The FBI recovered some 11,000 documents—United States property—from Donald Trump’s Mir-a-Lago home/hotel.  In Donald J. Trump v. United States of America, the former president petitioned for a Special Master to look into the claim that revealing the content of certain seized document would violate his rights of “executive” and “client privilege.”

Citing “extraordinary circumstances,” federal district judge Aileen M. Cannon ruled that, “Plaintiff’s former position as President of the United States, (puts) the stigma associated with the (FBI’s) subject seizure .  .  .  in a league of its own.  A further indictment  .  .  .  would result in reputational harm of a decidedly different order of magnitude.”

It came as no surprise to sophomore law students when an Eleventh Circuit Court three judge panel slapped down Judge Cannon’s decision.

Still, America’s justice system is heavily weighted to favor some and punish others.  For falsifying results of one urinalysis, a foolish young man served over two years in federal prison.  Given Donald Trump’s bottomless pockets, had a five-hundred-dollar-an-hour lawyers argued that conviction might result in a “stigma” or “reputational harm” to his client, would the judge have ruled differently?

For driving seventy on a fifty-five-mile-an-hour highway, I faced a judge and paid a fine.  If the State Trooper had discovered Donald Trump, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, or Kevin McCarthy behind the wheel, would he have considered “stigma” or “reputational harm” in issuing or not issuing a citation?

Lady Justice is blindfolded and holds a scale.  Shifty lawyers and prejudiced jurists notwithstanding, no one is above the law.  No one!

“EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW” is chiseled over the portico of the Supreme Court building.  It’s the glue that holds America’s democracy together.  Without it come anarchy or dictatorship.     

Ex-president Trump’s rants since the FBI’s August 8 search his Lar-a-Lago home/hotel, with the documents recovered, beam a spotlight beneath the reach of Donald’s mental illness.

I’ve written this before, but the potentially devastating impact on America’s Democracy of Donald Trump’s “Malignant Personality Disorder” (NPD) cannot be enough repeated or overstated.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM5) defines (NPD) as, “a persistent manner of grandiosity, a continuous desire for admiration, along with a lack of empathy. It starts in early adulthood and occurs in a range of situations, as signified by the existence of any 5 of the next 9 standards,

• A grandiose logic of self-importance
• A fixation with fantasies of infinite success, control, brilliance, beauty or idyllic love
• A credence that he or she is extraordinary and exceptional and can only be understood by, or should connect with, other extraordinary or important people or institutions
• A desire for unwarranted admiration
• A sense of entitlement
• Interpersonal oppressive behavior
• No form of empathy
• Resentment of others or a conviction that others are resentful of him or her

Nine for nine folks!  A slam-dunk!

DSM5 does not define “Malignant Narcissism.” Campbell’s Psychiatric Dictionary describes it as combining characteristics of Narcissistic and Antisocial Personality Disorders with aggression and paranoia, making the patient not only delusional but potentially dangerous!

If DSM5 and NPD sound like smart-assed talk of psychiatric wonks, observe and think for yourself.  Remember the railroad crossing warning: stop, look, listen! 

At risk of overtaxing the metaphor, is Donald’s Express blinded by its own luster?  Does it see itself as the locomotive commanding the tracks?  Does it feel admired and entitled?  Does it feel resented and unappreciated?  Does it give a damn who it injures or kills‽

When we observe and think, it’s a no brainer.

In a hearing to determine if a special master should review items the DOJ seized from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home/hotel, over-paid lawyers made the really dumb assertion that the documents in Trump’s possession were analogous to an “overdue-library-book.”

The fact is, foregoing the formality of checking the “book” out, ex-president Trump stole rare and sensitive documents, with no intention of returning them—ever!

On “Alex Wagner Tonight,” a Florida teacher voiced concern over the state’s new public school civics curriculum.  It seems Governor DeSantis and cohorts would gloss over the stigma of slavery and impose Christian precepts into what students are taught about the state’s history.

The slavery piece puzzles me.  Do Conservative lawmakers reason that, by somehow sanitizing slavery since the Declaration of Independence and prejudice, bigotry, and lynchings since Emancipation, young Floridians may be made amenable to a conservative political climate which effectively rejects that, “all (people) are created equal?”

