ADVERTISEMENT

The Atlantic: The Truth About Trump’s Press Conference

Colonoscopy

HB Legend
Feb 20, 2022
12,623
13,488
113
52
Saint Louis, Mo
His obvious emotional instability is frightening, not funny.
By Tom Nichols

Donald Trump’s public events are a challenge for anyone who writes about him. His rallies and press conferences are rich sources of material, fountains of molten weirdness that blurp up stuff that would sink the career of any other politician. By the time they’re over, all of the attendees are covered in gloppy nonsense.

And then, once everyone cleans up and shakes the debris off their phones and laptops, so much of what Trump said seems too bonkers to have come from a former president and the nominee of a major party that journalists are left trying to piece together a story as if Trump were a normal person. This is what The Atlantic’s editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, has described as the “bias toward coherence,” and it leads to careful circumlocutions instead of stunned headlines.


Consider Trump’s press conference yesterday in Florida. Trump has been lying low since President Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential race, at least in terms of public appearances. But Vice President Kamala Harris, the new Democratic nominee, and her running mate, Governor Tim Walz, are gaining a lot of great press, and so Trump decided it was time to emerge from his sanctuary.

Trump, predictably, did an afternoon concert of his greatest hits, including “Doctors and Mothers Are Murdering Babies After They’re Born,” “Putin and Xi Love Me and I Love Them,” and “Gas Used to Be a Buck-Eighty-Something a Gallon.” But the new material was pretty shocking.

Trump not only declared that mothers are killing babies in the delivery room—he’s been saying that for years—but added the incomprehensible claim that liberals, conservatives, and independents alike are very happy that abortion has been returned to the states. (When asked how he would vote in Florida’s abortion referendum, he dodged the question, which suggests that maybe not everyone is happy.)

He said (again) that the convicted January 6 insurrectionists have been treated horribly, but this time he added that no one died during the assault on the Capitol. (In fact, four people died that day.) He made his usual assertion that Russia would never have invaded Ukraine if he’d been in office, but this time he added how much he looked forward to getting along with the Iranians, despite also bragging about how he tanked the nuclear deal with them.


He claimed that Harris was sliding in the polls, a standard Trump trope in talking about his opponents, but he added that he was getting crowd sizes up to 30 times hers at his rallies. Harris recently spoke to approximately 15,000 people in Detroit; 30 times that would be nearly half a million people, so Trump is now saying that he’s having rallies that are five times bigger than the average crowd at a Super Bowl—bigger, even, than Woodstock—and somehow fitting them all into arenas with seats to spare.

For the moment, let’s assume that Trump just gargled up a number he couldn’t comprehend. But he apparently knows we are in Olympics season, so he followed all of this by going for the gold: His rallies are not just big, they’re the biggest ever.

“Nobody has spoken to crowds bigger than me,” Trump said. And then, referring to the crowd that gathered at his behest on January 6, he compared it to the 1963 March on Washington: “If you look at Martin Luther King, when he did his speech, his great speech, and you look at ours: same real estate, same everything, same number of people.”

The March on Washington drew a quarter million people, almost six times the number that showed up during the attack on the Capitol. Trump agreed that official estimates said his crowd was smaller than King’s. He pressed on anyway: “But when you look at the exact same picture and everything is the same—because it was the fountains, the whole thing all the way back to go from Lincoln to Washington—and you look at it, and you look at the picture of my crowd … we actually had more people.”

Then things got even weirder.

Trump claimed that former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown said bad things about Harris while he and Trump were on a helicopter together. Oh—and the helicopter was in trouble:

We thought maybe this was the end. We were in a helicopter, going to a certain location together, and there was an emergency landing. This was not a pleasant landing. And Willie was—he was a little concerned.
So I know him, but I know him pretty well. I mean, I haven’t seen him in years. But he told me terrible things about her. But this is what you’re telling me, anyway, I guess. But he had a big part in what happened with Kamala. But he—he, I don’t know, maybe he’s changed his tune. But he—he was not a fan of hers very much, at that point.
Brown has not had to change his tune, because none of this ever happened. Trump may have confused Willie Brown with former California Governor Jerry Brown, with whom Trump once shared an uneventful helicopter ride. (One might think they’re hard to mix up: Willie Brown is Black; Jerry Brown is white.) In any case, trying to untangle the half-cooked pasta of a Trump story isn’t really worth the effort. The issue is that a former president is frighteningly delusional, and if any other candidate had done this—Biden was roasted over stories that were obscure but turned out to be true—it would dominate the news with understandable alarm about the well-being of the candidate.


Reporters might listen to Trump and then understandably be reluctant to start typing stories that must feel like spec scripts for The West Wing pieced together by a creative-writing circle:

The former president, lying about abortion laws, said women murder their own babies in the delivery room. He megalomaniacally claimed that he gets bigger crowds than anyone in history, and compared himself to Martin Luther King Jr. He descended into fantasy by telling a story about surviving a helicopter emergency that never happened with a man who wasn’t there.
Instead, The New York Times ran this headline: “Trump Tries to Wrestle Back Attention at Mar-a-Lago News Conference.” The Washington Post said: “Trump Holds Meandering News Conference, Where He Agrees to Debate Harris.” The British paper The Independent got closer with: “Trump Holds Seemingly Pointless Press Conference Filled With False Claims,” but CNN went with “Trump Attacks Harris and Walz During First News Conference Since Democratic Ticket Was Announced.”

All of these headlines are technically true, but they miss the point: The Republican nominee, the man who could return to office and regain the sole authority to use American nuclear weapons, is a serial liar and can’t tell the difference between reality and fantasy.

Donald Trump is not well. He is not stable. There’s something deeply wrong with him.

Any of those would have been important—and accurate—headlines.
 
Counterpoint: Trump has been like this for years.


Sure, it's maddening to decent people, it's an indictment of a major political party, and it's a great example of why people think and say: "it's a cult". But at the same time, people get used to things, they get out rage fatigue, and there's an acceptance of the reality of the situation.
 
Counterpoint: Trump has been like this for years.


Sure, it's maddening to decent people, it's an indictment of a major political party, and it's a great example of why people think and say: "it's a cult". But at the same time, people get used to things, they get out rage fatigue, and there's an acceptance of the reality of the situation.
Right. That's what I see. After a while it becomes "normal", unfortunately.

Although I don't necessarily disagree with the argument that the headlines shouldn't focus on what is most remarkable about him.

I just don't know if it's feasible to keep it up for years.
 
They are scared.



You would have to be an idiot to realize this isn't Trump vs Kamala. It's Trump vs the Machine.
I see it as more of a question on how to cover the man. If his speech contains a bunch of inane ramblings, conspiratorial musings, and ridiculous lies -- are those the big focus? Shouldn't they be?

With most politicians, historically, they would be. Should Trump be treated differently? Or should we play this "normal for Trump" game and not highlight these items like we would for anyone else?

That's clearly one of the problems with Trump, normalizing items that should never be normalized. Will future candidates get the same pass? Will it encourage more problematic politicians to aggressively run for office knowing that they too can "get away with it" like Trump did? Should the media stay disciplined and grill him on the items consistently like they would anyone else?
 
Last edited:
They are scared.



You would have to be an idiot to realize this isn't Trump vs Kamala. It's Trump vs the Machine.
You have a rare combination of talking in absolutes & being certain on things, while also being wrong so often. It’s a rare combo that’s not frequently seen. Maybe since Frasier Crane. Although Frasier could occasionally be funny whereas you never are funny, despite your best efforts.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT