ACV Democratic News

Keeping In Touch with politics and other issues in Central Virginia .....The Virginia 22nd Senate District and The 6th Congressional District......Vote Democratic for a Better Future....Protect Your Benefits

Democratic Committee Meeting

Sunday, February 26, 2017

Trump's First 100 Lies

TRUMP's First 100 Lies



To say that President Donald Trump has a casual relationship with the truth would be a gross understatement.   He has repeatedly cited debunked conspiracy theories, pushed voter fraud myths, and embellished his record and accomplishments.   The barrage of falsehoods has been so furious that journalists have taken to issuing instant fact-checks during press conferences and calling out false statements during cable news broadcasts.

All presidents lie, but lying so brazenly and so frequently about even silly factoids like his golf game has put Trump in his own category.   His disregard for the truth is reflected in his top aides, who have inflated easily disproved figures like the attendance at his inauguration and even cited terror attacks that never happened.
 

ACV  Democratic News offers this list of 100 incidents of egregious falsehoods.   Still, it is likely the administration has made dozens of other misleading and exaggerated claims.

1.  White House press secretary Sean Spicer falsely claimed the crowd on the National Mall was “largest audience to ever witness an inauguration.” (Jan. 21)

2.  Trump falsely claimed that the crowd for his swearing-in stretched down the National Mall to the Washington Monument and totaled more than 1 million people. (Jan. 21)

3.  As Trump fondly recalled his Inauguration Day, he said it stopped raining “immediately” when he began his speech.   A light rain continued to fall throughout the address. (Jan. 21)

4.  During his speech at CIA headquarters, Trump claimed the media made up his feud with the agency.   In fact, he started it by comparing the intelligence community to “Nazi Germany.” (Jan. 21)

5.  During his speech at CIA headquarters, Trump repeated the claim that he “didn’t want to go into Iraq.”   He told Howard Stern in 2002 that he supported the Iraq War. (Jan. 21)

6.  During his speech at CIA headquarters, Trump said he had the “all-time record in the history of Time Magazine. … I’ve been on it for 15 times this year.”   Trump had been featured on the magazine a total of 11 times. (Jan. 21)

7.  Trump claimed that his inauguration drew 11 million more viewers than Barack Obama’s in 2013.   It didn’t, and viewership for Obama’s first inauguration, in 2009, was even higher. (Jan. 22) 

8.  Spicer said during his first press briefing that there has been a “dramatic expansion of the federal workforce in recent years.”   This is false. (Jan. 23)

9.  While pushing back against the notion of a rift between the CIA and Trump, Spicer claimed the president had received a “five-minute standing ovation” at the agency’s headquarters.   He did not.   The attendees were also never asked to sit down. (Jan. 23)

10.  Spicer claimed that “tens of millions of people” watched the inauguration online.   In fact, about 4.6 million did. (Jan. 23)

11.  Trump told CBN News that 84 percent Cuban-Americans voted for him.   It’s not clear where Trump got that number.   According to the Pew Research Center, 54 percent of Cuban-Americans in Florida voted for him. (Jan. 23)

12.  While meeting with congressional leaders, Trump repeated a debunked claim that he only lost the national popular vote because of widespread voter fraud. (Jan. 24)

13.  In remarks with business leaders at the White House, Trump said, “I’m a very big person when it comes to the environment.   I have received awards on the environment.”   There is no evidence that Trump has received such awards. (Jan. 24)

14.  In signing an executive memo ordering the construction of the Keystone pipeline, Trump said the project would create 28,000 construction jobs.   According to The Washington Post Fact Checker, the pipeline would create an estimated 16,000 jobs, most of which are not construction jobs. (Jan. 25)

15.  Spicer said in a press briefing that Trump received more electoral votes than any Republican since Ronald Reagan.   George H.W. Bush won 426 electoral votes in 1988, more than Trump’s 304. (Jan. 24)

16.  In remarks he gave at the Homeland Security Department, Trump said Immigration and Customs Enforcement and border patrol agents “unanimously endorsed me for president.”   That’s not true. (Jan. 25)

17.  Spicer said during a press briefing that a draft executive order on CIA prisons was not a “White House document.”   Citing three administration officials, The New York Times reported that the White House had circulated the draft order among national security staff members. (Jan. 25)

 
18.  In an interview with ABC, Trump again claimed he “had the biggest audience in the history of inaugural speeches.”   False. (Jan. 25)

 
19.  Trump claimed during an interview with ABC that the applause he received at CIA headquarters “was the biggest standing ovation since Peyton Manning had won the Super Bowl.” It wasn’t even a standing ovation. (Jan. 25)

20.  In an interview with ABC, Trump attacked the Affordable Care Act and said there are “millions of people that now aren’t insured anymore.” Twenty million people have gained health coverage because of the law so far.   The estimated 2 million people who did not qualify under the law received waivers that kept the plans going until the end of 2017. (Jan. 25)

21.  At the GOP retreat in Philadelphia, Trump claimed he and the president of Mexico “agreed” to cancel their scheduled meeting.   Enrique Peña Nieto said he had decided to cancel it. (Jan. 26)

22.  At the GOP retreat in Philadelphia, Trump said the national homicide rate was “horribly increasing.”   It is down significantly. (Jan. 26)

23.  On Twitter, Trump repeated his false claim that 3 million votes were illegal during the election. (Jan. 27)

24.  In an interview on “Good Morning America,” Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway said Tiffany Trump, the president’s daughter, had told her she was “not registered to vote in two states.”   A local election official confirmed to NBC News twice that the younger Trump indeed was. (Jan. 27)

25.  Trump said he predicted the so-called “Brexit” when he was in Scotland the day before the vote. He was actually there the day after the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. (Jan. 27)

 
26.  Trump claimed The New York Times lost subscribers “because their readers even like me.” The Times experienced a sharp uptick in subscribers after Election Day. (Jan. 27)

27.  Trump claimed two people were fatally shot in Chicago during Obama’s last speech as president. That didn’t happen. (Jan. 27)

 
28.  Trump claimed that under previous administrations, “if you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible.” In fact, almost as many Christian refugees were admitted to the U.S. as Muslim refugees in fiscal year 2016. (Jan. 27)

29.  Trump defended the swiftness of his immigration order on the grounds that terrorists would have rushed into the country if he had given the world a week’s notice. Even if terrorists wanted to infiltrate the refugee program or the visa program, they would have had to wait months or even years while being vetted to get into the country. (Jan. 30)

30.  The White House maintained that Trump’s immigration order did not apply to green card holders and that was “the guidance from the beginning.” Initially, the White House said the order did include green card holders. (Jan. 30)

31.  Trump said his immigration order was “similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.” Obama’s policy slowed resettlement of refugees from Iraq, but did not keep them from entering the country. Moreover, it flagged the seven countries included in Trump’s order as places the U.S. considered dangerous to visit. (Jan. 30)

 
32.  Spicer said that “by and large,” Trump has been “praised” for his statement commemorating the Holocaust. Every major Jewish organization, including the Republican Jewish Coalition, criticized it for omitting any specific references to the Jewish people or anti-Semitism. (Jan. 30)

33.  A Trump administration official called the implementation of Trump’s travel ban a “massive success story.” Not true ― young children, elderly people and U.S. green card holders were detained for hours. Some were deported upon landing in the U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) even criticized the rollout as “confusing.” (Jan. 30)

