A NEWSLETTER FROM DAVID CORN

Trump Loses a Battle in His Long War on Reality

By David Corn September 30, 2023

Donald Trump campaigning in Summerville, South Carolina, on September 25, 2023. Artie Walker Jr./AP

Almost two decades ago, during the second year of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney’s misbegotten war in Iraq, there was a media hubbub when an unidentified White House aide told a writer for the New York Times Magazine that the Bush-Cheney gang could create its own reality. Deriding what he called the “reality-based community," this administration official said, “We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

This person seemed to suggest that truth—actual facts—did not matter to the powerful. They could be negated by might and force of will. Leaders of strength could dictate reality and impose what years later would be called “alternative facts.” This much-commented-upon remark was widely read as a sign of the immense arrogance and hubris of the Bush-Cheney crowd: We control how the world is perceived.

This episode came to mind as I read the ruling issued this week by New York Judge Arthur Engoron, who pronounced that Donald Trump had committed fraud for years by massively overvaluing his properties and assets and who ordered several of Trump’s businesses removed from Trump’s control. This was a major blow to Trump’s corporate and real estate empire. It was also a stunning defeat for Trump in his decades-long war on reality.

Like the Bush-Cheney aide, Trump for most of his life has acted as if the truth means nothing and he can concoct his own convenient reality. He has done this through deception, bullshit, subterfuge, and never-ending image spinning. That is, through unrelenting fraud.

It would take an entire book—and it has—to trace Trump’s life of fraud. His first major deal in Manhattan—buying and rehabbing the Commodore Hotel next to Grand Central station in 1975—was predicated on a fraud. (To seal the deal with New York City, he falsely declared he had signed an option with the bankrupt Penn Central to buy the hotel, and he sent city officials a phony option agreement that was unsigned.) During the 1990s he engaged in shady tax schemes that included fraud to expand the fortune he received from his parents. Trump University was a fraud. His foundation was a scam. His Trump Organization was found to have run a tax fraud. On November 4, 2020, he fraudulently claimed victory. And, of course, he is a relentless liar who lies about…everything.

Trump appears to believe that he can say whatever he wants—whatever is best for him—and forge those falsehoods into a fake truth. (This is why he has waged a campaign against the media, calling it “fake news.” He wants to delegitimize the institution that can challenge his crap.) For him, everything is a sales pitch. He doesn’t bend to reality; reality bends to him and his desires and falsehoods. And he’s gotten away with this. He has built a life of glitz and wealth. He became a TV star (on a fake reality show). He was elected president. It’s been one long con, with Trump repeatedly triumphing in the battle against reality.

Joe Biden put a stop to that in 2020. And now so has Judge Engoron. His ruling repeatedly says to Trump: Just because you say something is so doesn’t make it so. Much of it describes how Trump brazenly lied and declared specific properties to be much more valuable than they were to secure loans and deals. Engoron over and over states that Trump’s assertions are detached from reality and that Trump does not possess the power to define what is real or not. For instance, he raps Trump for insisting he can estimate the value of his personal brand to be whatever he wants it to be. Nope, Engoron says. You can’t BS that way.

In Trump’s world, Engoron wrote, “rent regulated apartments are worth the same as unregulated apartments; restricted land is worth the same as unrestricted land…and square footage [is] subjective. That is a fantasy world, not the real world.”

The judge is referring to certain real estate calculations. Here’s a good example. Engoron points out that the Trump Tower three-floor apartment in which Trump has resided is 10,996 square feet but Trump claimed it was 30,000 square feet, which resulted in an overvaluation between $114 million and $207 million. Trump’s lawyers argued that “the calculation of square footage is a subjective process.” The judge rejects this relativism: “Well, yes, perhaps, if the area is rounded or oddly shaped, it is possible measurements of square footage could come to slightly differing results due to user error. Good-faith measurements could vary as much as 10-20%, not 200%. A discrepancy of this order of magnitude, by a real-estate developer sizing up his own living space of decades, can only be considered fraud.” Math is math.

Engoron’s historic ruling, which presumably will be appealed, focuses only on the real estate–related Trump falsehoods brought to light by the investigation mounted by New York Attorney General Letitia James and the civil lawsuit she filed. But it addresses the essence of Trump: his reliance on fraud. The judge is telling him, No, you don’t get to shape reality with your lies.

