In the Bunker
Anyone happening to pass by the White House Friday night would have been treated to this sight: the exterior lights turned off. I have read that this is the first time these lights have been turned off at night since 1889*, even during World War II, which I would think posed a slightly greater threat to the President than a few hundred angry demonstrators. President Trump was also removed to a bunker described as deep beneath the White House, to protect him from the apparently overwhelming threat of being confronted with how Americans actually feel about his behavior. While we are delving into history, let me mention that the last time anyone went to the bunker for protection was during 9-11. Bush was out of town at the time, but Dick Cheney was taken to the bunker because there were still hijacked airplanes in the air, heading toward Washington. Too bad it didn't occur to the Secret Service to stake Cheney out on the lawn with a target on him, but still, that day there was a real threat to the White House, and not just a spasm of fear on the part of the Toughest He-Man Ever.
This sordid event occurred as we learned the following, as reported by Politico:
"Trump continued his effort to project strength..."
Ha ha. On his phone, from the basement.
"President Trump today derided the nation’s governors as “weak” and demanded tougher crackdowns on protesters. “Most of you are weak,” Trump said. “You have to arrest people...“You’ve got to arrest people, you have to track people, you have to put them in jail for 10 years and you’ll never see this stuff again,” said Trump. “We’re doing it in Washington, D.C. We’re going to do something that people haven’t seen before.”
Trump did not appear in public on Sunday and was not scheduled to so Monday either."
Put people in jail for ten years, for protesting against him. While hiding from them. Yes, that certainly is the country that Donald Trump would like to live in.
Anyway, I thought it would be interesting to see how the mainstream press is describing this unprecedented act of cowardice from a sitting President. Here's a sample:
Time: "Trump Took Refuge in White House Bunker"
The Guardian: "Trump fled to bunker"
Bloomberg: "Trump Taken to Bunker"
New York Times: "Trump Moves to Underground Bunker"
New York Post: "Trump hid in bunker"
CBS News: "Trump briefly taken to White House bunker"
Business Insider: "Trump sheltered in White House secure bunker"
Fox News: "Trump took shelter in White House bunker"
I just love the way the pathetic New York Times puts it: "Trump Moves to Underground Bunker"...attributing agency to Trump. I am sure the Guardian gets it closer: "Trump fled to bunker." A real range of takes there, from stating the thing in all its shameful cowardice, to trying to somehow apologize it away, with (as you would expect) the "liberal" New York Times providing the most cover.
Anyway, huddled in the basement in the dark, afraid to face his own people, hurling boasts about how tough he is on Twitter...I think this will always be my image of President Donald Trump.
*I saw this from a normally reliable source, but was unable to confirm it. If anyone can help me with this, I would appreciate it.
Comments
Yeah the female reporter who was hit with a rubber bullet and her cameraman who was bashed with a shield and punched. Then a baton was swung at them while they were trying to get out of the way. I don't want to appear too cynical but I think our government will do all it can to say "we're concerned about that" without actually upsetting anyone in power in Washington.
Also... we can't really say it's not okay to clobber OUR reporters without implying we think it's very bad what you are doing to yours. Because then we've walked into taking a stance on US domestic affairs... That's not tasty burger to serve a diplomat.
Our Prime Minister - whom I don't like very much but don't completely despise - has been convivial with Trump as we try to ride out this period of dire danger.
Some day in the future he may reflect on these days and reveal what else he was thinking.
He's actually quite religious.. our PM... he might be thinking, from 'faith', that he can be a calming voice to that maniac.
The current protest movement re George Floyd has had a mildly galvanising effect on the discussion around racially based inequities in Australia. "black" means something else here - the indigenous peoples that our ancestors supplanted and did violence to, and whom often still live in situations of disproportionate social challenge, often with issues regarding policing.
But apart from that... yes very concerned, along with much of the world.