Is Trump Adoration Syndrome any better than Trump Derangement Syndrome? No, because they’re BOTH fanatically insane, threatening to destroy you if you disagree

Our latest compilation of celebrity diseases likely caused by COVID “vaccination” started with the case (I use the word advisedly) of Donald Trump, or—to be more accurate—Trump 47, since he’s clearly not the man he was last time around; and we naturally began that compilation with the president’s condition (whatever it may be, exactly), since he is, beyond question, the most famous of the ailing stars we noted earlier. Therefore the title of that post starts with the cautious sentence, “There’s something wrong with Trump 47.”

Of course, “the news” is overflowing with stuff about the signs, or seeming signs, of Trump’s possible decline, and—of course—much of it is overblown, or just rank speculation, since “our free press” routinely skews the facts to nail this president, and always has. Thus the press has long since lost all credibility, and not just with Trump’s base; which is, to say the least, a shame, since that vitriolic bias has now made it unlikely that millions will believe a word of what they say, no matter how well-evidenced or consequential. Thus “our free press” is like the boy who cried wolf, with the difference that that boy only warned and warned and warned of an approaching predator, whereas “our free press” has, all along, not only done the same with Trump, but has also freely interspersed its cries of fear with honks of ridicule, deriding everything he says and does, his looks, his clothes, his taste, his wife, his house, his hair, you name it.

This raging bias, as I say, is—or, rather, was—a shame, since it’s a betrayal of proper journalism, and therefore has destroyed the media’s credibility, except with the Blue Meanies who crave such trivial and nasty “coverage.” So it surely was the last time Trump occupied the Oval Office; but, this time around, the media’s disgraceful practice isn’t just a shame, but a catastrophe, since Trump 47 is, in fact, not comparable to the restrained, albeit provoking, character between Obama and “Joe Biden.” Trump today is (as I noted in my previous post about him) a very different Chief Executive, who’s doing things that should be urgently reported, and that “our free press” is (sometimes) reporting, but his fans bristle at any and all coverage that is not as sycophantic as Trump and his courtiers want it to be—or else. Had the media not gone hog wild on “Russia-gate,” lionized Stormy Daniels, and otherwise kept shrieking about trivial or non-existent scandals, they’d be far better able to report those bad ideas and vicious practices the likes of which we did not see in Trump 45; and, in that imaginary case, Trump’s followers, or some of them, would be far likelier to listen than to seethe.

My prior post on Trump, who’s covered in the second section of this piece:

Link

Here, I admit, I’m being a bit naive, since I suspect Trump was placed in power, precisely to divide the country, with the professional classes facing off against the working people, blacks against whites, coasts against the heartland. (He was also used to split the country over COVID, just as Bush/Cheney were installed in time for 9/11, and then to pursue the “war on terror.”) That Trump was “placed” in office was apparent from the weird forensics of his first election (or “election”), which tells us that (God forbid) Hillary did win, just as the pre-election polls foretold; and Trump’s team knew it, too, which is why he went home early on Election Night, and why his people didn’t even bother drafting an acceptance speech (according to Anthony Scaramucci). When we look back at Trump’s first campaign, moreover, we note how many sizable constituencies he seemed to go out of his way to rile—Afircan-Americans, the disabled, veterans groups, Muslims—suggesting that he didn’t really want to win, or was ambivalent about it (perhaps, as rumor had it, because his real wish was to start up his own TV network).

This reading of his win (or “win”) is anathema to Trump’s most dedicated followers, who need to think that, thanks to them, he “beat the deep state” in a triumph for American electoral democracy, despite the dirty tricks deployed against him. That optimistic view betrays a wide-eyed unawareness of how “our” elections really work, and have since 1964—the first time that computers were used to count the vote. (Ask yourself how that anti-democratic innovation related to what went down in Dallas on 11/22/63.) No one can get honestly elected with the system we have now, nor could one even get to be the nominee without the blessing and assistance of the CIA, which has for decades, since JFK, rigged elections all around the world, or, failing that, toppled governments headed by some “wrong” contender. Thus, despite the wishful thinking of his fans, Trump couldn’t have prevailed if those who work both parties’ strings did not prefer him to serve their purposes.

Just as they did when Bush/Cheney won both their “surprise victories,” which contradicted all the most trustworthy pre-election polls, so did “our free press” rush to claim, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, that all the pre-election polls in 2016 were “wrong” about a Clinton victory. (Clinton “lost” for Trump’s sake just as she had “won” her party’s nomination at the expense of Bernie Sanders—who, four years later, “lost” again for Kamala Harris’s sake. The Democrats’ commitment to electoral integrity is clear enough from Sanders’ muteness on his two “defeats,” and Clinton’s muteness on her own, except for her completely groundless claims that “Putin” had defeated her.)

The religious fury that swells in the hearts of Trump’s devotees broke out into the open at a health freedom rally where I spoke back in 2021, doing well with all the crowd until I mentioned, passingly, the oddities about Trump’s first election. As I tried to get into the details of that “win,” a trio of young women snapped to life, and starting shrilly chanting, “Trump won! Trump won! Trump won!”—sitting so close to the stage that I had to stop, until the woman managing the rally asked them to pipe down. I then went on, in spite of those three true believers glaring at me.

I tell this story as a preface to what’s happened recently, in reaction to my recent compilation of celebrity ailments, with the first line of its title: “There’s something wrong with Trump 47.” This vague and innocuous statement made some few readers go ballistic, in part because of my inclusion of two articles on the concerns of certain Trump insiders vis-a-vis his mental health—one in the Irish Star, an anti-Trump organ, and one in Raw Story, quoting anti-Trump conservative Charlie Sykes. My critics were incensed that I had quoted those two pieces—and I get it, since Raw Story especially is one of the multitude of sloppy, violently biased “leftist” rags that have been trashing Trump from the beginning. On the basis sheerly of its record, then, my critics have a point; and since Sykes is notoriously anti-Trump, they have a point there, too.

That’s all very well; but what if it’s true that Trump 47 may be out to lunch? To blow such “leftist” coverage off because you don’t like what it says is just as blinding as it is to spurn Fox News, or the New York Post, or Alex Jones because you don’t like what they say, regardless of its truthfulness. In short, we have to check what all such outlets say, and thereby see if it’s feasible, confirmed by other sources and the evidence of our own senses. This is what I did with that last piece (like all my pieces), which had my explosive readers charging me with “hating Trump,” and/or with “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” when I don’t hate Trump at all, and have always spoken out against that incapacitating “liberal” mental illness.

But let us turn from that condition, which long ago reached epidemic levels on the “left,” and look into its opposite: Trump Adoration Syndrome, a disorder common on the right; although that syndrome is fading fast, as ever more Trump voters have been moved to change their minds by what Trump’s done, or plans to do, since his inauguration. Thus, while it’s always been impossible to get a stalwart “leftist” to rethink his or her assumptions (as with COVID and the jab), ever more of Trump’s supporters have now had a very rude awakening, since his agenda has turned out to threaten them, along with contrary Democrats, inadequately loyal Republicans, journalists insisting (even without malice) on an answer, and all immigrants, legal or illegal, as well as citizens with foreign-sounding names.

Read more