Regarding the Christian piece, in an interview with Anna Fusco, president of the Broward Teachers’ Union, The Washington Post’s Lori Rozsa writes, “Union members who attended (training) were being told to present to students ‘only one side of history,’”  “It was basically, this way or no way, like there’s only one side to American history,” Fusco said.  “Then they kind of slipped in a Christian values piece, ignoring the fact that this country is made up of so many different cultures and religions.”

As I understand, the rationale behind DeSantis and colleagues’ interjecting Christian precepts into the public-school curriculum falls back on “Originalism.”  Accord to Wikipedia:
“In the context of United States law, originalism is a concept regarding the interpretation of the Constitution that all statements in the constitution must be interpreted based on the original understanding “at the time it was adopted.”

Apparently, the folks rewriting Florida’s civics curriculum believe, “at the time (the constitution) was adopted“ our Founding Fathers intended that governance of The United States of America reflect Christian precepts.  

Being ignorant regarding “originalism” and the Constitution’s framers’ thinking, I Googled.  A History channel piece, “Freedom of Religion,” explains the Founding Fathers’ reasoning regarding religion in the First Amendment:  

“In 1785, Virginia statesman (and future president) James Madison argued against state support of Christian religious instruction.  Madison would go on to draft the First Amendment, a part of the Bill of Rights that would include constitutional protection for certain individual liberties including freedom of religion  .  .  .  “!  (my emphasis)

Hence: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof  .  .  .”

Apart from flying in the face of the First Amendment, the implications and complications inherent in imposing any religious doctrine into public-school curricula would cross a rabbi’s eyes.  From Huguenots, Puritans, Calvinists, Roman Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelicals, Methodists, Moravians, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Anglicans, Pentecostals, Quakers, Mormonism, Agnostics, and Atheists, to Jews, Sikhs, Islamics, Hindus, and Buddhists the dilemma is, whose religion is taught on the taxpayers’ dime?

In a country committed to liberty, equality, and freedom, the First Amendment must never be abrogated for religious preference.  Potential impact of such an abrogation calls to mind the wit and wisdom of Winston Churchill, “History will treat me kindly, for I shall write it.”

“When One Great Scorer comes to write against your name, He marks not that you won or lost, but how you played the game.”

Republican Representative Matthew Gaetz’s rant at a July 23 Turning Point USA Student Action Summit got me thinking about mean people.

Gaetz called pro-abortion rallies, “Just disgusting.  But why is it that the women least likely of getting pregnant are the ones most worried about having abortions?  Nobody wants to impregnate you if you look like a thumb!  These people are odious on the inside and out!” Gaetz’s glib diatribe ignores and insults attractive pro-abortion women and delivers a slap-in-the-face to, “5 foot 2 inch 350 pounds,” less physically fortunate on either side of the issue.

A decade back, sentiments such as Gaetz’s were anathema in civil discourse and virtually unheard of from a member of Congress.  Then, candidate Donald Trump mocked a handicapped journalist, and urged MAGA supporters to take dissenters out on stretchers, vowing to pay their legal bills!  Slander and lies became Trump’s trademark. The kid gloves were off. 

Rush Limbaugh seems to have pioneered “trash talk” on the airwaves.  Today, Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Alex Jones, and Fox personalities take sadistic satisfaction in publicly lying about and insulting any with whom they disagree.  On January 6, 2021, their rage acted out in terrifying, graphic form. 

The touchstone of Mean Ultra-Right-Wing rhetoric is an assumption that some humans are superior and others inferior.  Throughout human history, from the Stone Age to the Space Age, this paradigm predominates.  More recently, class conflict and revolutionary nationalism were cornerstones of Benito Mousseline’s Fascist regime.  Adolf Hitler proclaimed the superiority of a fair-skinned, blond, blue-eyed, Aryan race.  Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, physically handicapped, and others who did not look or behave according to this model were “subhuman.” 

Today, under the banner of a “Christian Nationalism” terrifyingly reminiscent of Italian Fascism and German Nazism, some challenge America’s Democracy!  The very Mean People who stridently defend the Second Amendment are intent on jettisoning the First!