 
34.  Spicer equated White House adviser Steve Bannon’s appointment to the National Security Council Principals Committee with Obama adviser David Axelrod attending meetings pertaining to foreign policy. Axelrod, however, never sat on the Principals Committee. (Jan. 30)

35.  Spicer said people would have “flooded” into the country with advance notice of Trump’s immigration order. Not true. (Jan. 30)

 
36.  Spicer insisted that only 109 travelers were detained because of Trump’s immigration order. More than 1,000 legal permanent residents had to get waivers before entering the U.S. An estimated 90,000 people in total were affected by the ban. (Jan. 30)

37.  Trump tweeted the false claim that “only 109 people out of 325,000 were detained and held for questioning.” (Jan. 30)

38.  Trump took credit for cutting $600 million from the F-35 program. But Lockheed Martin already had planned for the cost reductions for the next generation fighter plane. (Jan. 31)

39.  Trump accused China of manipulating its currency by playing “the money market. They play the devaluation market, and we sit there like a bunch of dummies.” According to The Washington Post, the United States is no longer being hurt by China’s currency manipulation, and China is no longer devaluing its currency. (Jan. 31)

40.  In defending the GOP’s blockade of Merrick Garland, Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Spicer said no president had ever nominated a justice “so late” in his term. It previously happened three times. (Jan. 31)

41.  Spicer repeatedly insisted during a press conference that Trump’s executive order on immigration was “not a ban.” During a Q&A event the night before, however, Spicer himself referred to the order as a “ban.” So did the president. (Jan. 31)

 
42.  White House officials denied reports that Trump told Peña Nieto that U.S. forces would handle the “bad hombres down there” if the Mexican authorities don’t. It confirmed the conversation the next day, maintaining the remark was meant to be “lighthearted.” (Jan. 31)

43.  Trump claimed that Delta, protesters and the tears of Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) were to blame for the problems over his travel ban. In fact, his administration was widely considered to blame for problems associated with its rollout. (Jan. 31)

 
44.  Trump said the Obama administration “agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia.” The deal actually involved 1,250 refugees. (Feb. 1)

45.  Trump said the U.S. “has the most generous immigration system in the world.” Not really. (Feb. 2)

46.  Trump said the U.S. was giving Iran $150 billion for “nothing” under the Iranian nuclear deal. The money was already Iran’s to begin with, and the deal blocks Iran from building a nuclear bomb. (Feb. 2)

47.  Spicer called a U.S. raid in Yemen “very, very well thought out and executed effort” and described it as a “successful operation by all standards.” U.S. military officials told Reuters the operation was approved “without sufficient intelligence, ground support, or adequate backup preparations.” (Feb. 2)

48.  Spicer said that Iran had attacked a U.S. naval vessel, as part of his argument defending the administration’s bellicose announcement that Iran is “on notice.” In fact, a suspected Houthi rebel ship attacked a Saudi vessel. (Feb. 2)

49.  In his meeting with union leaders at the White House, Trump claimed he won union households. He actually only won white union households. (Feb. 2)

50.  Conway cited the “Bowling Green massacre” to defend Trump’s travel ban. It never happened. (Feb. 3)

51.  Conway said citing the nonexistent “Bowling Green massacre” to defend Trump’s immigration order was an accidental “slip.” But she had mentioned it twice prior to that interview. (Feb. 3)

 
52.  Trump approvingly shared a story on his official Facebook page which claimed that Kuwait issued a visa ban for five Muslim-majority countries. Kuwait issued a statement categorically denying it. (Feb. 3)

53.  Trump claimed people are “pouring in” after his immigration order was temporarily suspended. Travelers and refugees cannot simply rush into the U.S. without extensive and lengthy vetting. (Feb. 5)

54.  After a judge halted his immigration ban, Trump claimed that “anyone, even with bad intentions, can now come into the U.S.” Not true. (Feb. 5)

55.  Spicer said nationwide protests of Trump are not like protests the tea party held, and called them “a very paid AstroTurf-type movement.” Although Democrats have capitalized on the backlash against Trump by organizing, the massive rallies across dozens of cities across the country ―  which in some cases have been spontaneous ― suggests they are part of an organic phenomenon. (Feb. 6)

56.  During an interview with Fox News before the Super Bowl, Trump repeated his debunked claim of widespread voter fraud during the presidential election. There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Republican and Democratic state officials have said so, as have Trump’s own campaign attorneys. (Feb. 6)

57.  During an interview with Fox News before the Super Bowl, Trump repeated his false claim that he has “been against the war in Iraq from the beginning.” (Feb. 6)

58.  Conway said she would not appear on CNN’s “State of the Union” because of “family” reasons. CNN, however, said the White House offered Conway as an alternative to Vice President Mike Pence and that the network had “passed” because of concerns about her “credibility.” (Feb. 6)

59.  Spicer claimed CNN “retracted” its explanation of why it declined to take Conway for a Sunday show appearance. CNN said it never did so. (Feb. 6)

60.  Trump cited attacks in Boston, Paris, Orlando, Florida, and Nice, France, as examples of terrorism the media has not covered adequately. “In many cases, the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report it,” he said at CENTCOM. Those attacks garnered wall-to-wall television coverage, as well as thousands of news articles in print and online. (Feb. 6)

61.  The White House released a more expansive list of terrorist attacks it believed “did not receive adequate attention from Western media sources.” Again, the list includes attacks that were widely covered by the media. (Feb. 6)

62.  Trump said sanctuary cities “breed crime.” FBI data indicates that crime in sanctuary cities is generally lower than in nonsanctuary cities. (Feb. 6)

 
63.  Trump claimed The New York Times was “forced to apologize to its subscribers for the poor reporting it did on my election win.” The paper has not issued such an apology. (Feb. 6)

64.  Trump claimed the murder rate is the highest it’s been in 47 years. The murder rate rose 10.8 percent across the United States in 2015, but it’s far lower than it was 30 to 40 years ago. (Feb. 7)

65.  Spicer explained that the delay in repealing Obamacare was a result of the White House wanting to work with Congress. Unlike during the Obama administration, he asserted, the legislature ― not the White House ― was taking the lead on health care. Various congressional committees worked on drafting multiple versions of the bill that would become the Affordable Care Act ― a lengthy process that took over a year. (Feb. 7)

66.  Trump accused Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) of misrepresenting “what Judge Neil Gorsuch told him” in response to the president’s attacks against the judiciary. Gorsuch called Trump’s tweets attacking federal judges “demoralizing.” A spokesman for Gorsuch confirmed the judge’s remarks. (Feb. 9)

67.  Trump has repeatedly said he doesn’t watch CNN. But he had to in order to see and offer and opinion on the network’s interview with Blumenthal. (Feb. 9)

68.  Former national security adviser Michael Flynn has said that phone calls he made to Russia prior to Trump’s inauguration were not related to sanctions. According to a Washington Post report, however, Flynn held private discussions with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, before Trump took office, suggesting that sanctions against Moscow would be eased by the incoming administration. (Feb. 9)

69.  Trump took credit for Ford’s decision not to open an auto factory in Mexico and instead expand its Michigan plant. The company said Trump was not responsible for its decision. (Feb. 9)

70.  Trump told a room full of politicians that “thousands” of “illegal” voters had been driven into New Hampshire to cast ballots. There is no evidence of such a claim. (Feb. 11)

