Hello, readers! I ended up writing so much about this topic that I’m publishing it in two parts. Come back tomorrow for Part Two. Also, here’s a piece I wrote for MS NOW the other day: “Trump’s unconstitutional press ban won’t make the bad news go away”.
——–
Mainstream political journalists routinely cover up for Donald Trump’s massive shortcomings as a human being because bluntly stating the truth to readers and viewers would feel to them like taking sides in a political dispute, which they and their superiors consider a cardinal sin.
So they cover up for his derangement, as I’ve written many times before.
They cover up for his belief in white supremacy, as I’ve written many times before.
There’s one more. It’s the essential puzzle-piece that fully reveals how we got into the dangerous political mess we’re in today. And political journalists are covering that up, too:
Trump is an idiot.
I wrote a lot about his stupidity, incoherence, ignorance, and cluelessness during Covid – but not nearly enough since. My bad.
And when I say he’s an idiot, it’s not just that he doesn’t read books and isn’t erudite. It’s not just that he never thinks things through and makes buffoonish threats. It’s not just that he is incurious, and incapable of learning.
It’s that he doesn’t understand basic concepts, like “tariff” and “trade deficit.” He makes assertions that are dumbfounding. And he does things that are just plain stupid.
Yes, his idiocy is intertwined with his derangement. And yes, it’s compounded by the lack of anyone inside his bubble willing to correct him. But it’s not so much correction that he lacks. It’s a functional brain.
Alongside his mental instability and his racism, his idiocy explains things that are otherwise inexplicable.
- Why are we at war with Iran? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why are we running out of interceptors? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why are we in a trade war with Canada? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why are we in a trade war at all? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why does he say he can reduce the price of prescription drugs by 1,000%? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why did he think he could end the Russian war with Ukraine in a day? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why does he think that passing a cognitive test that assesses dementia means he is some sort of genius? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why does he think turning a triumphal arch in the middle of a busy traffic circle into a military installation is a good idea? Because he’s an idiot.
- Why does he call so many Black people “low IQ”? Because he’s a racist idiot.
- Why does he describe himself as a “very stable genius”? Because he’s a very unstable idiot.
I could go on.
Every day, Trump says things that represent an absolutely moronic misunderstanding of basic concepts. But most of the time, the mainstream media either ignores it or simply quotes him and move on.
Let’s talk about last week, because Trump’s idiocy last week was exceptional, even by his standards – but you wouldn’t know it from the news.
No, a ‘Deficit’ Is Not a ‘Loss’
Here’s what Trump said Wednesday night, at a political rally in Gastonia, North Carolina, where the big reveal was a new, racist tactic of using scary-looking Black men to scare voters into voting Republican. (Or, as the Washington Post sanewashed and idiotwashed it: “Trump emphasizes crime in midterm push in North Carolina”.)
Interest rates in the United States should be 1% or less because we are the best credit in the world by far with all that money pouring in. Our country is booming with new investment more than anybody else ever. And if we stop trading with every country that we have a deficit with, which is most of them, and which would be very easy to do, we’d make at least $1.5 trillion a year.
We do that because it’s almost like a reflex. The word deficit, you have to understand is nothing more than a fancy word for loss. So we do these countries. We don’t need anything for them. (My emphases.)
He continued:
And you ever notice they’re considered elite?…
They’re only elite because we allow them to trade with us and we allow them to make far more money than they should be. They’re not elite, we’re the ones that are elite.
And if I ended those deals, you would see a country that would make more money and you’d see the elite countries go right down the tubes. We’re carrying almost every country in the world and that really cannot go on that much longer. I’m letting them know. I’m gonna say that, uh, “Can’t do that. We just can’t do it”…
Why should we carry so many countries in Europe? We’re carrying the European nations with a $200 billion deficit. All we have to do is say, “You know what, we’re not trading with you anymore.” We don’t need anything they have. We have cars, we have lumber, we have food, we have everything. It’s a beautiful thing about – we have very few countries – there’s some that we have certain things would, is helpful.
Forgive me for quoting him at such length, but here’s another thing political journalists routinely do to cover up for Trump: They find one vaguely intelligible quote, call it news, and that’s what their story is about.
For the public to fully appreciate the incoherence and stupidity of what Trump is saying, they need to hear him go on and on.
And what Trump said there is completely wrong. He genuinely seems to think that a “deficit” – it’s actually a trade deficit – means the U.S. just sends the money to Europe, rather than using it to buy things of enormous value. That’s stupid.
To be clear, the “deficits” he is talking about are definitively NOT “losses.” In this case we have a trade deficit because we buy more of their stuff than they do of ours. Every penny that travels either way is used to buy something.
