Global Independent Analytics
Scott Bennett
Scott Bennett

Location: USA

Specialization: Counterterrorist Finance

A Psychoanalysis of Donald Trump

Main issues about main candidate

Recently I joined Allen Roland on Susan Lindauer’s radio show, The Covert Report, in which we discussed the unfolding Presidential campaign and the candidates running, specifically Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, Jeb Bush, and Hillary Clinton.  
Here is my analysis and summary of the most important points.

Disclaimer:

First of all, I am unpaid, and I am neither for nor against Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders or anyone else running for President. I am for the truth, the truth, the truth - always have been and always will be. The truth is metaphysical, eternal, and alive. It has no sex, no race, no religion, no color, no rank, no national citizenship. It is simply the truth. Once we embrace the truth (which is the harmonious expression of the natural law, environmental stewardship, and love and honor of our fellow human beings - regardless of citizenship), we learn to synthesize it into our imaginations and decisions governing our national and international socio-economic and political lives. "Love thy neighbor as thyself" [Mark,12:31], means preserving our own life and safety and our family (and country) first, so that we will have an orderly, stable, tranquil state from which to positively and generously influence and nourish others. We must keep the lifeboat afloat and in balance, in order to not sink and kill everybody in a panic for resources.

Warning

This article is not pro-Trump, it is not con-Trump; it is neither for him or against him, but simply an attempt to analyze him and let the reader use that analysis as he or she sees fit.

Essence of the Issue

Despite the mainstream media attempting to brand Trump as fearful of Muslims based on his comments about stopping the illegal refugee relocation program into the United States, Donald Trump seems to be the leading favorite among non-Democrat voters.  It is important to recognize that the American political process requires Trump to appear leaning to the right-wing of the Republican party base at the beginning of the election, and then after winning the primary, he will even out.  All political candidates follow this dance step.  To do otherwise means failure to win the Republican party base, which means failure to win the primary election (step 1) , which means failure to win the national election (step 2) to become President.  So that being said, I think very quickly Trump will “clarify” his comments to appear much more complimentary towards Muslims - especially non-Wahabiists.  Trump is smart, he just needs to be better educated, and that is the role of truthful advisors, not consultants.

Trump is also being hyper-criticized—if not attacked—by some, including executives at Fox News, for a supposed “confrontational response” to Fox News correspondent Megan Kelly, who was a moderator of the debate (along with other Fox pundits Chris Wallace and Brett Baer).  Kelly insinuated, rather snidely I might add, that somehow Donald Trump might be defined as “anti-woman” for his past personality clashes or public confrontations with comedian Rosie O’Donnell, who seems to enjoy mimicking Trump with exaggerated condescension. 

Now keep in mind, this was the very first question of the very first Presidential debate.  Upon reflection—which is something we all should do before voting in order to filter out reasonable policy analysis from empty emotional slogans—Megan Kelly didn’t want a question about something serious on the minds of every single Republican.  She wanted to inflame passion with a soundbite of drama masquerading as a significant issue for Republicans.  It was not significant, it was silly.

More than that, it was quite ignorant or obnoxious of her considering the psychographic analysis of Republican voters.  Typically, Republicans—moderate and conservative—believe and vote for traditional sexual morality and natural roles in male-female marriage; religious importance to individual and community life; entrepreneurial dynamism and accountable moral tax policy exercised by a transparent government in order to preserve individual property and pursuit of happiness rights; the necessity of civil rights to assemble and self-protect through “expression” and “firearms”; and, most important, non-interventionism in foreign policy, despite the recent deviation from Republican norms pursued—foolishly I might add—by the Bush-Cheney Administration.  

Megan Kelly either never learned these political values within the Republican mind (which of course I cannot believe, given her job at Fox and her identity as a Catholic), or forgot them, or consciously chose to ignore them—and thereby ignore the typical Republican debate watcher and focus on herself.  This to me seems unforgivable, because it cheapens Megan Kelly (and Fox News) into an over-perfumed, sloppily made-up “sow’s ear rather than silk purse,” by degenerating the debate into a gotcha game of “it’s all about me, it’s all about the drama, it’s all about generating controversy for ratings”; rather than a true philosophical exchange about “what Republicans want in a President?”