71.  During an interview with ABC’s “This Week,” White House senior policy aide Stephen Miller falsely said the “issue of busing voters into New Hampshire is widely known by anyone who’s worked in New Hampshire politics.” Again, not true. (Feb. 11)

72.  Miller cited the “astonishing” statistic that 14 percent of noncitizens are registered to vote. The study the stat is based on has been highly contested. (Feb. 11)

73.  Trump said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) was “cut off” on CNN for “using the term fake news the describe the network.” The senator was joking and he was not cut off. (Feb. 12)

74.  Trump accused the media of refusing to report on “big crowds of enthusiastic supporters lining the road” in Florida. There were a few supporters, but they were vastly outnumbered by hundreds of protesters. (Feb. 12)

 
75.  White House officials told reporters that Flynn decided on his own to resign. However, Spicer said during a press briefing that the president asked Flynn to resign. (Feb. 13)

76.  Trump denied in a January interview that he or anyone on his campaign had any contact with Russia prior to the election. However, The New York Times and CNN both reported that Trump campaign officials and associates “had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials” before Nov. 8. (Feb. 15)

77.  Spicer denied in a daily briefing that anyone on the Trump campaign had had any contact with Russian officials. (Feb. 15)

78.  Trump complained he “inherited a mess” upon being elected to office. The stock market is experiencing record highs, the economy is stable and growing, and unemployment is low. (Feb. 16)

 
79.  Trump disputed the notion that his administration is experiencing turmoil, telling reporters it is working like a “fine-tuned machine.” His poorly executed travel ban has been suspended by the courts, a Cabinet nominee was forced to withdraw his nomination, and Trump’s national security adviser resigned after less than four weeks on the job. (Feb. 16)

 
80.  Trump said his 306 Electoral College votes was the biggest electoral votes victory since Ronald Reagan. Obama got 332 votes in 2012. (Feb. 16)

81.  Trump said his first weeks in office “represented an unprecedented month of action.” Obama accomplished much more during his first weeks in office. (Feb. 16)

 
82.  Defending himself from charges of hypocrisy on the matter of leaks ― which he frequently celebrated when they pertained to his campaign opposition but now denounces ― Trump said that WikiLeaks does not publicize “classified information.” It does, often anonymously. (Feb. 16)

83.  Trump repeated his claim that Hillary Clinton gave 20 percent of American uranium to the Russians in a deal during her tenure as secretary of state. Not true. (Feb. 16)

84.  Trump said drugs are “becoming cheaper than a candy bar.” They are not. (Feb. 16)

85.  Trump said his administration had a “very smooth rollout of the travel ban.” His immigration caused chaos at the nation’s airports and has been suspended by the courts. (Feb. 16)

86.  Trump said the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is in “chaos” and “turmoil.” It is not. (Feb. 16)

87.  Flynn lied to FBI investigators in a Jan. 24 interview about whether he discussed sanctions with Russian officials prior to Trump’s inauguration, according to The Washington Post. (Feb. 16)

88.  Trump falsely suggested at a Florida rally that Sweden had suffered a terror attack the night before his speech. It had not, and Trump was likely referring to a Fox News segment on crime in Sweden. (Feb. 18)

89.  During his Florida rally, Trump repeated his false claim that the United States has already let in thousands of people who “there was no way to vet.” Refugees undergo the most rigorous vetting process of any immigrants admitted to the United States, often waiting upwards of two years to be cleared for entry. (Feb. 18)

90.  White House chief of staff Reince Priebus said in a “Fox News Sunday” interview that Trump “has accomplished more in the first 30 days than people can remember.” Obama accomplished much more during his first weeks in office. (Feb. 19)

91.  Trump said during his campaign that he would only play golf with heads of state and business leaders, not friends and celebrities like Obama did. Trump has golfed with world leaders like Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Most recently, however, he hit the links with golf pro Rory McIlroy, International Sports Management’s Nick Mullen and his friend Rich Levine. (Feb. 19)

 
92.  A White House spokesperson told reporters that Trump only played a “couple” of holes at his golf resort in Florida. A day later, as reports came out saying the president had played 18 holes with Mcllroy, the White House admitted he played “longer.” (Feb. 19)

93.  Trump said the media is “trying to say large scale immigration in Sweden is working out just beautifully. NOT!” Sweden’s crime rate has fallen in recent years, and experts there do not think its immigration policies are linked to crime. (Feb. 20)

 
94.  Spicer said Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) asked for a meeting with Trump at the White House. John Weaver, a former campaign aide of the governor, said the president asked for the meeting. (Feb. 21)

95.  Vice President Mike Pence called Obamacare a “job killer.” Overall, job growth has been steady since it was signed into law. And the number of unwilling part-time jobs has also gone down, contrary to GOP claims. (Feb. 22)

96.  Trump claimed that he negotiated $1 billion in savings to develop two new Boeing Co. jets to serve as the next Air Force One. The Air Force can’t account for that number. (Feb. 22)

97.  During a meeting with the nation’s CEOs at the White House, Trump claimed his new economic adviser Gary Cohn “paid $200 million in tax” to take a job at the White House. Cohn didn’t have to pay taxes, he had to sell more than $200 million of Goldman Sachs stock. (Feb. 23)

 
98.  Trump claimed there were “six blocks” worth of people waiting to get into the Conservative Political Action Conference to see him. People filled only  three overflow rooms. (Feb. 24)

99.  At CPAC, Trump said that Obamacare covers “very few people.” Nearly 20 million people have gotten health insurance under the law. (Feb. 24)

100.  At CPAC, Trump said companies like Intel were making business investments in the United States because of his election. The company planned their new investments before the election. (Feb. 24)


Just 36 days into the Trump Presidency, buckle up for the lies to come. 






Missing posters like the one depicted above appear all over the 6th District as voters search for Bob Goodlatte.

Sixth District Rep. Bob Goodlatte has declined an invitation to appear at a town hall meeting organized by a local grass-roots organization demanding a meeting with him next week.
Goodlatte, R-Roanoke County, was holding a scheduled telephone town hall with constituents Thursday evening, his spokeswoman, Beth Breeding, said. “Congressman Goodlatte’s staff notified the group earlier today that he is unable to attend,” Breeding said in an email Thursday.

Roanoke Indivisible, a local chapter of the national progressive organization Indivisible that has sprung to life in the wake of Donald Trump’s presidency, announced via Facebook a “People’s Town Hall for Bob Goodlatte” at 4:30 p.m. Feb. 22 at the Charles R. Hill Senior Center in Vinton.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte has not held a Town Hall with his constituents since 2013, so we are organizing one for him,” the event announcement reads.

The leader of Roanoke Indivisible could not be reached for comment Thursday.


Man holding cardboard cutout of Bob that his staff uses during meetings and for photos with voters.



Goodlatte holds telephone town halls as one of his means of communicating with constituents.   To sign up, use a form on the congressman’s website: https://goodlatte.house.gov/.   Those who are signed up are invited to subsequent calls.




Cardboard cutout of Bob posed before mikes as if he is answering questions.


 Rest assured Goodlatte appears in person when its time to collect the paycheck.

At this time Goodlatte is leading a Congressional Delegation that is overseas touring and testing golfing venues.   The date of return to the Congress and work is unknown.

Folks at a meeting Goodlatte couldn't make it to.




Constituents press Bob Goodlatte, Tom Garrett for town hall meetings 


While first-term Congressman Tom Garrett, who represents part of the Lynchburg and Roanoke areas, hosted his second online question-and-answer session this week, veteran Rep. Bob Goodlatte hasn’t responded to demands from constituents who want to meet him in person, according to an organizer.