Authoritarians and fascists need to control reality. The Soviets airbrushed out-of-favor officials from photographs. Vladimir Putin’s propaganda machine pumps out lies about the Ukrainian war to the Russian public. China, North Korea, and Cuba censor the internet. In his novel 1984, George Orwell presented a simple example:

In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy… For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?

For decades, Trump has been telling people that two plus two equals five. That is literally what he did in his business, albeit with much bigger numbers, according to Engoron. The judge’s ruling aims to put a stop to that and punish Trump harshly for his lies. The bigger question is whether the American citizenry will do the same.

Got anything to say about this item—or anything else? Email me at ourland@motherjones.com.

Wanna Hear Something Funny?

Fat-cat Republican donors who don’t fancy Donald Trump—he’s a loser!—have been looking for another presidential candidate to finance, one who is not yet in the race, as none of the current non-Trump GOP contenders have been able to break away from the pack and demonstrate an ability to surpass Trump. So, reports CBS News’ Robert Costa, they’ve come up with Plan B. Or is it Plan C (after Ron DeSantis disappointed them), or Plan D (after Tim Scott disappointed them), or Plan E (after Nikki Haley disappointed them)? Whatever. The new plan is—wait for it—Glenn Youngkin, the Republican governor of Virginia.

According to Costa:

Some of the biggest Republican donors in the country will converge next month at the historic Cavalier Hotel in Virginia Beach for a two-day meeting to rally behind Gov. Glenn Youngkin. The closed gathering, named the “Red Vest Retreat” after the fleece Youngkin wore during his 2021 campaign, will begin Oct. 17 and be focused, officially, on the Republican effort to win full control of the General Assembly in Virginia’s upcoming elections. But unofficially, several donors tell me, it will be an opportunity for them to try to push, if not shove, Youngkin into the Republican presidential race.

Let me know when you’re done laughing, and I’ll proceed.

Okay, caught your breath? Here’s why this is a dumb idea. If these moneybags manage to coax Youngkin into running, Trump will pummel “Glenn Dumbkin”—or whatever he will call him—while Youngkin’s wealthy patrons spend millions to introduce him to GOP voters who have never heard of the guy. Moreover, Youngkin will only further divide the non-Trump vote in the Republican primary. It’s unlikely that DeSantis and the others will leave the race because Youngkin, a newcomer to the national spotlight, enters the fray. They all could end up in single digits.

Is there any reason to believe Youngkin could peel Republican voters away from Trump more so than DeSantis, Haley, or Scott? And consider the calendar. There won’t be much time for Youngkin to prove himself. The Iowa caucuses are scheduled for January 15. New Hampshire will presumably come soon after that. (The date of the Granite State’s primary has not yet been set.) There will be a few states following that, but Super Tuesday hits on March 5, and if Trump does well then, the race will likely be over. This leaves little time for a late entrant to catch fire in the first states and surprise Trump in those early March contests.

These GOP donors want a white knight to rescue them from Trump. They’re playing a fantasy game.

Watch This Video

I’m not going to do anything to set this up. Give it a look now:

Whoa. Right? The video was created by Sandy Hook Promise, a gun-violence prevention group founded by parents and other survivors in the aftermath of the elementary school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012. As my colleague Mark Follman, the author of Trigger Points, a book about preventing mass shootings through behavioral threat assessment, reports,

For years, Sandy Hook Promise has helped build violence prevention efforts around the country through its “Know the Signs” programs, conducting trainings for school systems and communities that focus on warning signs and crisis intervention. The new PSA takes aim at a crucial obstacle known as the “bystander” problem. The history of school shootings is rife with ominous communications from perpetrators that were misconstrued or disregarded by peers…

Previous PSAs from Sandy Hook Promise have gone viral and won Emmys, spotlighting a range of red flags that signal opportunity for intervention. The group’s 2016 video titled “Evan,” which drew more than 155 million views in the first three weeks after it launched, smartly depicted how most people will overlook a troubled, isolated kid—in this case one who researches guns online, mimics shooting his teacher behind her back, and behaves in other worrisome ways. The idea for “Just Joking” came from the realization that the messaging needed to expand, says Nicole Hockley, cofounder and CEO of the group, whose son Dylan was among the first-graders killed in the Sandy Hook tragedy. “We felt it was time to shift from just talking about how to recognize a warning sign and also focus on, ‘What do you do once you recognize it?’”

I hope this video receives plenty of attention. Pass it on.