For me, the “Select Committee to Investigate the January 6^th Attack on the United States Capitol’s” July 23 hearing boils down to one question: Why, with the safety and lives of thousands, including his Vice President, in imminent  danger; as his Chief of Staff, cabinet, legal eagles, family, even Fox personalities, urged him to call back his mob, did President Donald J. Trump, for 187minutes, monitor the attack on Fox and do nothing‽ What was he thinking?  

I’ve written elsewhere, but it addresses the question, in The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump three dozen mental health professionals and others with credible knowledge, agree that Donald J. Trump exhibits symptoms a Malignant Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD).  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM5) defines (NPD) as, “a persistent manner of grandiosity, a continuous desire for admiration, along with a lack of empathy. It starts in early adulthood and occurs in a range of situations, as signified by the existence of any 5 of the next 9 standards,

• A grandiose logic of self-importance
• A fixation with fantasies of infinite success, control, brilliance, beauty or idyllic love
• A credence that he or she is extraordinary and exceptional and can only be understood by, or should connect with, other extraordinary or important people or institutions
• A desire for unwarranted admiration
• A sense of entitlement
• Interpersonal oppressive behavior
• No form of empathy
• Resentment of others or a conviction that others are resentful of him or her
• A display of egotistical and conceited behavior or attitudes

What’s a slam-dunk folks, 9 for 9!

DSM5 does not define “Malignant Narcissism.” Campbell’s Psychiatric Dictionary describes it as combining characteristics of Narcissistic and Antisocial Personality Disorders with aggression and paranoia, making the patient not only delusional but potentially dangerous!

It is impossible to conjure a more graphic scenario of Malignant Narcissistic Personality Disorder than President Donald Trump’s action and inaction on January 6, 2021.

During those tumultuous and dangerous 187 minutes, our President’s sole focus was to stop certification of the States’ Electors and cling to power!  As Capitol Police rushed our Vice President, Senators, and Representatives to safety from his mob, Donald called and texted those very men and women, concerned not for their safety, indeed their lives, but urging them to stop certification of the Electors!        

In Too Much and Never Enough How My Family Created the World‘s Most Dangerous Man, Mary Trump exposes the roots of Donald’s mental illness. When he was two years old, his mother became seriously ill and, thereafter, emotionally unavailable.  A real estate developer, at the office six days a week, father, Frederick, amassed fabulous wealth.  Conflating financial wealth, power, and the fame they bring, adopting this model Donald bonded with Dad.

Donald J. Trump has never experienced love!  Comments during and at the end of the January 6 riot point to Donald’s warped impression of love.  He alone saw rioters “hugging kissing” police officers.  When it became clear his coup had failed, President Trump finally called off his troops with, “We love you, you’re very special.”

I’m dumbfounded that Donald Trump can continue thumbing his nose and giving the middle finger to America’s laws and remain unindicted?  Then, I recall my two weeks on a jury.

A lady was suing two surgeons for medical malpractice.  After hearing the plaintiff’s case, at the conclusion of week one my feelings were, in effect, “hang the incompetents scoundrels!”  After hearing the defense, at the conclusion of week two I voted with nine of twelve other jurors to acquit.  (Two non-voting alternates concurred.)  What changed my mind?  Lawyers!

Plaintiff’s counsel presented an adequate but lackluster performance.  Defense counsel paired polished argument with a personable manner.  Debriefing with our judge, I observed, “If I needed a lawyer, I’d hire the defense counsel, Mr. Morgan.”  A fellow juror responded, “If you could afford him!”  In hindsight, I suspect the defense counsel was a $500 an hour Malpractice Specialist retained by the Insurance Company.

Some attorney opined that any prosecutor worth the price of his sheepskin can convince a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.  Ours was not a grand jury, but I’m convinced that the twelve of our jury who voted to acquit were swayed primarily, not by evidence, testimony, witnesses, x-rays, and laboratory tests, but by a slick, Big City, Hired Gun.  The poor plaintiff was hopelessly outlawyered!

In O.J. Simpson’s trial for murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, Los Angeles District Attorney Gilbert Garcetti seemed to have a slam-dunk case.  In assigning Deputies Marcia Cark and Christopher Darden to go up against Simpson’s “Dream Team”: Johnny Cockran, Robert Shaprio, F. Lee Bailey, Robert Kardashian, Alan Dershowitz, Gerald Uelman, et al., Garcetti pitted Poodles against Pitbulls! 