Trump and Republican Women

Personally, I don’t think Trump can be labeled anti-woman by any stretch of the imagination based on his response to Megan Kelly’s question—which as I’ve said seems quite ridiculous, ignorant, and improper for a Republican Presidential debate—since I don’t think a single Republican in the entire United States of America considers Rosie O’Donnell to represent or defend in any way their notions of traditional womanhood or healthy femininity, as defined by the majority of Republicans.  She’s just not “on our team” to borrow a Seinfeld psycho-sexual analysis, or in our tent, and doesn’t seem to want to be.  Democrats or liberals or feminists or homosexuals or humanists or non-religionists/atheists or some others I’ve not listed here might believe Rosie O’Donnell represents the spirit and values of the modern American woman, but I don’t think Republicans do; and I know I certainly do not.  

Now of course I do think she’s quite bright, in a certain way, and I do agree with her on some things (such as the 9-11 false-flag terrorist attacks and cover up), but on other things I must politely smile and say I do not agree with her.  Yes, we all realize she’s suffered significant trauma early on in life, fundamentally because of her childhood, an abusive father and missing mother; and we feel sorry about that.  But that’s not necessarily germane to this discussion.  What is important to understand is that most all civilized people will agree that although we don’t wish to inflict sadness or pain upon others, we realize that sometimes debates and discussions and different opinions unintentionally cause others to grow frustrated and tense; and that can wound pride, which triggers anger, which creates pain, and then resentment. 

This was the lesson for me about the full multidimensional implications within the “Trump-Kelly-Rosie” issue.  

To summarize, simply put, Megan Kelly thought up—or was fed by her boss—a confrontational question that no real Republican woman would have considered relevant, or would have asked, because no Republican woman would agree with the question’s premise.   Why?

Trump and Men-Hating Feminists

Perhaps amplified by Megan Kelly’s characteristic aggression, presumptuousness or lawyer-like arrogance, the insinuation that Trump would be perceived as anti-woman for his past skirmishes with Rosie O’Donnell, seemed not only shallow, but no doubt to Trump also felt like a “slap in the face” and an hysterical attack upon his old school “manhood”, and seemed to disrespect or ignore his tours of duty as a father, grandfather, and husband. 

This perception of Megan Kelly whiningly disrespecting his “manhood” instinctively moved Trump to respond by asserting his manhood, albeit in a traditional Trump way—which is characteristically strong, blunt, and irrevocable.  

I can honestly say that the women in the room with me when we watched this debate, had no problem with his response, and were in fact somewhat annoyed by Megan Kelly’s question because it was personal, not Presidential.

Now could Trump have responded in a better way, specifically in a way that would have, perhaps, communicated a Cary Grant/John Wayne/Ronald Reagan gentlemanly grace and subtle redirection?  Yes, of course he could have.  But correcting or polishing a man’s personality is not the purpose of a Republican debate.  It’s to determine how the person thinks about and solves the greatest problems facing our country, and our world, and gauge how he will wield power over the people who entrust him with the position of President.  To do otherwise, to ask silly questions, is a scandal all by itself; and the people who do this should be shunned because their selfish, ill-will, or blind ignorance puts at risk the safety of the people of the United States by corroding our rightful, sacred expectation of a President (and politicians) speaking truth, and serving out of love for our fellow man and our duty to country, not selfish motive.   To believe otherwise defiles our cultural heritage, weakens our political moral authority, and is thoroughly un-American.

Trump As A Man

Trump is old school.  In a way, he’s a kind of Oscar Schindler player (as depicted by actor Liam Neeson)—he loves the ladies (not little boys like Lindsey Graham), loves to make money and build things (especially in America, by Americans, for Americans), and seems to not only keep his moral-spiritual beliefs and values to himself, but in fact expects them to be considered private, not for public discussion, and non-essential to the performance of a President.  Trump seems to consider a moral man and a moral President, someone who not only does not impede another person’s ability and desire to succeed in life, but does his best to encourage and support it.  