Dumbass Comment of the Week

Certainly, one of the biggest lies of the week came from Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the chair of the House Oversight Committee. At the start of the first hearing for the Republican’s bogus impeachment crusade against President Joe Biden, Comer proclaimed that his investigation has “uncovered a mountain of evidence revealing how Joe Biden abused his public office for his family’s financial gain.” Yet Jonathan Turley, the Fox-friendly law professor who was the lead GOP witness, said there was so far no such evidence of Biden wrongdoing to support articles of impeachment: “I do not believe that the evidence currently meets the standard of a high crime and misdemeanor needed for an article of impeachment.” He did say there was enough smoke to warrant a House investigation of a possible link between Biden and Hunter Biden’s sketchy business dealings, but his testimony blew apart Comer’s assertion that the Rs already possessed “a mountain of evidence” implicating the president.

Was Comer’s statement stupid? Perhaps so because it was so easily debunked. But it played well on Fox.

Let’s give an honorable mention to Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.), the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, who was made to look a fool by a reporter who questioned the significance of new revelations in the Biden investigation that Smith touted as bombshells.

Moving on, far-right talk-show host Mark Levin, bemoaning the indictments of Donald Trump, huffed, “Unbelievable. America has never experienced this kind of Stalinism that Trump is contending with. It’s unconscionable."

Trump’s indictments hardly compare to the mass murder, forced labor, and famine that killed millions during Stalin’s reign of terror. Levin really needs to read a history book.

In the running this week was also former Trump aide Peter Navarro, recently convicted on contempt of Congress charges. He reached deep into the well of misogyny while slamming Cassidy Hutchinson, the former Trump White House aide who testified to the January 6 committee and who has a new book out:

Why would White House men - prez, vp, senior aide - EVER hire a woman after watching book pimps Cassiday Hutchinson, Alyssa Farah, Stephanie Grisham, Kayleigh McEnany, Olivia Troye throw mud @realDonaldTrump @RudyGiuliani et. al. Pimp ladies be giving real MAGA WOMEN bad name

One might as easily ask whether any Republican woman should ever support a MAGA man? These women all put their faith in Trump only to learn he was a charlatan. Let’s hope this doesn’t affect how they view all people with XY chromosomes.

There were, of course, many idiotic comments from Republicans trying to blame the Democrats for the looming GOP-engineered government shutdown. The judges refused to review them. And they cried for mercy regarding the Republican presidential debate held this week, though they agreed that former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie deserves special mention for the lack of class he displayed regarding Biden and the first lady: “When you have the president of the United States sleeping with a member of the teachers union, there is no chance that you can take the stranglehold away from the teachers union every day.”

In yet another highly competitive week, an old-favorite rose above the rest: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. She hysterically claimed, “There is massive human trafficking in Ukraine. This is one of the most corrupt countries in the world... It's a known country for child organ trafficking."

This was part of the disinformation campaign she has waged to block US military assistance to Ukraine. The comment was no spontaneous slip of the lip. Earlier in the week, she told Trump fanboy Charlie Kirk, "Ukraine is one of the worst countries on the Earth for child sex trafficking and they're harvesting children's organs over there."

These remarks are straight out of Russian propaganda and dangerous calumny. For helping Vladmir Putin and reminding us of her past as a QAnon supporter, Greene is our winner.

The Mailbag

In a recent issue, I wrote a piece questioning whether the media can appropriately cover the House GOP’s impeachment drive without amplifying unsubstantiated claims about President Joe Biden. I asked, “So how does the media cover a (so far) baseless impeachment day by day without aiding and abetting the weaponizers?” In response, Michelle Passarelli wrote in with a suggestion and took me to task:

“So how does the media cover a (so far) baseless impeachment day by day without aiding and abetting the weaponizers?” The media need to begin every story of this “impeachment inquiry” with two or three paragraphs explaining that the way the Republicans are pursuing this baseless inquiry is not how it is done at all. Also, media must not fall prey (again) to hedging their bets. They know this “investigation” is bogus. No need to cover their butts with phrases like “so far.” Expose it for what it is. Let Fox News breathlessly report it.

Journalists don’t like to repeat themselves. News is supposed to be new. That’s why it is not likely they will start every story on impeachment the same way—though there certainly is room in each article for context that casts the impeachment effort as lacking evidence. As for me, I hedged because I believe that Hunter Biden was indeed operating a sleazy influence-peddling scheme. I see no evidence that Joe Biden was a part of it or benefitted from it. But I recognize the theoretical possibility that things could get messier for the president. The House Republicans should have continued their investigation of Hunter without irresponsibly launching an impeachment inquiry. Then again, that’s like saying scorpions shouldn’t sting.

