaguars and martinis mixed to a recipe given to him by Nixon, who in turn inherited it, like the V-sign, from Winston Churchill. …


 

Given sree’s vindictive nature, and his superiority complex, I can appreciate his love of all things trump, and heck if he had a poster of Stone in his bedroom it wouldn’t surprise me one bit.

Sree seems more in love with money than he is with any other ideology. So I would guess that his hero who he has a life size tattoo of on his back is, maybe, Steve Mnuchin.

@lausten

There is only sense that I can salvage from what Sree is saying. The rise of populism is historically predictable. It started after Nixon.
Thanks for the movie. I will watch it later.

By the way, I just want to say that I appreciate your willingness to allow my viewpoints in this forum even though some of them had been crafted to provoke discussion and not necessarily reflect positions I hold.

By the way, I just want to say that I appreciate your willingness to allow my viewpoints in this forum even though some of them had been crafted to provoke discussion and not necessarily reflect positions I hold.
Don't think you can butter up the mods.

FYI, above, I left out a word,it should read; There is only ONE sense that I can salvage…

The rise of populism is historically predictable.
That Frontline documentary on Trump was pretty good. Trump came at the right time when the American masses needed someone like him. And he was in the right place at the right time running for President. And what's your argument against that?

@timb

If there were such a thing as “souls”, you would not want the one connected to the t rump.
You see Trump as a demon instead of an ordinary person, don't you?
TimB: If there were such a thing as “souls”, you would not want the one connected to the t rump.

Sree: You see Trump as a demon instead of an ordinary person, don’t you?


I see the t rump as a severely disordered character who has become a danger to the world. But I don’t think that there is anything supernatural in how he became who he is today. That is a product of his particular history of reinforcement, (which Mary, his niece, indicated was “Too Much and Never Enough”).

@sree we did not need a criminal, like the dotard, in the highest office of the land. Everything you’ve said shows how you are the very definition of a dotard cult member and have been brainwashed to believe he has saved the U.S. when in fact he has destroyed it and killed millions of people, and not just by the virus alone. You hang onto every word he says as gospel, when it is pure rubbish. Please listen to the CFI podcast concerning the Dotard’s cult.

BTW, I don’t not see the dotard as a demon, but I do see him as a criminal who needs to be locked up for life, because he has committed crimes against the Constitution and crimes against humanity. Add to that, the more recent money laundering of campaign funds (I’m sure you missed that news article because you listen to his propaganda channel Faux News).

“Too Much and Never Enough”
To some, this smacks of insatiable greed. The question is, too much of and never enough of what? The American Dream has to do with the insatiable acquisition of knowledge, fame, money, and power. Unless you are a Christian who steers clear of the things of this world, what is wrong with you? I know this sounds accusatory. Are we Americans or not? Leopards who complain about spots need to be skinned alive.

The richest person in the world is an American and his net worth keeps increasing. He doesn’t hide his stash in a cave so no one can get at it. He provides for the masses in his drive to make this world a better place.

learn about cancer fool.

He doesn’t hide his stash in a cave so no one can get at it.
No? They sink it into tons of luxury homes, boats, planes, car, gold, stock and bonds, etc. Then invest in lobbyists to fight against national health care, job protections, environmental protections, minimum wage and such.
They sink it into tons of luxury homes, boats, planes, car, gold, stock and bonds, etc.
Combined, all that is a fraction of his net worth which is largely deployed to finance businesses otherwise known as economic activities putting food on the table for people. I was watching the splashdown of SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft and saw the fast boats racing to it. The crews on those boats are people who get to eat because some rich guy had a dream to realize.

There’s a little astronomical lesson that probably flies over your head -

The bigger a star is, the hotter it burns, the faster it depletes itself and the fast it dies. We are destroying our planet’s life support system idiot. That’s why it matters. Not that anyone is going to do anything about it at this point.

 

Oh and,

https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/

Report • By Lawrence Mishel and Julia Wolfe • August 14, 2019

Summary
What this report finds: The increased focus on growing inequality has led to an increased focus on CEO pay. Corporate boards running America’s largest public firms are giving top executives outsize compensation packages. Average pay of CEOs at the top 350 firms in 2018 was $17.2 million—or $14.0 million using a more conservative measure. (Stock options make up a big part of CEO pay packages, and the conservative measure values the options when granted, versus when cashed in, or “realized.”) CEO compensation is very high relative to typical worker compensation (by a ratio of 278-to-1 or 221-to-1). In contrast, the CEO-to-typical-worker compensation ratio (options realized) was 20-to-1 in 1965 and 58-to-1 in 1989. CEOs are even making a lot more—about five times as much—as other earners in the top 0.1%. From 1978 to 2018, CEO compensation grew by 1,007.5% (940.3% under the options-realized measure), far outstripping S&P stock market growth (706.7%) and the wage growth of very high earners (339.2%). In contrast, wages for the typical worker grew by just 11.9%.