Pressure on representatives to hold town hall meetings is rising since Republican President Donald Trump took office along with a GOP-controlled Congress, according to news reports nationally.   Some elected officials who have held such meetings have faced hostile crowds.

A national group called Indivisible, with chapters in Roanoke, Lynchburg, Charlottesville and Harrisonburg, has led part of the effort.   While the 6th District’s Goodlatte, R-Roanoke County, and 5th District’s Garrett, R-Buckingham, offer opportunities to communicate online or by phone, some constituents say those options act more as doors than windows.

Roanoke Indivisible claims Goodlatte has not scheduled an in-person town hall meeting since 2013.


 

So, “we did it for him,” reads a Facebook event announcing a town hall the group has scheduled in Vinton on Feb. 22.   Roanoke Indivisible has invited Goodlatte and his staff.

Goodlatte’s website, meanwhile, offers a sign-up form for constituents to participate in telephone town halls he holds.   Since 2012, Goodlatte has hosted 24 “town hall” meetings by telephone with nearly 189,000 constituents, an aide said in an email.

Besides the Roanoke Indivisible town hall invitation, at least two petitions circulating this week seek town hall-style meetings with Goodlatte.   About 100 people visited Goodlatte’s Lynchburg office Tuesday with Valentine’s Day cards protesting Trump’s and Goodlatte’s immigration policies as well delivering a 300-signature petition asking for a town hall meeting in Lynchburg, according to organizer Phil Stump.

An online petition out of Harrisonburg Indivisible requests Goodlatte hold a meeting by April 8 in Roanoke, Lynchburg or Harrisonburg, and had at least 380 signatures Tuesday evening.

Kala Melchiori, a James Madison University assistant professor of psychology, said she started the online petition after repeatedly contacting Goodlatte’s office about actions by the Trump administration and hearing nothing directly from her congressman.   Melchiori left messages with aides asking Goodlatte to appear in person, she said.

“I don’t know if he will ever respond to these requests.   It sounds like he hasn’t talked directly to his constituents in an open forum like this since 2013,” Melchiori said.   “It’s frustrating that he is our representative, yet the lines of communication seem to have a lot of barriers.”





In response to the online petition, spokeswoman Beth Breeding emailed a statement from Goodlatte.   “I meet regularly with groups or individuals who have requested appointments, attend community events, and correspond with constituents who have contacted my office via phone, email, postal mail, and social media,” Goodlatte said in the statement.   “In addition, I host telephone town hall calls that allow me to reach thousands of people at once and take questions from callers as they listen.   I appreciate the input of all of my constituents, and I am looking at their requests.”

Roanoke Indivisible members said they have made multiple trips to Goodlatte’s Roanoke office seeking a meeting with the congressman.

“We’re focused on convincing our representatives that even though they won these districts handily, that doesn’t mean they get to ignore their constituents that don’t agree with these maximalist policies,” said Ivonne Wallace Fuentes, founder of Roanoke Indivisible.   “We don’t believe there’s a sweeping mandate.”

The group’s mission is local and defensive, she said.

It’s working in partnership with two other grass-roots groups, Together We Will, which formed just after the election, and Strong Women Strong America, which organized the women’s march in Roanoke last month that drew an estimated 4,000 people.

Garrett, meanwhile, held his first Facebook Live town hall Monday night, answering questions compiled from social media posts, emails and phone calls.

The decision to host the live broadcasts did not arise from constituent pressure, he said Tuesday.

“We only started now because we are finally getting our legs under us and getting fully staffed up,” Garrett said via text.   “We have always been hands on.   Eight debates and 6,400 miles in one year on one car speak to that.”

Garrett anticipates hosting at least two live social media meetings per month, he texted Tuesday.   His Facebook page was to host another chat Wednesday night.

Garrett’s Facebook Live stream Monday drew participants from every locality in the district, he said.

Garrett expects to plan in-person meetings as he swings through the district, which is larger in size than New Jersey.   The summer will allow him more time in the 5th District, he said.





 Commentary: Donald Trump's constant lying threatens the American experiment 

 
"No man has the right to mislead others, who have less access to history, and less leisure to study it ... Thus substituting falsehood and deception for truthful evidence and fair argument."



— Abraham Lincoln, "Cooper Union Address," 1860



You may know me as an actor. I'm also a longtime supporter of election reform and opponent of partisanship. In 1999 I gave a talk at one of the last bipartisan congressional retreats, using what I had learned preparing to play Abraham Lincoln to warn against faction, partisanship's original name. The founders knew partisanship to be one of the few things powerful enough to destroy the great American democratic experiment. I had some great quotes. John Hume, a Nobel laureate for his work to bring peace in Northern Ireland, spoke before me. His experience made searing testimony. We did our best. It seems it didn't work.

Until 2008, when an effort called Unity08, led by Democrat Gerald Rafshoon and Republican Doug Bailey, to elect a bipartisan presidential ticket was defeated, I was a registered Independent. To vote for Barack Obama in the primary that year, I joined a party. Believing it to be the best use of what influence my career in show business might have, I've served, more or less quietly, for many years on the boards of Oceana and Refugees International. But working quietly doesn't feel like an option now. This feels like an all-hands-on-deck moment.


Yes, the word is lying — not negotiation, salesmanship, bluster, attention-getting, delusion, deception, braggadocio, exaggeration, bullying, alternative facts ...

The great issue of today is lying — constant lying in public. Lying is the ally of faction and, since President Donald Trump's rise to power, it is the greater danger. Yes, the word is lying — not negotiation, salesmanship, bluster, attention-getting, delusion, deception, braggadocio, exaggeration, bullying, alternative facts or any other euphemism. Once, President John F. Kennedy could say that our national problems were no longer ideological but technical. Lying on a grand scale has reversed that.

And it's hard to keep up. Trump has lied about climate change and the character and motives of refugees, about how asylum-seekers have been vetted in the past and how many have been able to enter the United States, about immigrants, and a long list of other matters. As with partisanship, the more lying there is, the worse it is. And Trump's alternative facts have meant nasty real-world consequences.

As lying comes easily to Trump, it should come first in every report about his administration. Trump doesn't lie about this and that, and he doesn't lie sometimes. He is a liar, a person who lies. This news should be reported everywhere.

Politicians have lied before, but this is not an old problem getting worse. Indeed, past presidents have sometimes paid dearly for the mere appearance of a lie. A man of great good character and a lifetime of public service, President George H.W. Bush said, "Read my lips," which was branded a lie, and he lost an election. Accusations of lying — "Lying Hillary" — tainted Hillary Clinton's run for president. President Bill Clinton told a lie in public and under oath and the scandal got him impeached. The impeachment gained some weight from the sound legal principle that a liar in one thing is likely to lie about other things. That principle should be applied to Trump.

By the frequency of his lying, Trump has revealed a truth we have avoided confronting: Like partisanship, regular and habitual lying is an existential threat to us, to our institutions, our memories, our understanding of now and of the future, to the great American democratic experiment, and to the planet. It blurs the truth, subverts trust, interferes with thought, and destroys clarity. It drives us to distraction.

It's impossible to overstate what is at stake. "I won," Trump says truly, following it up with lies about landslides, voter fraud and crowd size. Every American should be alarmed. It ought to be the lead in every article about him and his administration, no matter the subject. Lying at this level is a threat to the Republic.

