Editorial: Is Bernie Sanders Trump’s Alter-Ego?

In recent weeks, many Americans have posited that Bernie Sanders is the liberal alter ego of Donald Trump. Both are loud and irascible, and both talk of big (some would say “grandiose”) ideas. They both have cult-like followers, and they are both Washington outsiders. Different, yet alike.

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank writes, …”Their styles are similar: shouting and unsmiling, anti-establishment and anti-media, absolutely convinced of their own correctness, attacking boogeymen (the “1 percent” and CEOs in Sanders’s case, instead of immigrants and minorities), offering impractical promises with vague details, lacking nuance and nostalgic for the past.”

Sanders, who calls himself a Democratic Socialist, is the political opposite of Donald Trump, who has hitched his wagon to an ultraconservative evangelical base. Yet, for their respective supporters, each holds the promise of a similar type of revolution; one that will “explode the status quo.”

Trump brags of leading “a movement the likes of which the world has never seen.”

Sanders talks of a revolution that will result from “the most unprecedented campaign in the modern history of this country.”

And though each man’s base interprets “hope” differently, both men have a message that appeals to the hope of a similar mindset, at least on the surface: Blue collar workers, mostly white, who are disillusioned, tired of falling through the cracks, and weary of a system they think is rigged against them. Their base supporters see these figures, older white men though they are, as outsiders who have their backs, and who came to challenge the system and set it right. (“Help me, Obi-wan Kenobi. You’re my only hope.”)

Both have bases that include extremist supporters who are loud, often abrasive, fanatical, and unconditionally loyal to their respective movements in similar ways. Black-and-white absolutes define and categorize the world into good people and bad people; smart people and stupid people. Villains and victims.

“…Sanders is a populist of the left as surely as Trump is a populist of the right, with a familiar distaste for compromise and a comparable appeal to Americans outraged or disgusted by politics as usual and by the usual politicians,” writes Frank Bruni of the New York Times.

Sanders offers hope in “Medicare for All” while Trump ridicules the idea, signing legislation that gives financial protections to the multi-million-dollar commercial health insurance industry. Where Sanders warns about climate change, Trump has rolled back environment-friendly legislation. Sanders refuses to take funding from Wall Street billionaires as Trump cozies up to them. Sanders wants stricter gun control laws, and Trump promises, “unlike the Democrats, we’ll never take your guns away!”

To say that Sanders and Trump are just opposite sides of the same coin, though, is to not consider a key difference between the two. Our president has bluffed and cheated his way through his presidency, and through his life, making up impressive statistics about his accomplishments, putting himself above the law (and tweeting about it), petulantly supporting corrupt practices and people (such as his recent grants of clemency to 11 of his friends and associates who were all convicted of federal crimes), and practicing corruption himself (for which he was recently impeached).

For all of his bravado and bluster, Bernie Sanders, unlike Trump, is not a cheating businessman, a vindictive employer, a briber of porn actresses, or a sycophant of Putin. And for all of his pie-in-the sky ideas, Bernie Sanders, unlike “alter-ego” Trump, talks about his vision in terms of “you” and “we” and “us,” while alter-ego Trump seeks to magnify only “I” and “me.”

Can Bernie Sanders Defeat Trump? Jacobin’s Bhaskar Sunkara & The Atlantic’s David Frum Debate | Democracy Now! [2020-02-04]

BERNIE SANDERS to Trump: ‘You are a liar, you are a fraud’ | The Hill
[2020-02-18]

Bolton Willing to Testify; GOP Doesn’t Care, Continues with Trump Non-Defense

The U.S. presidential election is only 276 days away. Americans have no way of knowing how secure the ballot boxes will be. This is because as of Friday morning, January 31, it looks as if the Senate, during its impeachment trial, will acquit Donald J. Trump, who is accused of behavior that threatens the integrity of U.S. presidential elections.

The articles of impeachment against Trump are based on charges that Trump put pressure on Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelenskiy to open an investigation into Trump’s political rival, former vice president Joe Biden, and Biden’s son, Hunter, by withholding $391 million in already approved military aid.