President Barack Obama on the other hand believes—as he was originally recorded saying in 2008—that reaching into another man’s pocket, taking out his money, and spreading it around on the table to others as a form of quasi racial reparation or entitlement or confirmation of character disability, with not so much as a “thank you or ‘atta boy” to the Joe the Plumber type citizen whose hard work, sweat, and sacrifice generated the money in the first place, best defines ‘American Exceptionalism.’

Fundamentally it is the classic difference between an intellectual limousine liberal who arrogantly presumes to know best how humanity should be defined and molded (by the coercion of government), and the blue-collar conservative who believes people should be left alone to define, develop, and mold themselves in the furnace of experience and social morays.

Origins of Trump

To Trump, the source of his strength, his pride, and his hope was his family, who pushed him to push himself.  And he did.  

He went to a military academy, which gave him a discipline and drive and strength of character few men understand.  His father was an important sounding board and driver in his life, and gave him the opportunity to build his empire.  He is also a New Yorker, and rebuilt a lot of the city, and has a special pride and sense of unity with America like a man who digs the dirt, carries the steel or mixes the cement which creates the buildings (the substance) of America and its culture.  No politician has that natural right, because they are limited to making flattery speeches and signing bills (often in exchange for political contributions or bribes), rather than managing men and negotiating deals.  Strangely we seem to have forgotten that this type of work—making deals, managing men, attracting investors, calculating risk—is hard work, and stressful, and should be admired by those who can do it.  

Is Donald Trump Really John Gault?

In these strange Twilight Zone times, or perhaps sunset ending of the American pioneer spirit, it seems that some Americans are falling into the angry delusion of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” proletariat-bureaucracy,  which believes that natural leaders, talented people, and the creative or inspiring human beings have an absolute duty to “donate their gifts and energies and time” to the improvement or satisfaction of others, however legally unbalanced or morally questionable or spiritually empty this may be defined.  

We can see the application of this belief in the recent Texas case involving the use of the courts (the government) as a threatening force or instrument of pain (i.e., a gun or sword) against people who do not want to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual marriage because of the harm it would do to their own sense of religious identity, duty, or loyalty.  From this example alone we can smell the corpse like stench of tyranny and see the inevitable gangrene death of freedom.

Trump and Bernie

Bernie Sanders is traveling around the country stirring up crowds, appealing to those disenchanted with the status quo, and those distrusting or repulsed by the Hillary-Bill Clinton machine.  The financial establishment, whoever they are, are supposedly upset by this popular uprising or movement, and may try to stop this by indicting Hillary Clinton on criminal charges if she refuses to bow out, and then hand the baton to VP Joe Biden.  Maybe.

I made the comment, if Joe Biden came in, he essentially might win by re-introducing the “It’s Morning in America” political advertisement (created by my old advertising firm Hal Rhiney and Associates).
The other thought was where is the young, handsome, charismatic John F. Kennedy, who could be the VP?  Could it be Martin O’Malley of Maryland, or prior San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, or other?  Time will tell.

Trump and Jeb

Jeb Bush seems to be imploding by the emptiness of his personality, and the pressures of being revealed as CIA NOC agent in the 80’s, responsible for creating banks in South America used for drug cartels to money-launder their cocaine profits for CIA black budget operations (which is father George H.W. Bush managed as Director of CIA, then Vice President).   

This has been written about exhaustively by people smart and courageous enough to do the research, and can also be confirmed by the Department of Justice itself which has been teaching a class to prisoners entitled “DEEP BLACK”, written by David Guyatt, about the 50 year history of the CIA-Mossad connection to the Drug Markets, racketeering and assassination conspiracies, and betrayal of the American people.  Imagine the irony of that, but it’s true - I was there and took the class and have the syllabus filed as an exhibit in the Florida Courts.   