Sam Waterston is a stage, film and television actor who serves on the board of Oceana and the emeritus board of Refugees International.







Stuck With Trump for 4 Years?



Are we really stuck with this guy? It's the question being asked around the globe, because Donald Trump's first week as president has made it all too clear: Yes, he is as crazy as everyone feared.

Remember those optimistic pre-inauguration fantasies? I cherished them, too. You know: "Once he's president, I'm sure he'll realize it doesn't really make sense to withdraw from all those treaties." "Once he's president, surely he'll understand that he needs to stop tweeting out those random insults." "Once he's president, he'll have to put aside that ridiculous campaign braggadocio about building a wall along the Mexican border." And so on.



Nope. In his first week in office, Trump has made it eminently clear that he meant every loopy, appalling word — and then some.

The result so far: The president of China is warning against trade wars and declaring that Beijing will take up the task of defending globalization and free trade against American protectionism. The president of Mexico has canceled a state visit to Washington, and prominent Mexican leaders say that Trump's border wall plans "could take us to a war — not a trade war." Senior leaders in Trump's own party are denouncing the new president's claims of widespread voter fraud and his reported plans to reopen CIA "black sites." Oh, and the entire senior management team at the U.S. Department of State has resigned.

Meanwhile, Trump's approval ratings are lower than those of any new U.S. president in the history of polling: Just 36 percent of Americans are pleased with his performance so far. Some 80 percent of British citizens think Trump will make a "bad president," along with 77 percent of those polled in France and 78 percent in Germany.

And that's just week one.



Thus the question: Are we truly stuck with Donald Trump?


It depends. There are essentially four ways to get rid of a crummy president. First, of course, the world can just wait patiently for November 2020 to roll around, at which point, American voters will presumably have come to their senses and be prepared to throw the bum out.

But after such a catastrophic first week, four years seems like a long time to wait. This brings us to option two: impeachment. Under the U.S. Constitution, a simple majority in the House of Representatives could vote to impeach Trump for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors." If convicted by the Senate on a two-thirds vote, Trump could be removed from office — and a new poll suggests that after week one, more than a third of Americans are already eager to see Trump impeached.



If impeachment seems like a fine solution to you, the good news is that Congress doesn't need evidence of actual treason or murder to move forward with an impeachment: Practically anything can be considered a "high crime or misdemeanor." (Remember, former President Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.) The bad news is that Republicans control both the House and the Senate, making impeachment politically unlikely, unless and until Democrats retake Congress. And that can't happen until the elections of 2018.

Anyway, impeachments take time: months, if not longer — even with an enthusiastic Congress. And when you have a lunatic controlling the nuclear codes, even a few months seems like a perilously long time to wait. How long will it take before Trump decides that "you're fired" is a phrase that should also apply to nuclear missiles? (Aimed, perhaps, at Mexico?)

In these dark days, some around the globe are finding solace in the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. This previously obscure amendment states that "the Vice President and a majority of … the principal officers of the executive departments" can declare the president "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office," in which case "the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President."



This is option three for getting rid of Trump: an appeal to Vice President Mike Pence's ambitions. Surely Pence wants to be president himself one day, right? Pence isn't exactly a political moderate — he's been unremittingly hostile to gay rights, he's a climate change skeptic, etc. — but, unappealing as his politics may be to many Americans, he does not appear to actually be insane. (This is the new threshold for plausibility in American politics: "not actually insane.")

Presumably, Pence is sane enough to oppose rash acts involving, say, the evisceration of all U.S. military alliances, or America's first use of nuclear weapons - and presumably, if things got bad enough, other Trump cabinet members might also be inclined to oust their boss and replace him with his vice president. Congress would have to acquiesce in a permanent 25th Amendment removal, but if Pence and half the cabinet declared Trump unfit, even a Republican-controlled Congress would likely fall in line.

The fourth possibility is one that until recently I would have said was unthinkable in the United States of America: a military coup, or at least a refusal by military leaders to obey certain orders.



The principle of civilian control of the military has been deeply internalized by the U.S. military, which prides itself on its nonpartisan professionalism. What's more, we know that a high-ranking lawbreaker with even a little subtlety can run rings around the uniformed military. During the first years of the George W. Bush administration, for instance, formal protests from the nation's senior-most military lawyers didn't stop the use of torture. When military leaders objected to tactics such as waterboarding, the Bush administration simply bypassed the military, getting the CIA and private contractors to do their dirty work.

But Trump isn't subtle or sophisticated: He sets policy through rants and late-night tweets, not through quiet hints to aides and lawyers. He's thin-skinned, erratic, and unconstrained — and his unexpected, self-indulgent pronouncements are reportedly sending shivers through even his closest aides.

What would top U.S. military leaders do if given an order that struck them as not merely ill-advised, but dangerously unhinged? An order that wasn't along the lines of "Prepare a plan to invade Iraq if Congress authorizes it based on questionable intelligence," but "Prepare to invade Mexico tomorrow!" or "Start rounding up Muslim Americans and sending them to Guantánamo!" or "I'm going to teach China a lesson — with nukes!"



It's impossible to say, of course. The prospect of American military leaders responding to a presidential order with open defiance is frightening — but so, too, is the prospect of military obedience to an insane order. After all, military officers swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, not the president. For the first time in my life, I can imagine plausible scenarios in which senior military officials might simply tell the president: "No, sir. We're not doing that," to thunderous applause from The New York Times editorial board.

Brace yourselves. One way or another, it's going to be a wild few years.

Washington Post

Rosa Brooks is a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and a former Pentagon official. Her next book, "How Everything Became War," will be published by Simon & Schuster in August.








ACV Democratic News


ACVDN




Sunday, January 29, 2017

3 Arguments for Dems to Stop Making

  Not a Real School and Not A Real President

3 Arguments for Democrats to Stop Making

Since the election, Democrats have really been down in the dumps.   Despite the tantrums and protests, it strikes me that Democrats must be okay with this state of affairs.   Sure, they claim he’s Hitler with a spray tan, and on some level they might even believe this.   But short of establishing that half the country are total masochists—the safety word is “MAGA”—why are they doing everything in their power to make sure he runs roughshod over them and wins so much he gets sick of winning?   Because that’s what Democrats are doing.

If I wanted to discredit an entire political party, I’d do exactly what Democrats, grassroots and party bosses alike, are doing:  whining and making excuses at every opportunity, right up to insisting there must be some fantastical way to overturn a decisive electoral drubbing.

The first step here should be to shut up and do some meaningful self-reflection about why Democrats lost.   Yet precious few smart and influential Democrats are actually doing this.   To paraphrase Mark Twain, it’s better to remain silent and be thought a loser than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.   The people rejected the Democrats and their message.

Even worse, the bellyaching about the GOP's victory has become tired and predictable even as it amounts to little more than wishing.   Now is the time to be honest, so I implore Democrats, if you catch yourself making any of the following arguments about why Dirt-bag Donnie shouldn’t be president, think before you wreck your party.


1. Dems Won the Popular Vote, Or the Electoral (University?) Is Unfair

Yes, we know she got more than two million more votes than Dirt-Bag Donnie.   But the popular vote is never how presidential elections in this country have been decided.   It’s called the “United States” for a reason.   Nearly the entire premise of the U.S. Constitution—including the Electoral College—is setting up a system of government such that in a large country with as many striking regional and political differences as ours, one state can’t dominate the rest.