Think about it this way: You have a “trade deficit” with your grocery store because you buy more from it than it buys from you. If you stopped trading with it, you’d have more money, but no food.
We import $636 billion in European goods annually, and they import $407 billion in U.S. goods. The $229 billion more we spend buys us $229 billion worth of goods we need. It is not “lost.”
If Trump unilaterally “ended those deals” the two largest economies in the world would both crash.
Then there’s the matter of the interest rate, which Trump thinks should be set at less than 1%. The Federal Reserve on Wednesday slightly raised its benchmark interest rate, to about 3.9%, in an attempt to lower inflation.
Trump first linked the interest rate and trade deficits earlier this month, when he posted on Truth Social: “LOWER THE RATE OR I’LL STOP TRADING WITH COUNTRIES WITH WHICH WE HAVE A DEFICIT”.
But the Fed concerns itself with maximizing employment and keeping inflation no higher than 2%. (It’s currently 3.4%). It has very little to do with the trade deficit.
Nobody seems to understand why Trump is linking the two – because it’s idiotic.
Here’s what University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers tweeted on Thursday about Trumps threat:
If that sounds bizarre and you’re thinking “Boy, why is it my economic understanding is such that I can’t see how those two are connected?”, the problem’s not you. These issues are completely unrelated. Essentially, I think the president was threatening “I’m going to do something really dumb if you don’t do the thing that I want you to do.”
So. How many mainstream news organizations wrote about the stupidity of Trump’s threat and how wrong he was about economics? That would be none, as far as I can tell.
The vast majority just ignored it. The Wall Street Journal did a tiny, stenographic item in its liveblog. (They obviously didn’t take it seriously.)
In a Wednesday New York Times article, economic policy reporter Tony Romm wrote in the first paragraph that Trump “reprised his earlier threats to cut off a broad swath of U.S. trade unless the central bank bows soon to his demands for lower borrowing costs.”
Why? Who knows? Romm can’t explain, of course. His analysis of what would happen if Trump did what he’s threatening to do was insufficient:
Such a move could cause immense blowback for U.S. families and businesses, while the rate cuts that Mr. Trump seeks – to 1 percent or lower, he said – could exacerbate inflation and make the central bank’s job even more difficult.
In fact, unilaterally breaking trade deals – which, by the way, would be the most authoritarian move of Trump’s presidency yet – would cause massive chaos for American companies with import contracts, and for American consumers, who would no longer be able to buy anything not made here. The damage would be inconceivable. The rate cut would also inevitably lead to high inflation, and the Fed’s loss of credibility would likely lead to a massive stock-market selloff.
Later, Romm actually quoted Trump saying “The word ‘Deficit’ is nothing more than a fancy word for LOSS.” And that was it. No explanation. No indication that Trump was being a complete idiot. Just passing along misinformation because Trump said it.
The Arc de Trump
And then on Sunday morning, Trump announced his second-most idiotic idea ever – and that’s quite an achievement.
His idea for a triumphal arch was pretty stupid in the first place. It would be a colossus that breaks up beautiful sightlines from the Lincoln Memorial to Arlington Cemetery. It’s on the flightpath to National Airport. The last guy to build a triumphal arch was Kim Jong Il in North Korea, which tells you a lot. Overall it’s just a ridiculous, ostentatious, self-aggrandizing thing for Trump to do.
Now, Trump is saying, it would not just be a Triumphal Arch, it would be “a top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch, to house, store, and have the rapid ability to use large numbers of drones, plus Snipers, on both the roof and plaza areas, and additionally have and hold large quantities of sniper ammunition in storage.”
Truly stupid. But his announcement was greeted with big, credulous headlines all over the internet.
Snipers would be entirely useless there, except maybe to protect the arch itself, which is a bit circular. You don’t need a tall structure to launch drones, and one in a flight path is probably the worst possible location. And how much ammunition do snipers need?
On Tuesday, the Washington Post published a lightweight second-day story (with three bylines) that told readers that Trump’s new idea “has complicated a required federal review process and raised new legal and safety concerns.” That is some weak and weaselly stuff.
The article did note that “experts have questioned the implications of storing ammunition in the middle of a heavily used traffic circle and whether tourists could still enter the arch as previously planned.”
But to really understand what was going on here, you had to read the reader comments, which the Post’s AI summarized thusly:
The comments express overwhelming skepticism and criticism of President Trump’s proposal to build a triumphal arch with military features such as snipers and drones. Many commenters question the practicality and rationale behind the idea, suggesting it is absurd, dangerous, and a misuse of resources. There is a strong sentiment that the proposal is a distraction or a vanity project, with some questioning Trump’s mental fitness and the legitimacy of his claims about military support for the project.
We’re not stupid. He’s stupid.
Tomorrow: Part Two