Alfred Higgins responded to my observations about Mitt Romney’s recent pseudo-confession:

Thanks again for your astute insights and commentary on Romney’s pity party in the Atlantic. An enabler by any other name is still an enabler.

Readers had strong opinions about the issue on Cornel West, who is running for president as a Green Party candidate and who could end up being a spoiler who helps Trump.

Norman Watkins emailed:

Cornel West is better than you say...Deep cuts in the US military—that is an idea the Democrats should rally around. Separate the ideas from the man and say that Dems should stop leaning ever rightward. Otherwise Social Security and Medicare will get cut.

My focus was not on West’s policy prescriptions—many are laudable—but his potential impact on the general election. He could be next year’s Jill Stein or Ralph Nader and draw enough votes from Biden, the likely Democratic nominee, to make a difference in favor of Trump.

Elizabeth Richards got this:

Primaries are the time to make one's statement. General elections are the time to be serious as a heart attack.

That is especially true, if the general election might conclude with victory for an authoritarian who threatens American democracy.

Paul Goode agreed with this take and had a harsh view of West and his supporters:

These people are delusional. Exhibit A for why I left the left. [In 2000] Nader was also the difference in New Hampshire, which also swung the election to Bush.

When we think about Nader and the 2000 presidential election, we often focus on his obvious impact in Florida, where George W. Bush beat Al Gore by 537 votes and Nader bagged 97,488 votes. In the Granite State, Bush gathered 7,211 more votes than Gore, and Nader pulled 22,198 votes. Without Nader on the ballot, would enough of his voters have backed Gore to make up that small difference? Perhaps. And if Gore had won New Hampshire—whatever happened in Florida—he would have become president. In that case, there might have been no Iraq War. West and his allies ought to keep that in mind.

Denny Clancy emailed:

I know that this is a pipe dream, but I wish that we could get the citizens and their representatives to move to the 50-percent rule for presidential elections. I know that we would have to get rid of the Electoral College first. I think that if the citizens saw that moving to the 50-percent threshold would be an opening for other parties and ideas. If no one reaches 50 percent, the top two square off one month from the day (thereabouts). I do not rule out the idea of rank choices voting as well. Baby steps. Doing this would eliminate the constant fear of the damage that third- and fourth-party involvement brings. I do not know the path, but I do think it would be great for democracy.

We certainly could use some major democratic reforms. This is a good idea. Yet noting that “we would have to get rid of the Electoral College first” is akin to saying we should go paragliding but first we must climb Mt. Everest. Abolishing the Electoral College is a necessary reform—and a heavy lift.

MoxieCam™

“Moxie, don’t you see the sign?”

“Yes, but on the other side it didn’t say nothing.”

“Very funny. I get the reference.”

“Besides, you keep forgetting. I can’t read.”

Read Recent Issues of Our Land

September 27, 2023: Donald Trump, stochastic terrorist; Joan Osborne’s regrets; Invasion’s slow pace; and more.

September 23, 2023: Joe Biden and Saudi Arabia: what the heck?; a killer attack ad for abortion rights; an apology for Chile; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Rep. Victoria Spartz); the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

September 19, 2023: The threat of Cornel West; Nils Lofgren sings about truth; Gus Russo deconstructs the latest JFK assassination revelation (or is it?); and more.

September 16, 2023: Can the media meet the challenge of the GOP’s bogus impeachment?; why Mitt Romney should read American Psychosis; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Tim Gurner); the Mailbag: MoxieCam™; and more.

September 12, 2023: The right-wing authoritarian threat beyond Trump (Project 2025); American Psychosis and C-SPAN; Barbie and the corporate exploitation of exploitation; the Rolling Stones’ stereotypical “Angry”; and more.

September 9, 2023: A story too immense (Rudy Giuliani and Russia)?; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Tucker Carlson); the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

September 6, 2023: One of the best books I’ve ever read; the Mailbag; Full Circle offers a fascinating neo-noir trip; and more.

September 1, 2023: Can Donald Trump rally be barred from the 2024 ballot?; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Tucker Carlson): the Mailbag; Jade Bird and LP belt it out (separately); and more.

August 26, 2023: The bottomless cynicism of Tucker Carlson; the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

Got suggestions, comments, complaints, tips related to any of the above, or anything else? Email me at ourland@motherjones.com.

This message was sent to example@example.com. To change the messages you receive from us, you can edit your email preferences or unsubscribe from all mailings.