Clinton’s margin of victory in California was 4.3 million votes.   The rest of the country has good reason not to want national elections to be determined by California alone.   Maybe next time have your candidate set foot in Wisconsin?   Maybe next time nominate a candidate who’s not so terrible that she runs only a point or two ahead of Donald Freaking Drump in national elections?

Those arguments don’t really address the constitutional rationale for its existence.   Simply venting in the Washington Post that the Electoral System is a “medieval relic” seems ill-advised.   Besides, what does this progressive argument make of the popular vote?   Is it somehow preferable to be saddled with a relic from the sixth century B.C.?

This brings us to another problem with shrieking, “Hillary won the popular vote!”   Look around the country.   Just how popular are Democrats these days?   Not very.   Thirty-three states now have Republican governors.   Republicans have control of the Senate.   A third of the Democratic congressional delegation comes from just three states—CA., Mass., and NY.   Look at a House of Representatives map, does this look like a national party to you?

You can moan about the Electoral System all you want, but to get rid of it, you need to do one of two things.   One, pass a constitutional amendment.   Or two, have the states come together and decide on a new system for allocating electors.   Either way, Democrats need to finish first in a helluva lot more elections to make either of these things possible.

Regarding the reallocation of electors, that’s extremely unlikely because, oh yeah, Republicans control the legislatures in 32 states, and Democrats control the legislatures in just 13.   This means that if Republicans come to control 38 legislatures, which is difficult but not unthinkable the way things have been trending, they could call an Article V convention and start passing their own constitutional amendments without any support from Democrats.   The Democratic party is in sad shape.

At the end of the day, even with Clinton’s popular vote margin, the fact is more Americans are voting for Republicans at the local, state, and federal level.   If you’re a Democrat, this total electoral dominance by Republicans should scare the stuffing out of you.   But when you’re losing the game, you need to play harder—you can’t just make up new rules as you go along.

2. James Comey and the FBI Wanted Trump Elected

It’s conceivable, per Nate Silver, that the Comey letter in late October gave Trump momentum and possibly swung the election.   But my response, like most Americans, is “So what?”   If you’re worried about an FBI investigation influencing a presidential election DON’T NOMINATE A CANDIDATE UNDER FBI INVESTIGATION. 


And you really, really, don’t want to nominate a candidate under investigation whose top aide’s husband is also being investigated by the FBI for child pornography who is also allegedly in possession of emails relevant to the candidate’s FBI investigation that he’s keeping on the same computer as his sex pics.
Seriously, stop and read those two previous sentences again, and think about why any normal person would be in any way sympathetic to this predicament.   As to whether the Clinton email investigation was warranted in the first place, if you take this argument seriously I beg of you to ask one of the millions of Americans who’ve dealt with the rigmarole of getting a security clearance whether they think there’s an obvious double standard.

As to the possibility of Comey playing politics, if he was out to get her why didn’t he recommend charges initially?   The political influence with the Clinton email investigation ran only in one direction, and that benefited Clinton.   The attorney general in the position of bringing charges, Loretta Lynch, was appointed a U.S. attorney by Bill Clinton and later worked for a law firm connected to the Clintons for years.   President Obama formally endorsed Hillary Clinton when the FBI investigation was still ongoing.   That should have been grounds for a special prosecutor.   The issue isn’t that Hillary Clinton was betrayed by Comey;  the issue should be that she skated.   Lest we forget, they were chanting “lock her up” at the Democratic convention as well.

Finally, there’s my favorite argument that many a well-known Democrat has made regarding her email server:  “There’s no proof Hillary Clinton’s server endangered national security.”   Now proof that it did is not a requirement for violating the law.   But let’s get this straight.

On one hand, Democrats have spent the last several months arguing that Clinton did nothing to endanger national security, presumably because we can be certain that Russians couldn’t hack into the server that Hillary was keeping in the closet right the behind the Rubbermaid containers full of Christmas ornaments.

On the other hand, Democrats are now demanding we need a thorough congressional investigation right now because of concerns Russian hackers may have penetrated our entire electoral system across several states to steal the election.   In fact, UFO enthusiast and Democratic capo John Podesta—I’m beginning to think these two avocations are not unrelated—is demanding some pronouncement about how terrible the Russian hacking was before the Electoral College votes ratify the results so they can presumably respond by something something something President Hillary!

Pick one of these arguments and stick with it, please.   Anyway, this brings me to the third argument.

3. The Russians Are Coming!

I don’t want to be too flippant here, because Russia is a serious threat and I have no doubt that they want to meddle in our elections.   The fact that top Trump aides might be, say, laundering money for Russian mobsters makes a lot of people understandably queasy.   Republicans in Congress agree with Democrats that Russia’s attempt at influencing things unduly needs investigating.

However, the evidence that Russians had any real impact on the actual election results is embarrassingly scant and wildly disproportionate to the amount of supposedly legitimate media outlets and public figures taking the idea of Russian hacking seriously.   If the roles were reversed, I have no illusions that the media and their Democratic allies would be pretty dismissive of this given the lack of hard evidence.

As it happens, on October 18 no less than Barack Obama mused, “There is no serious person out there who would suggest that you could even rig America’s elections, in part because they are so decentralized.   There is no evidence that that has happened in the past, or that there are instances that that could happen this time.”

Further, the media wasn’t always troubled by American presidents cozying up to Russia:




Also, isn’t the fact that Russia is so hostile to us now and allegedly undermining our elections a pretty damning judgment on the competence of the woman in charge of overseeing Obama’s “Russian reset” if the point of that was more friendly relations?   The charitable interpretation here is that Russia is, for whatever reason, so afraid of Clinton that they tried to undermine the election.   But there was also a time, not that long ago, when intimidating Russians by calling them our “number one geopolitical foe” was a bad thing in the eyes of the media.   Oddly, I’m not seeing too much contrition over what they did to Romney (this is about it), even as they are now in an unjustified panic.

Then again, we’re talking about a party that has an 80-year history of claiming Republicans were exaggerating the threat of Russia.   In fact, “60 Minutes” ran a report about the effort to get Obama to pardon the Rosenbergs on October 16, three weeks before the election and 63 years after they were executed.   Since the fall of the Soviet Union, we have all manner of evidence conclusively proving the Rosenbergs were spies.   It’s not even a remotely controversial matter, unless, apparently, you’re a member of the media.

Now, there is one tangible precedent for the Russians intervening in our elections.   That’s because Ted Kennedy actually asked them to interfere in the 1984 election.   For some strange reason this revelation wasn’t the first thing that inexplicably failed to, uh, sink Ted Kennedy’s career.   Rather, it’s a story most Americans never even heard about.

It seems as if the media only cares about Russian threats insofar as they harm Democrats’ electoral chances.   To hear Democrats screaming about the threat of Russia now, after ignoring the problem for decades, isn’t something that ordinary Americans are going to pay much attention to—at least not without more evidence and some real contrition regarding their about-face on the Russian threat.

I don’t see that happening soon, because too many Democrats with a megaphone are convinced that something sinister is going on.   As filmmaker Joss Whedon noted,  “The crafty move was forcing the Dems to debunk voter fraud, so when the Trump/Putin cabal ACTUALLY COMMITTED it, we’d sound hypocritical.”   Whedon’s right about one thing—Democrats do sound hypocritical.   The obvious explanation isn’t  a Putin conspiracy, but that Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate with more corrupt baggage than the law would allow. 

