Top critical review
BIASED ATTACK ON TRUMP DETRACTORS
Reviewed in the United States on October 15, 2019
Written by a conservative columnist with a longstanding affiliation with the Wall Street Journal, in the author's own words, here is what this book is about:
“This is not a book about Donald Trump, per se... This is instead a book about the more radical elements of the Resistance, and how their reaction to Trump is causing significant damage to our institutions and political norms... [T]he subject here is the behavior of the other side—the fringe of his opposition... [I]t's the leaders of the Resistance who are doing the damage, and are the primary focus of this book. They are a loosely gathered collection of Democratic politicians, political operatives, big-name pundits, news organizations, and well-funded activists.”
The author starts her book with the inaccurate premise that Trump “won his election fair and square, under an Electoral College that has governed our system from the start.” The only reason Trump, who lost the popular vote, “won” is because the Electoral College didn't do its job; the sole reason it exists is to prevent someone like Trump from assuming the presidency, but because the Electoral College folks didn't do their job and instead voted along party lines, they betrayed the country.
The author then jumps to the unfounded assumption that those who resist Trump “view themselves as justified in taking any action necessary to get rid of the occupier”. If that were truly the case, Trump would no longer be in office. The Resistance is working within the law and established pathways to remove him. (In fact, there is scarcely any need for a “Resistance” to be working on this at all, not when Trump does all the heavy lifting to indict himself.) There is no “cheating” at play. If you want to see cheating, look at Mitch McConnell's refusal to conduct hearings on Obama's Supreme Court nominee. And of course the author objects to the elimination of the Electoral College; without it, we would have had Democratic presidents since Bill Clinton took office.
But critics like me are swiftly dealt with:
“I predict that for the sin of writing a book that is not unrelentingly, remorselessly, and absolutely critical of Trump, the Trump haters will attempt to portray this as some sort of Trump apologia. In doing so, they prove yet again that the truest haters aren't interested in debate or ideas or in restoring 'norms'—as they claim—but only in engulfing the Trump administration in flames, and tarring and feathering as many of their critics as possible.”
That paragraph deserves applause. In just a few words, the author manages to dismiss her critics. Who exactly is it that isn't interested in debate? Also, political books are seriously trending. Both pro-Trump and anti-Trump books are hitting the bestseller list on a weekly basis. To imply that her book will be singled out for criticism is to ignore all of the negative reviews (and nasty comments on those reviews) happening to books written by others on both sides of the aisle.
The author misses a fundamental point in this blazingly pro-Trump book. “The 45th president has no real filter.” I know a lot of people whose filter leaves a little something to be desired. The problem isn't that he has no filter. The problem is what comes spewing out of his mouth. If you have no filter and are not a racist, you won't say racist things. If you have no filter and are not a grab them by the pu**y kind of guy, well, you get the idea. The author even supplies ghastly examples of Trump's words and – you guessed it – explains them away.
Obama is decried as “the most lawless and overreaching president in modern history”, because apparently the author forgot the Baby Bush years? Obama is trashed. Jim Comey is reduced to “fired for insubordination” and “came down with one of the first cases of Trump Derangement Syndrome”. Sure. Her book is totally unbiased...
Let me just ask you one thing: “Democrats had soaring ambitions for a Hillary Clinton presidency. She would cement Obama's gains and put the nation irrevocably on a path to progressive enlightenment.” Would that really have been so bad? Which part do you object to? The progress? Or the enlightenment?
As she decries the purported actions of the Resistance, here is my question for the author: Witnessing Trump's actions, his tweets, his sexism and misogyny, his racism, his disregard for the people who elected him, his contempt for those south of the border, his friendships with dictators and alienation of our historic allies, his collusion, his self-interest, his use of his office to advance his business interests, the situation with Biden and Ukraine, his ineptitude, his scientific (and other) ignorance, his pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord, his sudden withdrawal of support for the Kurds effectively condoning their slaughter – how on earth can you think for one moment that the Resistance is wrong? How can any thinking person support this man?
This book makes me so angry. After the 8 years of obstruction Obama faced from Congressional Republicans (to mention nothing of the Clinton years), during which the stated sole goal of Republicans was to prevent Obama from basically accomplishing anything – even objectives they agreed with, to now have to hear that “Trump Haters” (read Democrats) are the problem is an absolute outrage. Furthermore, what Trump supporters don't get is that “Trump Haters” are fighting for everybody – including them. The MAGA crowd is so blinded by alt right rhetoric from their narrowly-viewed sources that they can not see that they are voting against their own interests and supporting in the presidency a man who has shamelessly used them to support only his own agenda.
The fact that this book is being released as impeachment proceedings are underway against Trump just serves to underline how utterly misguided the author and her ilk really are.
I remain grateful for one thing: Peaceful transition of power. Despite the fact that Trump should never have taken office, he was permitted to do so peacefully. Despite the fact that Trump should not be in the office and has demonstrated that fact with many actions and thousands of tweets, he has been permitted to remain in office. Because in the U.S., we overturn such a travesty by legal means not by force. And for that I am grateful.
Well written, meaning it's readable and grammar is good and all that, which doesn't alter my opinion of its inflammatory negative inaccurate content.