The week started with revelations from the manuscript of former U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton’s upcoming book, The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir. According to The New York Times, the manuscript contains details of President Trump’s phone call with Zelenskiy. Bolton has said that Trump told him directly that he was placing a hold on the aid until Zelenskiy announced the investigation Trump requested.

During the earlier impeachment hearings that took place in the House, Bolton had not shown up for a requested deposition before the House Intelligence Committee. If the House issued him a subpoena, Bolton said, he would take the matter to court. In early January, however, Bolton said that he’d be willing to give testimony in the Senate impeachment trial, if requested.

The question and answer phase of the impeachment trial has taken place this week, with Senators submitting questions for either side (in lieu of questioning actual witnesses and without benefit of relevant documents), to be read aloud by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. The questions seemed largely aimed at restating the positions of those asking them, rather than discovering information.

Avoiding, or unable, to produce a substantial defense for the president, Trump’s defense team has turned instead to using distraction techniques, including focusing on such topics as Joe and Hunter Biden’s activities; the debunked myth that it was Ukraine, not Russia, who interfered with the 2016 election; and the “great economy under Trump.” Finally, they settled on the position that even if Trump did do what he’s accused of, he did nothing wrong, because he’s the president. Or, at the very least, he shouldn’t be impeached because it would be “too disruptive.”

Alan Dershowitz, a member of the Trump defense team, put forth an argument that many interpreted as saying that the law gives the president nearly unchallenged presidential power.

“If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment,” Dershowitz said.

But what politician doesn’t think that being elected is in the public interest? One can draw one’s own conclusions about how far a politician could go to get elected if he or she could do anything without being kept in check.

On Friday, the Senate will vote on whether to call witnesses. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer pointed out that the Trump defense team was making the case for calling witnesses with its argument that there was not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing to remove the president from office. And as of Thursday, it appeared that the defense had enough votes to block witnesses.

Republicans are united in their efforts to support Trump by blocking witnesses and documents pertinent to the trial, ostensibly to “wrap it up” quickly (“for the sake of the American people”).

Meanwhile, the White House has reviewed Bolton’s manuscript and issued a formal threat to Bolton in an effort to prevent him from publishing his book, saying that some of the information was classified at “top secret” level, could cause grave harm to national security, and “may not be published or otherwise disclosed without the deletion of this classified information.”

One has to wonder why the White House is scrambling to protect this information as a “security threat,” when the president, through his public actions, words, disclosures, and tweets, regularly threatens national security.

As expected, Trump has begun his Twitter attacks on Bolton’s credibility, integrity, and reputation. Among his most notable was this:

“For a guy who couldn’t get approved for the Ambassador to the U.N. years ago, couldn’t get approved for anything since, “begged” me for a non Senate approved job, which I gave him despite many saying “Don’t do it, sir,” takes the job, mistakenly says “Libyan Model” on T.V., and…

” ….many more mistakes of judgement, gets fired because frankly, if I listened to him, we would be in World War Six by now, and goes out and IMMEDIATELY writes a nasty & untrue book. All Classified National Security. Who would do this?”

Trump’s attacks are reminiscent of other attacks and threats he has made toward those he sees as having crossed him. These include former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, both of whom gave testimony during the House impeachment hearings; the whistleblower who first reported the troubling content of Trump’s call to Ukraine; former FBI director James Comey; and others.

If the Senate votes on Friday to hear witnesses, Trump has said he may try to invoke executive privilege to block Bolton from testifying. Legal experts, however, are saying that Trump may have undermined executive privilege with his tweets describing his conversations with Bolton regarding Ukraine.

Despite the fact that 75 percent of voters want the Senate to call witnesses, Republicans appear eager to eschew any new evidence that could change someone’s mind, and keep repeating, “Let the American people decide at the voting booths.” And this, we must be sure to do.

President Trump’s Impeachment Trial Has 16-Hour Q&A |
Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon [2020-01-30]

EXCLUSIVE: House Impeachment managers make their case on HillTV |
The Hill [2020-01-30]