Anyway, you may not want to believe I have good intentions here, but if you can’t accept this tough love, consider it tough snark.   I really do believe America needs a functional opposition party.   That, however, will require accepting some criticism as valid and, yes, probably some compromise in response to that criticism.   Recall that just eight years ago, Democrats had total control of Washington—assuming Republicans will be in power forever is folly.

However, a month after the election they’re still publishing op-eds in the Los Angeles Times headlined  “Why the Democrats don’t need an overhaul.”   The longer Democrats are in denial, the longer their road to political recovery is going to be.   They don’t have to like what happened, but for their own good, Democrats need to stop seriously entertaining arguments that Trump’s victory was invalid.







ACV Democratic News


ACVDN

Saturday, January 28, 2017

Top Psychotherapist Releases Terrifying Diagnosis Of President Trump



Johns Hopkins’ Top Psychotherapist Releases Terrifying Diagnosis Of President Trump




If there’s one thing we can say about Donald Trump, it’s that he’s unlike any other world leader we’ve seen to date.   The problem, however, is that his differences fail to set him apart in a positive manner.

Almost daily, Trump tweets about the “biased media,”  or a world leader who has suddenly done something so terrible that he must take to Twitter to publicly berate them.   Notice, however, that it’s always someone else with the problem.   It’s never him.



However, John D. Gartner, a registered psychotherapist from the renowned Johns Hopkins University Medical School seems to think Trump may, in fact, be the one with the problem.   Gartner, who teaches psychiatric residents at Hopkins, decided to break the ethical code known as the “Goldwater Rule” in order to warn the American public about the dangerousness of our new commander-in-chief’s mental state.

The “Goldwater Rule” is defined as “the informal term for part of the ethics code of the American Psychiatric Association saying it is wrong to provide a professional opinion of a public figure without examining that person and gaining consent to discuss the evaluation.”

Trump’s Democratic challenger called it first.   She said Trump is “temperamentally unfit” to serve as president, following his numerous sexist remarks about women, mocking of a disabled reporter, and blatantly racist statements about basically every single human being who isn’t white.



Gartner says “Donald Trump is dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being president.”

According to USNews, Gartner unofficially diagnosed Trump with “malignant narcissism.” Although he himself has not personally examined Trump, Gartner claims it’s obvious from watching even a little of his behavior that he meets the diagnostic criteria for the disorder.   Some of the characteristics include:

Anti-social behavior
Sadism
Aggressiveness
Paranoia
Grandiosity
Entitled
Regressed
Manipulative
Destructive
Egocentric
Use of projection
Lack of conscience
Narcissistic



Gartner says that individuals with malignant narcissism often lack impulse control and empathy.   He also says many who suffer from this disorder believe that others around them don’t recognize their greatness.

‘We’ve seen enough public behavior by Donald Trump now that we can make this diagnosis indisputably,’  Gartner claims.

As Psychology Today notes, “Malignant Narcissists will go to great lengths to achieve their aim.    They can be intelligent, high functioning, soft-spoken, charming, tearful/seemingly emotional, gracious, well-mannered, kind and have the ability to form relationships.   They may lie, falsely accuse, dramatize, smear, cheat, steal, manipulate, accuse, blame or twist to get what they want and feel justified in doing so.   Because they are entitled, egocentric and desperate, they do not experience it as wrong.”



Malignant narcissists are:

‘Determined to gratify their wishes and furious if thwarted.   Their desire can be so consuming that there is little comprehension of, respect for or ability to empathize with the other.   They lack guilt or remorse and tend to feel that it is they who have been mistreated.  They can be of any gender, race or social class.’

As if that weren’t enough, malignant narcissism is incurable.

So there you have it. The leader of the United States of America is more than likely a malignant narcissist who has the fate of the free world in his two tiny hands.   Not to mention, he now has access to the United States government’s nuclear codes.   If that’s not terrifying, we don’t know what is.




Are you understanding  that republicans have elected a mentally deranged person as President of the United States?


Or Has Partisan Politics Destroyed Your Ability to Think?    The republican party really put on over on you this time.





Narcissistic personality disorder is a destructive preoccupation with one’s own personal adequacy, power and prestige.   People with this disorder crave for admiration, have an unreasonably strong sense of entitlement and are often preoccupied with unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty and ideal love.   Unlike malignant narcissism, narcissistic personality disorder is defined as a mental illness in DSM-V (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the Fifth Edition).

Malignant narcissism, while described somewhat differently by various authors, can be succinctly defined as “an extreme form of antisocial personality disorder that is manifested in a person who is pathologically grandiose, lacking in conscience and behavioral regulation, and with characteristic demonstrations of joyful cruelty and sadism“.


20 Traits of Malignant Narcissism

How Many Does Donald Trump Have?



1. THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR is skillfully deceptive and very convincing.   Avoids accountability by diverting topics, dodging questions, and making up new lies, bluffs or threats when questioned.   His memory is self serving as he denies past statements.   Constant chaos and diverting from reality is their chosen environment.

Defense Strategy:  Verify his words.   Do not reveal anything about yourself - he'll use it against you.   Head for the door when things don't add up.   Don't ask him questions - you'll only be inviting more lies.


2. THE CONTRACT BREAKER agrees to anything then turns around and does the opposite.   Marriage, Legal, Custody agreements, normal social/personal protocol are meaningless.   This con artist will accuse you of being the contract breaker.   Enjoys orchestrating legal action and playing the role of the 'poor me' victim. 
Defense Strategy:  Expect him to disregard any agreement.   Have Plan B in place.   Protect yourself financially and emotionally.


3. THE HIGH ROLLER Successfully plows and backstabs his way to the top.   His family a disposable prop in his success facade.   Is charismatic, eloquent and intelligent in his field, but often fakes abilities and credentials.   Needs to have iron-fisted control, relying on his manipulation skills.   Will ruthlessly support, exploit or target others in pursuit of his ever-changing agenda.   Mercilessly abuses the power of his position.   Uses treachery or terrorism to rule or govern.   Potential problem or failure situations are delegated to others.   A vindictive bully in the office with no social or personal conscience.   Often suspicious and paranoid.   Others may support him to further their own Mephistophelian objectives, but this wheeler-dealer leaves them holding the bag.   Disappears quickly when consequences loom.
Defense Strategy:  Keep your references and resume up to date.   Don't get involved in anything illegal.   Document thoroughly to protect yourself.   Thwarting them may backlash with a cascade of retaliation.   Be on the lookout and spot them running for office and vote them out.   Educate yourself about corporate bullies


4. THE SEXUAL NARCISSIST is often hypersexual (male or female).   Pornography, masturbation, incest are reported by his targets.   Anything, anyone, young, old, male/female, are there for his gratification.   This predator takes what is available.   Can have a preference for 'sado-maso' sexuality.   Often easily bored, he demands increasingly deviant stimulation.   However, another behaviour exists, the one who withholds sex or emotional support.
Defense Strategy:  Expect this type to try to degrade you.   Get away from him.   Expect him to tell lies about your sexuality to evade exposure of his own.


5. THE BLAME-GAME NARCISSIST never accepts responsibility.   Blames others for his failures and circumstances.   A master at projection.
Defense Strategy:  Learn about projection.   Don't take the bait when he blames you.   He made the mess let him clean it up.