You might now be asking, with outrage furrowing your brow, “Why in the world would the Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons be teaching a class like that to prisoners?”  I would answer, perhaps they are looking to recruit, or sow the seeds of national outrage and rebellion so that the JADE HELM police state is all the more justified?  But that’s another discussion.  Let’s finish the Jeb part by saying simply Jeb’s star seems to be falling, and Rand Paul is not quite replacing his spot—sad to say, since Rand Paul seemingly is a champion of Constitutional rights and freedoms, which is the only firewall which protects us from the tyranny of the police state. 

Conclusion

I also said, I think Americans honestly may be looking to decompress, take a break for a while, and retreat into the fog of America's early national character policy of "non-interventionism" (as George Washington strongly recommended) to “lick their wounds” inflicted upon them by the recent racial flare ups encouraged by Obama’s repeated accusations (if not slander) of bigotry by white, upper class, small business professionals, or mentally medicated white-kids.  Interesting how the recent murder of two news journalists by a disgruntled black employee was not worthy of Obama’s compassion.

Additionally, Americans are yearning to escape the slavery of 15 years of war, Middle East upheaval, and police-state surveillance threats engineered by the Bush-Cheney false flag crusade into the Middle East at the behest of Ehud Barack, Bibi Netanyahu, and a cabal of neoconservative, Zionist fascists. 

And despite the recently published National military strategy by Martin Dempsey and the war hawk cowards on Capitol Hill, Americans are also trying to wipe off from their political shoes the pungently nauseating stench of the neoconservative belief that every nation that competes with America, is an enemy to be targeted with American soft-power, diplomatic pressure/extortion, economic sanctions and ostracism, and asymmetric black flag information operations - which incidentally I know well, since I did it for a living in the military and for Booz Allen Hamilton, along with Edward Snowden.

Time will tell which man, and Americans will eventually decide whether Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump or other person, is the best leader to help Americans better define themselves, and make policies that protect this definition from the poison of neocon hegemonic hysteria.  Let us demand that that leader will reflect our most noble dreams and character, rather than our most depraved lusts and fears.

Related ARTICLES

Yucca Mountain – Sacred Native Land & Proposed Nuclear Waste Dump

Yucca Mountain – Sacred Native Land & Proposed Nuclear Waste Dump

Once again, the federal government proves itself as trustworthy as a two-headed rattler on methamphetamine.
Why would AIPAC dump Trump?

Why would AIPAC dump Trump?

It is possible that AIPAC was worried that Trump wouldn’t be pro-Israel enough, after last week’s gaffe when Trump said he would be “neutral” between Israel and the Palestinians.

08 April 2016

by Max J. Schindler

Thank You Mr. Trump: You have Stripped the Cloak of “Conservatism” from the GOP Establishment

Thank You Mr. Trump: You have Stripped the Cloak of “Conservatism” from the GOP Establishment

Please understand that this is NOT like any presidential election we have seen in this country...maybe since 1860.

02 April 2016

by Chuck Baldwin

POPULAR ARTICLES

Not Found

OPINION

Vladimir Golstein

Vladimir Golstein

The Danderous Acceptance of Donald Trump

James N. Green

James N. Green

Politics in Brazil: Fasten Your Seat Belts!

Barbara H. Peterson

Barbara H. Peterson

Health officials confirm spread of Zika virus through sexual contact in Texas, first in US

Danny Haiphong

Danny Haiphong

WHY IS OTTO(SUPER)MAN ERDOGAN LOSING HIS CHARISMA?

Miray Aslan

Miray Aslan

How relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran reached a breaking point

Navid Nasr

Navid Nasr

How relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran reached a breaking point

Writers

chief editor

Joshua Tartakovsky

Analysis should serve as a method to better understand our world, not to obscure it.

Materials: 42

Specialization: Israel and the Middle East, US politics

Materials: 7

Specialization: Balkans, NATO and EU policies, Strategic communications

Materials: 3

Specialization: Foreign politics, Immigration, Human rights.

