Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Caliman73

(11,738 posts)
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 05:05 PM Jun 2019

What do you think about Nancy Pelosi's statement on Trump? - "difference between right and wrong"

This post is not to bash Nancy Pelosi at all. I think that she is doing a great job in her second term as Speaker regardless of whether I agree with her or not on the pace of the move toward impeachment. I have a bit of disagreement on what she said last week with regards to Donald Trump. It may just be semantics at the end, but I think that language is very important, especially when discussing the actions, attitudes, and character of people.

Pelosi said that Donald Trump "once again, shows us that he doesn't understand the difference between right and wrong".

She could be actually stating that Trump has diminished capacity and literally lacks the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. I mean there are clinicians and legal representatives that assess for diminished capacity when deciding to try older adults or people with disabilities. If that is the case, then there is an argument for openly declaring the Trump appears to have diminished capacity.

Alternately, and what I may have said given the opportunity is that Trump does not CARE about the difference between "right and wrong". Trump appears to only think in terms of whether a choice will help him or hurt him, not whether there are moral, ethical, and legal implications for the choice. I do think that Trump is a sociopath.

I think that you can argue that Trump has diminished capacity. He certainly says things that sound quite delusional, has communication problems, has inflexible thinking, and some other signs that he may be starting to have difficulty distinguishing the difference. On the other hand, I would like him to be held accountable rather than considered to be addled and dealt with clinically.

What do you guys think?

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

RKP5637

(67,111 posts)
1. I really wonder if she thinks it could turn into a circus sideshow. The senate is a major obstacle.
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 05:26 PM
Jun 2019

I guess she is thinking there is more to be gained by prosecuting him after he is out of office. I would like to see him held accountable for his actions. The way it's going, he does what he damn well pleases, because he does not give a F about anything. The founders, I don't think, ever thought an anti-American like tRump could become president. I also think Mueller let the country down. If he felt their was obstruction it could have been strongly stated as such, along with a statement that a sitting president can not be prosecuted. I am just stunned an asshole such as tRump is president, and even more that he just slides along with really no repercussions for his actions. Additionally, I am stunned by how much of the US is truly ignorant and can not comprehend they are likely ushering in the end of a democracy.

Caliman73

(11,738 posts)
4. I am sure that is part of the calculation.
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 05:43 PM
Jun 2019

I am not as stunned that Trump could become President. I don't think that he became so legitimately. Even without direct cheating, Republicans use dirty tactics to suppress voting. Trump lost the popular vote by about 3 million. He "won" the electoral vote with about 77 thousand votes across the battleground states and in each of those states the Republican effort to purge voters and depress turnout was on high gear.

The cynic in me says that powerful people rarely suffer consequences. It is only when they cross other rich and powerful people that anything bad happens to them (think Bernie Madoff). If we were true to our principles, Trump would be sharing a cell with Dick Cheney and George W Bush and carved into the wall would be "Richard Nixon was here" and "So was Ronnie Reagan" the former two for lying us into wars costing thousands of lives and the latter two for also conspiring with foreign governments to win elections.

I guess the shocking thing is that about a third of American voters would cast a ballot for him. The problem for me is that almost half of eligible voters didn't vote and that number is consistent across elections. How can democracy function if almost half of the people who can vote don't bother to do so?

Anyway, what do you think of Pelosi's statement on Trump?

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)
2. I don't think he has diminished capacity in the legal sense.
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 05:33 PM
Jun 2019

He does know intellectually the difference between right and wrong. But his inflated self-image does not allow him to know when he himself has crossed the line. He believes he is perfect, therefore whatever he does must be right. If there is a problem, it's because someone else did something wrong.

Caliman73

(11,738 posts)
5. Good Discussion. Thanks.
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 05:50 PM
Jun 2019

It is a fine line though isn't it?

Think about it. He likely has personality disorder, like you said, there is the legal sense, which is different from a clinical assessment. His belief in his own innocence/greatness/etc... boarders on delusional. You have his apparent lapses in memory and orientation.

Ultimately I do agree I think that he can distinguish between what is legal or not and in lay person's terms "right or wrong". I do think that his psychopathology does interfere with his decision making around choosing the correct path over the illegal/immoral/unethical path.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
3. Doubt any intelligent person doubts he has "diminished capacity"
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 05:36 PM
Jun 2019

as the term is being used in lay discussion, not legally. He's missing or deficient in a number of the elements of a whole person.

HOWEVER, one of the people who wrote the 25th who is still with us pointed out on Rachel the 25th was not written to overset the will of the electorate. Trump is what he was when he ran for office, his extreme unfitness for any office wasn't hidden, and those who voted for him chose that.

I think what that person thinks matters and that any attempt to use the 25th to remove this president would fail. Until and if he decompensates substantially, or something, changing the situation dramatically. The process of the 25th would also have to be renewed repeatedly by the cabinet and VP while the president challenged it in court, as I recall.

Caliman73

(11,738 posts)
6. Yeah, I don't see the 25th working here either.
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 05:54 PM
Jun 2019

I mean Reagan was able to carry out his term and it is likely he was suffering from dementia. Prior to the 25th there were the stories about Wilson having suffered a massive stroke and Mrs. Wilson running things. Though times are different now and such things would be more difficult to keep secret, you are right that it would need to be a very significant decline to institute a challenge to the president's capacity to serve.

Many of us already knew that he was unfit to be the president from his trip down the golden escalator.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
8. Yes, apparently neither was so profoundly incapacitated that
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 06:27 PM
Jun 2019

it couldn't be hidden, if that was the case. Wilson was reelected and served a second term.

https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5b4fe34f808c6f2c4030c232/master/w_727,c_limit/CoverStory-STORY_blitt_escalator.jpg

It wasn't exactly my most brilliant moment, but I thought the strikingly hot and beautiful woman several steps below him was whatever the job title is of the women who escort men on stage to get awards or adorn the product at boat and car shows. "Ohhh, that was his wife!?" like 2 days later.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What do you think about N...