Aardvark senses that the commentariat is slowly giving up its struggle to find “the method in Trump’s madness.” That’s like sending out a posse to round up all the unicorns in Texas.
Meanwhile, there is a brouhaha about Trump’s Superbowl interview comments on Putin. To go straight to the source—the Faux News Network:
In a special preview, Trump revealed his plans for dealing with Russian President Vladimir Putin
O’Reilly asked Trump whether he “respects” the former KGB agent:
“I do respect him, but I respect a lot of people,” Trump said, “That doesn’t mean I’m going to get along with him.”
Trump said he would appreciate any assistance from Russia in the fight against ISIS terrorists, adding that he would rather get along with the former Cold War-era foe than otherwise.
“But, [Putin] is a killer,” O’Reilly said.
“There are a lot of killers,” Trump responded, “We’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country’s so innocent?”
In response, leading Republican invertebrates denounced the comments as a denigration of American exceptionalism.
“He’s a thug,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said of Putin on Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “The Russians annexed Crimea, invaded Ukraine and messed around in our elections. No, I don’t think there’s any equivalency between the way the Russians conduct themselves and the way the United States does.”
Well, there is that, But putting the sacredness of American exceptionalism to one side, here is what Aardvark thinks. He thinks that Trump is delusional, and that he is remarkably candid about his delusions.
I believe that Trump would love nothing better than to kill some journalists and political opponents. Whether he will try to do it, I cannot say. I certainly hope not. But I think that in his delusional mind, Trump sincerely believes has moral justification to assassinate some people who, in his way of thinking, need killing.
Now I am neither a mind reader nor a clinical psychologist. Lacking those skills, I substitute the application of the Rational Fascist Test, or, What Would Mussolini Do? (You may, if you wish, substitute Machiavelli for Mussolini.)
Would a rational fascist be so candid about his hopes and intentions? No, he would not. In the present circumstances, the rational fascist would be much more subtle about his plans.
Or at least that is what I think. As we proceed day by day, let us continue to apply the Rational Fascist Test to try to learn whether there is a method in the madness, or just madness.