Materials: 2

Specialization: Political Science, Social Anthropology

Materials: 3

Specialization: Eastern Europe

Materials: 14

Specialization: Industrial Safety, Corporations

Materials: 12

Specialization: Eastern Europe, Labor movement

Materials: 3

Specialization: American history, way of life, and principles

Danielle Ryan

Ireland

Materials: 10

Specialization: US foreign policy, US-Russia relations and media bias

Materials: 20

Specialization: War, Racism, Capitalist exploitation, Civil rights

Materials: 8

Specialization: Modern Japanese History, Modern Chinese History, Military History, History of Counterinsurgency, History of Disobedience, Dynamics of Atrocities in Wartime

Dovid Katz

Lithuania

Materials: 3

Specialization: Holocaust Revisionism and Geopolitics; East European Far Right & Human Rights; Yiddish Studies & Litvak Culture

Materials: 20

Specialization: History, Catalunya, Spain, Geopolitics, Nationalism in Europe, Islamization, Immigration

Materials: 5

Materials: 3

Specialization: migration, international relations

Materials: 1

Specialization: Syria, US Foreign policy and strategies, BRICS/SCO

Materials: 19

Specialization: Balkans, Yugoslavia

Materials: 10

Specialization: Jihadist Groups, Islamic Terrorism, Global Security

Materials: 4

Specialization: Geopolitics

Materials: 4

Specialization: Media and government relations

Materials: 2

Specialization: Latin America, Brazil

Jay Watts

Canada

Materials: 2

Specialization: History, Marxism-Leninism, Imperialism, Anti-imperialism.

Materials: 2

Specialization: International Relations, Sociology, Geostrategy

Materials: 1

Specialization: civil rights

Lionel Baland

Belgium

Materials: 22

Specialization: Euroscepticism, Patriotic parties of Europe

Maram Susli

Australia

Materials: 3

Specialization: Geopolitics

Materials: 2

Specialization: Civil rights, Racism, US politics

Materials: 1

Specialization: geopolitics, economics

Max J. Schindler

Palestine-Israel

Materials: 9

Specialization: Politics

Miray Aslan

Turkey

Materials: 12

Specialization: Media, Politics

Materials: 5

Specialization: Politics, International relations

Navid Nasr

Croatia

Materials: 13

Specialization: Global security, Politics

Materials: 9

Specialization: Development of European Union, Non-governmental organizations, Politics and economics in Baltic States

Materials: 9

Specialization: Greece, Crisis of the US hegemony; Israel / Occupied Palestine, Oppression of Black people in the US

Materials: 4

Specialization: geopolitics, Russia, USSR

Pedro Marin

Brazil

Materials: 17

Specialization: Latin America, Ukraine, North Korea

Materials: 13

Specialization: Sustainable development, International relations, Comparative European politics, European integration, Eastern European politics and EU-Russia relations

Materials: 8

Specialization: Politics

Materials: 16

Specialization: Counterterrorist Finance

Seyit Aldogan

Greece

Materials: 3

Specialization: ISIS, Middle East, Globalization, Migrant crisis

Materials: 1

Specialization: Head of "Srebrenica Historical Project"

Materials: 3

Specialization: Economy, Social politics

Stevan Gajic

Serbia

Materials: 1

Specialization: Full time researcher at the Institute for European Studies

Materials: 5

Specialization: Geopolitics, Geoeconomics

Materials: 2

Specialization: Civil rights

Tobias Nase

Germany

Materials: 8

Specialization: Syria, US Foreign policy, Ukraine

Valerijus Simulik

Lithuania

Materials: 2

Specialization: Politics and economics in Baltic States, education and science, non - governmental organizations, globalization and EU

Van Gelis

Greece

Materials: 17

Specialization: Middle East

Materials: 1

Specialization: Kosovo, Serbia, Belgrad bombing

Materials: 5

Specialization: international relations, Russia

toTop