Why it matters: Exorbitant CEO pay is a major contributor to rising inequality that we could safely do away with. CEOs are getting more because of their power to set pay, not because they are increasing productivity or possess specific, high-demand skills. This escalation of CEO compensation, and of executive compensation more generally, has fueled the growth of top 1.0% and top 0.1% incomes, leaving less of the fruits of economic growth for ordinary workers and widening the gap between very high earners and the bottom 90%. The economy would suffer no harm if CEOs were paid less (or taxed more). …

 

Introduction and key findings
Chief executive officers (CEOs) of the largest firms in the U.S. earn far more today than they did in the mid-1990s and many times what they earned in the 1960s or late 1970s. They also earn far more than the typical worker, and their pay has grown much more rapidly. Importantly, rising CEO pay does not reflect rising value of skills, but rather CEOs’ use of their power to set their own pay. And this growing power at the top has been driving the growth of inequality in our country.

About the CEO pay series and this report …


SpaceX, that’s the thing that going to take people to Mars, oh yeah talk about waste. Humans in spacesuits can’t do half the stuff our new generation of orbiters and rovers and other probes can do, it’s ego and lunacy and hubris at its height. Launching that car into space, showed how out of touch with the rest of humanity these fools are.

yeah, yeah, its nice we have something of our own to get people up to the space station again. Yes, a grand achievement, let me get out the flag

SpaceX, that’s the thing that going to take people to Mars, oh yeah talk about waste.
You know what? I agree with you. Half of humanity is dying to malignant poverty and we are heading to Mars. But we were talking about the sin of greed. We humans are what we are. If we want to throw stones at Trump, then let those who have no sin cast the first stone.
“Too Much and Never Enough”

To some, this smacks of insatiable greed.


Well, those some, are off on a tangent.

The “Too Much” in the trump early (and continued) development, was “Stuff” (what $$ can provide).

The “Never Enough” was “true human compassionate bonding”.

I imagine there are other roads to the development of a character disorder, but that could do the trick.

As far as a remedy, I think that issues of greed, space explorations, are secondary to trying to insure that all humans experience a safe, loving, bonded relationship with caregivers early in life.

... all humans experience a safe, loving, bonded relationship with caregivers early in life.
Wouldn't that be sweet. Compassion for others, honest curiosity and love of learning, appreciation that we live on a finite planet that needs some nurturing, stuff like. Appreciating we need each other to keep ourselves honest. It's the little things that could have made all the difference. But alas, the clock is ticking down.
The “Too Much” in the trump early (and continued) development, was “Stuff” (what $$ can provide).

The “Never Enough” was “true human compassionate bonding”.


Don’t you think it is crooked to accept a character analysis of a male gender person (i.e. Donald Trump) by a non-binary psychologist (i.e. Mary Trump); especially, one who has an ax to grind?

As far as a remedy, I think that issues of greed, space explorations, are secondary to trying to insure that all humans experience a safe, loving, bonded relationship with caregivers early in life.
Caregivers, traditionally, are women inspired by maternal instinct to bond with their offspring. Any other kind of bonding is artificial, contrived, and a knockoff of the real thing. It's like buying stuff made in China, cheap copies of the original product made in the USA.
Sree said: Don’t you think it is crooked to accept a character analysis of a male gender person (i.e. Donald Trump) by a non-binary psychologist (i.e. Mary Trump); especially, one who has an ax to grind?
No. I could make a case that it is professionally unethical, but that it is ethical in a higher sense of providing needed information to her country. The conclusions that I have heard her draw, seem to be quite credible, whether she "has an ax to grind" or not.

(And why do you even bring up “non-binary”??) Is she bi, or gay? So what?

Sree said: Caregivers, traditionally, are women inspired by maternal instinct to bond with their offspring. Any other kind of bonding is artificial, contrived, and a knockoff of the real thing. It’s like buying stuff made in China, cheap copies of the original product made in the USA.
Alas, if only you could feel shame for making such pathetically erroneous assertions (see italicized phrase above). Most adults who are in the position of caring for an infant can potentially bond with it (unless maybe they have unresolved disrupted bonding issues from their own early childhood).