6. THE VIOLENT NARCISSIST is a wife-Beater, Murderer, Serial Killer, Stalker, Terrorist.   Has a 'chip-on-his-shoulder' attitude.   He lashes out and destroys or uses others (particularly women and children) as scapegoats for his aggression or revenge.   He has poor impulse control.   Fearless and guiltless, he shows bad judgement.   He anticipates betrayal, humiliation or punishment, imagines rejection and will reject first to 'get it over with'.   He will harass and push to make you pay attention to him and get a reaction.   He will try to make you look out of control.   Can become dangerous and unpredictable.   Has no remorse or regard for the rights of others.
Defense Strategy:  Don't antagonize or tip your hand you're leaving.   Ask for help from the police and shelters.


7. THE CONTROLLER/MANIPULATOR pits people against each other.   Keeps his allies and targets separated.   Is verbally skillful at twisting words and actions.   Is charismatic and usually gets his way.   Often undermines our support network and discourages us from seeing our family and friends.   Money is often his objective.   Other people's money is even better.   He is ruthless, demanding and cruel.   This control-freak bully wants you pregnant, isolated and financially dependent on him.   Appears pitiful, confused and in need of help.   We rush in to help him with our finances, assets, and talents.   We may be used as his proxy interacting with others on his behalf as he sets us up to take the fall or enjoys the performance he is directing.
Defense Strategy:   Know the 'nature of the beast'.   Facing his failure and consequences will be his best lesson.   Be suspicious of his motives, and avoid involvement.   Don't bail him out.


8. THE SUBSTANCE ABUSER Alcohol, drugs, you name it, this N does it.   We see his over-indulgence in food, exercise or sex and his need for instant gratification.   Will want you to do likewise.
Defense Strategy:  Don't sink to his level.   Say No.


9. OUR "SOUL MATE" is cunning and knows who to select and who to avoid.   He will come on strong, sweep us off our feet.   He seems to have the same values, interests, goals, philosophies, tastes, habits.   He admires our intellect, ambition, honesty and sincerity.   He wants to marry us quickly.   He fakes integrity, appears helpful, comforting, generous in his 'idealization' of us phase.   It never lasts.   Eventually Jekyll turns into Hyde.   His discarded victims suffer emotional and financial devastation.   He will very much enjoy the double-dipping attention he gets by cheating.   We end the relationship and salvage what we can, or we are discarded quickly as he attaches to a "new perfect soul mate".   He is an opportunistic parasite.   Our "Knight in Shining Armor" has become our nightmare.   Our healing is lengthy.
Defense Strategy:  Seek therapy.   Learn about this disorder.   Know the red flags of their behaviour, and "If he seems too good to be true..."  Hide the hurt you feel.   Never let him see it.   Be watchful for the internet predator.


10. THE QUIET NARCISSIST is socially withdrawn, often dirty, unkempt.   Odd thinking is observed.   Used as a disguise to appear pitiful to obtain whatever he can.


11. THE SADIST is now the fully-unmasked malignant narcissist.   His objective is watching us dangle as he inflicts emotional, financial, physical and verbal cruelty.   His enjoyment is all too obvious.   He'll be back for more.   His pleasure is in getting away with taking other people's assets.   His target:  women, children, the elderly, anyone vulnerabie.
Defense Strategy:  Accept the Jekyll/Hyde reality.   Make a "No Contact' rule.   Avoid him altogether.   End any avenue of vulnerability.   Don't allow thoughts of his past 'good guy' image to lessen the reality of his disorder.


12. THE RAGER flies off the handle for little or no provocation.   Has a severely disproportionate overreaction.   Childish tantrums.   His rage can be intimidating.   He wants control, attention and compliance.   In our hurt and confusion we struggle to make things right.   Any reaction is his payoff.   He seeks both good or bad attention.   Even our fear, crying, yelling, screaming, name calling, hatred are his objectives.   If he can get attention by cruelty he will do so.
Defense Strategy:  Manage your responses.   Be fully independent.   Don't take the bait of his verbal abuse.   Expect emotional hurt.   Volence is possible.


13. THE BRAINWASHER is very charismatic.  He is able to manipulate others to obtain status, control, compliance, money, attention.   Often found in religion and politics.   He masterfully targets the naive, vulnerable, uneducated or mentally weak.
Defense Strategy.   Learn about brainwashing techniques.   Listen to your gut instinct.   Avoid them.


14. THE RISK-TAKING THRILL-SEEKER never learns from his past follies and bad judgment.   Poor impulse control is a hallmark.   Defense Strategy:  Don't get involved.   Use your own good judgement.   Say No.


15. THE PARANOID NARCISSIST is suspicious of everything usually for no reason.   Terrified of exposure and may be dangerous if threatened.   Suddenly ends relationships if he anticipates exposure or abandonment.
Defense Strategy:  Give him no reason to be suspicious of you.   Let some things slide.   Protect yourself if you anticipate violence.


16. THE IMAGE MAKER will flaunt his 'toys', his children, his wife, his credentials and accomplishments.   Admiration, attention, even glances from others, our envy or our fear are his objective.   He is never satisfied.   We see his arrogance and haughty strut as he demands center stage.   He will alter his mask at will to appear pitiful, inept, solicitous, concerned, or haughty and superior.   Appears the the perfect father, husband, friend - to those outside his home.
Defense Strategy:  Ignore his childlike behaviors.   Know his payoff is getting attention, deceiving or abusing others.   Provide him with 'supply' to avert problems.


17. THE EMOTIONAL VACUUM is the cruelest blow of all.   We learn his lack of empathy.   He has deceived us by his cunning ability to mimic human emotions.   We are left numbed by the realization.   It is incomprehensible and painful.   We now remember times we saw his cold vacant eyes and when he showed odd reactions.   Those closest to him become objectified and expendable.   Defense Strategy:  Face the reality.   They can deceive trained professionals.


18. THE SAINTLY NARCISSIST proclaims high moral standing.   Accuses others of immorality.   "Hang 'em high" he says about the murderer on the 6:00 news.   This hypocrite lies, cheats, schemes, corrupts, abuses, deceives, controls, manipulates and torments while portraying himself of high morals.
Defense Strategy:  Learn the red flags of behavior.   Be suspicious of people claiming high morals.   Can be spotted at a church near you.


19. THE CALLING-CARD NARCISSIST forewarns his targets.   Early in the relationship he may 'slip up' revealing his nature saying  "You need to protect yourself around me"  or  "Watch out, you never know what I'm up to."   We laugh along with him and misinterpret his words.   Years later, coping with the devastation left behind, his victims recall the chilling warning.
Defense Strategy:  Know the red flags and be suspicious of the intentions of others.


20. THE PENITENT NARCISSIST says "I've behaved horribly, I'll change, I love you, I'll go for therapy."   Appears to 'come clean' admitting past abuse and asking forgiveness.   Claims we are at fault and need to change too.   The sincerity of his words and actions appear convincing.   We learn his words are verbal hooks.   He knows our vulnerabilities and what buttons to push.   We question our judgement about his disorder.   We can disregard  "Fool me once..."   We hope for change and minimize past abuse.   With a successful retargeting attempt, this N will enjoy his second reign of terror even more if we allow him back in our lives.   Defense Strategy:  Expect this.   Self-impose a "No Contact" rule.   Focus on the reality of his disorder.   Journal past abusive behavior to remind yourself.   Join a support group.



ACV Democrawtic News


ACVDN


Blog Archive