My grandson, Steven, is a Prosecutor.  I asked why he choose prosecution over defense.  Steven explained, prosecutors have the flexibility equitably to consider evidence and apply the law.  A defense attorney’s sole purpose is to get the client acquitted.

A battalion of Litigious Gunslinger keeps Donald Trump out of court and prison.  So long as the ex-president can con his Minions into picking up the tab, he may remain free to thumb his nose and show his middle finger to America’s laws.

“A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance
when the need for illusion is great.”
Saul Bellow

January 6 committee member Republican Adam Kitzinger and his wife received voice and emails threatening to murder them and their five-month-old son.  No doubt these inarticulate, profanity-laced, ramblings are the tip of the proverbial iceberg.  Who knows how many Nancy Pelosi, Liz Cheney, and Chuck Schumer receive?  In Unthinkable, Congressman Jamie Raskin reports that, when he agreed to lead Donald Trump’s second impeachment, Speaker Pelosi arranged security for him and his family.           

Testifying before the January 6 Committee, aid to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Cassidy Hutchinson, alleged: (1) President Trump knew that some in his January 6 crowd were armed and prepared to commit violent acts.  (2) Demanding he be taken to the Capitol, the President grabbed at the steering wheel of the presidential limousine.  (3) Trump agreed Mike Pence deserved to hang.  (4) White House Counsel Pat Cipollini told Cassidy, “If he goes there, we’ll break every law imaginable.”  (5) A humorous note: Hearing a noise from the Oval Office, Cassidy went to investigate.  The valet was changing the tablecloth.  Cassidy observed, “There was ketchup on the wall and there was a shattered porcelain plate on the floor.”  Learning Attorney General Barr told the Associated Press there was no election fraud, it seems the President threw a tantrum.

For her courage and candor, no doubt Ms. Hutchinson receives death threats and marriage proposals.  The wannabe assassins and bridegrooms are motivated by testosterone and politics, rarely facts.

Did Ms. Hutchinson, “tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”?  Or, is she a brazen, bald-faced liar?  Would an obviously intelligent Republican White House aid dream up allegations so easily reputed? 

For me, this raises a larger question: Apart from Chaney, Kitzinger, and a handful of others, do left-leaning Republicans legislators receive death threats?  They would have to be authored by Democrats.  It’s impossible to imagine Democrats scribbling, emailing, or texting, rambling, profanity-laced death threats. 

Richard Hickock, Perry Smith, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Adam Lanza, Nikolas Cruz, Payton Gendron, Salvador Ramos, and Robert E. Crimo III were never Student Body President or Homecoming King.  Never labeled “Most likely to succeed,” their infamy eclipses all other faces in their high school yearbooks.  Friendless, fearful, furious, these young men became Mass Murderers!

From a Kansas farmhouse to Columbine High, Sandy Hook Elementary, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High, Tops Supermarket, Robb Elementary, a Highland Park Fourth of July Parade, and doubtless beyond, in the name of God and Humanity, why do they do it‽

Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood recounts Hickock and Smith’s slaughter of Kansas farmer Herbert “Herb” Clutter, wife Bonnie, daughter Nancy, and son Kenyon.  Their ages and choice of victims make Richard and Perry outliers, but comments Capote attributes to the pair offer an explanation why some young men murder total strangers.  As memory serves, cryptically, “Somebody had to pay.”  Capote quotes Smith, “(Mr. Clutter) was a very nice gentleman.  Soft spoken.  I thought so right up to the moment I cut his throat.”

Human history is permeated with individuals and groups striking out against standards of civil behavior.  In America, apart from circumscribed, depression-era gangland assassinations, multiple murders were unheard of.  Then, around two decades back, precedent, economics, and technology converged.  Harris and Klebold invented the model.  A profit-motivated, Arms-Industry/NRA/ Conservative-Congressional Cabal made military-grade assault rifles the, cliched, ticking timebomb.

I’ll wrap this up once again citing social psychologist, psychoanalyst, and philosopher Erich Fromm’s The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness.  Fromm argues man needs to “make a dent.”  If nowhere else, sometimes he makes it “in someone’s head.“