Patterico's Pontifications

10/23/2024

John F. Kelly’s Disturbing Revelations About Donald Trump

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:05 am



[guest post by Dana]

John F. Kelly, a former Marine and then-President Trump’s longest serving chief of staff, was interviewed about Donald Trump by a New York Times writer. While his observations are not really surprising (after all, we’ve seen Trump in action for 9 years), having the very worst confirmed though, makes it all the more jarring. His revelations about the former president as seen behind closed doors, reveals that the disturbed individual who held the most powerful position in the world (and seeks to again), was (and is) disdainful toward the U.S. military, admires murderous dictators (including Hitler), wants a military that is loyal to him alone, and resents the limits on a president’s power.

Consider:

Kelly said that based on his experience, Trump met the definition of a “fascist.”

In response to a question about whether he thought Mr. Trump was a fascist, Mr. Kelly first read aloud a definition of fascism…“Well, looking at the definition of fascism: It’s a far-right authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy,” he said.

Mr. Kelly said that definition accurately described Mr. Trump.

“So certainly, in my experience, those are the kinds of things that he thinks would work better in terms of running America,” Mr. Kelly said.

He added: “Certainly the former president is in the far-right area, he’s certainly an authoritarian, admires people who are dictators — he has said that. So he certainly falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure.”

Kelly also discussed Trump’s frustration at his powers being limited:

“He certainly prefers the dictator approach to government,” Mr. Kelly said.

Mr. Trump “never accepted the fact that he wasn’t the most powerful man in the world — and by power, I mean an ability to do anything he wanted, anytime he wanted,” Mr. Kelly said.

Kelly revealed Trump’s criticism of the U.S. military, and his willingness to use them against his perceived domestic enemies:

Mr. Trump’s recent comments about using the military against what he called the “enemy within” were so dangerous, he said, that he felt he had to speak out…“And I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it’s a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it,” Mr. Kelly said.

Unbelievably, yet not:

Mr. Kelly confirmed previous reports that on more than one occasion Mr. Trump spoke positively of Hitler.

“He commented more than once that, ‘You know, Hitler did some good things, too,’” Mr. Kelly said Mr. Trump told him.

Moreover, Kelly discusses how he had to instruct the President of the United States that Hitler was not to be admired:

“First of all, you should never say that,” Mr. Kelly said that he told Mr. Trump. “But if you knew what Hitler was all about from the beginning to the end, everything he did was in support of his racist, fascist life, you know, the, you know, philosophy, so that nothing he did, you could argue, was good — it was certainly not done for the right reason.”

Dovetailing with the NYT report’s portion concerning Trump and Hitler, The Atlantic also reports that Trump wanted generals like Hitler’s:

“I need the kind of generals that Hitler had,” Trump said in a private conversation in the White House, according to two people who heard him say this. “People who were totally loyal to him, that follow orders.”

Kelly was compelled to provide Trump with a little history lesson regarding Hitler:

In their book, The Divider: Trump in the White House, Peter Baker and Susan Glasser reported that Trump asked John Kelly, his chief of staff at the time, “Why can’t you be like the German generals?” Trump, at various points, had grown frustrated with military officials he deemed disloyal and disobedient. (Throughout the course of his presidency, Trump referred to flag officers as “my generals.”) According to Baker and Glasser, Kelly explained to Trump that German generals “tried to kill Hitler three times and almost pulled it off.” This correction did not move Trump to reconsider his view: “No, no, no, they were totally loyal to him,” the president responded. [W]hen Trump raised the subject of “German generals,” Kelly responded by asking, “‘Do you mean Bismarck’s generals?’” He went on: “I mean, I knew he didn’t know who Bismarck was, or about the Franco-Prussian War. I said, ‘Do you mean the kaiser’s generals? Surely you can’t mean Hitler’s generals? And he said, ‘Yeah, yeah, Hitler’s generals.’ I explained to him that Rommel had to commit suicide after taking part in a plot against Hitler.” Kelly told me Trump was not acquainted with Rommel.

In the NYT interview, Kelly notes that Trump views personal loyalty to him outweighs loyalty to the Constitution, looks down on those who were disabled on the battlefield, and calls service members who were injured or killed “losers and suckers”.

But the greatest danger, I think, is Trump’s demand for loyalty to be toward him before the Constitution. In other words, he would like to see the removal of our nation’s ultimate guardrail. One just has to look around the world to see how destructive compelled loyalty to a fascist leader is, to a nation and its people. It’s therefore mind-boggling that there are voters who actually think this would be a good thing. Even if Trump is not successful at securing the ultimate loyalty, the mere fact that he wants it, demands it, and sees it as beneficial (TO HIM), should be a big enough red flag for voters to understand that he simply cannot be allowed to step foot in the Oval Office again. The danger he would present to our nation with this mindset must be considered un-American and unacceptable to the voters.

Kelly confirms that he is raising alarm bells now because the election is just two weeks away:

In many cases, I would agree with some of his policies,” he said, stressing that as a former military officer he was not endorsing any candidate. “But again, it’s a very dangerous thing to have the wrong person elected to high office.

Especially dangerous for a second time…

Trump reacted to Kelly’s comments tonight, posting on social media:

Thank you for your support against a total degenerate named John Kelly, who made up a story out of pure Trump Derangement Syndrome Hatred! This guy had two qualities, which don’t work well together. He was tough and dumb. The problem is his toughness morphed into weakness, because he became JELLO with time! The story about the Soldiers was A LIE, as are numerous other stories he told. Even though I shouldn’t be wasting my time with him, I always feel it’s necessary to hit back in pursuit of THE TRUTH. John Kelly is a LOWLIFE, and a bad General, whose advice in the White House I no longer sought, and told him to MOVE ON! His wife once told me, at Camp David, John admires you tremendously, and when he leaves the Military, he will only speak well of you. I said, Thank you!

–Dana

Kamala Harris: I Would Force Doctors to Perform Abortions

Filed under: General — JVW @ 8:10 am



[guest post by JVW]

Not only does she want to codify Roe into national law, she would compel health professionals to violate their own consciences in pursuit of untrammeled abortion rights:

Vice President Kamala Harris said Tuesday night she would reject religious exemptions for abortion as president, effectively forcing health-care providers to perform the medical procedure in violation of their moral conscience.

The Democratic presidential nominee has been adamant about passing a bill that would codify Roe v. Wade into law, despite the Supreme Court overturning that decision in 2022. In an interview with NBC News anchor Hallie Jackson, Harris indicated she would refuse to compromise with Republican lawmakers on the abortion legislation.

“I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body,” Harris said when asked if she would consider religious exemptions for abortion in the likelihood of a divided government.

Sure, the Harris campaign will very likely now start to quietly walk back their candidate’s loose language: of course we won’t force a health care provider to violate his or her conscience. And it is better than even money that the mainstream media will accept this correction and chalk it up to the Vice-President’s “misunderstanding” of the question. But as we freely acknowledge the rather authoritarian impulses of the GOP nominee for President and his penchant for discomforting statements with respect to civil rights, let’s also recognize that his opponent is in fact no better than he is on those matters.

Bake that cake. Kill that child.

– JVW


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0601 secs.