In a stunning development New York Times reporter Jan Ransom on May 10 (page A19, print edition), previewed the trial of Individual #1 in New York. Her reporting enables us to see the future before it happens. The following excerpts from her article have been slightly modified (less than you would think!). They help us to understand what will happen when Individual #1 finally leaves the White House.
Individual #1, the fake American self-made man who swindled his way into Manhattan’s elite party circles, was sentenced on Thursday to four to 12 years in prison for bilking banks, lawyers, and people out of hundreds of millions dollars.
The sentencing capped a case of a grifter who spun his tale with brazen flair. He lived in fancy hotels and apartments, dined in expensive restaurants and lured investors in phony foundations, universities, and businesses without a penny to his name that he had earned on his own.
“I am stunned by the depth of the defendant’s deception,” Justice Diane Kiesel said in handing down the sentence in State Supreme Court in Manhattan. She added that Individual #1 from the wrong side of the river was blinded by the glitter and glamour of Manhattan.
His lawyer called the sentence “draconian,” arguing that his client was not a violent or career criminal. During the trial he said Individual #1 was an enterprising, business-minded person eager to make it in the big city. People believed what they wanted about Individual #1. He was enabled by a system.
But the judge said Individual #1 showed no remorse for his actions throughout the trail, and seemed more concerned about his hair and which actor would play him in an upcoming Netflix series about the case.
A juror who had visited the courtroom to watch the sentencing and asked to remain anonymous, said she had been annoyed by Individual #1’s apparent self-centeredness. His concern about his hair led to a two-hour delay in the trial one day.
“He was interested in everything that big money could buy,” Justice Kisesel said. “But he didn’t have the big money. All he had was a big scam. He forged financial statements, inflated the values of assets, created a fake accountant and a phony financial advisor.
This reporting makes it clear why Individual #1 prefers to avoid being tried in New York City. He knows it would not be good for him especially in the last decades of his life. It also highlights the one figure of authority since his father died whom Individual #1 fears: the courts.
Recent events suggest we are getting closer and closer to a moment of truth. Putting aside the silliness of thinking of Individual #1 as an adult, let’s consider the behavior of the immature child President as the world closes in on him. Typically the child does what he wants based on his narcissistic impulses until such time as he no longer can.
Suppose the Republican weenies had insisted that all candidates had to disclose their taxes before being allowed to participate in a Republican Party presidential debate…think how different things would be today. But the Republican Party establishment cowered before the bluster of Individual #1 and did nothing. That was the moment when the 7th grade smart-aleck-dumb-aleck learned he would never to be sent to the principal’s office. He could intimidate the people in adult positions who lacked the intestinal fortitude to act as adults. And so it has been ever since.
Yes, there were some adults in the White House who tried to contain him but they are all gone. Congress tried to control him but he shut them down and then used executive orders to circumvent it. The subpoenas or contempt citations from Congress mean nothing to him.
However he does understand the power of the courts. He has paid fines, closed a college and a foundation, and tried to use the courts to his own advantage throughout his life. He recognizes that the courts can hold him accountable to adult standards. The courts are the only ones who can act as Fred Trump did in trying to control the immature child. The father sent him to military school in the vain hope that the son would man up. That effort failed. Now Individual #1 is starting to recognize that the courts have a power he cannot control or deny.
So what would an immature child do when a parent finally seriously lays down the law and is that what Individual #1 is doing? First. he would have a temper tantrum. Done. Then he would hold his breath until the adult caved. Done. No more governing with Congress! I will keep crying and whining and having a hissy fit until I get what I want. Still the adults this time cannot be put off that easily. The subpoenas keep coming. The judgments keep coming. The exposure of his life keeps happening. He can’t shut down the governing forever. The courts will continue to lay down the law. At some point the immature child will realize that he cannot avoid the adult world forever. Then what?
The scariest scenario of all is that Individual #1 will not comply with the Courts either. In White House Down, Olympus Has Fallen, and Murder at 1600, the President is still on the side of the Constitution. In Seven Days in May, the position of the President is more suspect. If the courts attempt to be the father figure of authority the immature child has not had since his actual father died, will h comply? How do you know?
Of course, those of you reading this blog are thinking that never could happen here in the real world: Of course he will comply with Supreme Court rulings against him. But how many times have you thought that in the past few years that something could never happen only to learn that not only could in happen, it could become common, routine, the new norm? Most likely he would then comply but I would not hold my breath. Then what?
The time for contingency planning is now.
P.S. The immature child’s behavior as he is being called to task by the courts is a reminder of a Star Trek episode that predicted the current situation decades ago: The Squire of Gothos (1967). Here are some lines that resonate today.
1. Spock slaps the face of the immature child with enormous power
Mr. Spock: I object to you. I object to intellect without discipline; I object to power without constructive purpose.
Trelane: Oh, Mr. Spock, you do have one saving grace after all: you’re ill-mannered! The Human half of you, no doubt?
2. The parents of the immature child with enormous power return to restore order and take the child home.
Trelane’s Father: Trelane! Stop that nonsense at once!
3. Kirk classifies the immature child for the record.
Mr. Spock: Captain.
Captain James T. Kirk: Mr. Spock. Still thinking about Trelane, is that it?
Mr. Spock: For the record, Captain, how do we describe him? Pure mentality? A force of intellect? Embodied energy? Super-being? He must be classified, sir.
Captain James T. Kirk: [thinks a moment] God of War, Mr. Spock.
Mr. Spock: Well, I hardly find that fitting.
Captain James T. Kirk: Then a small boy. And a very naughty one at that.
Mr. Spock: It WILL make a strange entry in the library banks.
Captain James T. Kirk: But then he was a very strange small boy.
Keep in mind that the description below from a Star Trek fan site was not written about our immature child president.
[T]he pivotal moment comes when Trelane’s parents show up and put a stop to all of his “games”… Immediately, Trelane’s speech patterns change, going from superior and jovial scoundrel to a cranky little boy whose mommy and daddy are telling him it’s time to put his toys away and take a nap. Despite all of his blusterings and exhilaration of the hunt, Trelane protests that he’s just playing around, makes excuses, and even whines that he never gets to have any fun….[T]his call[s] to mind images of a young child being told it’s bedtime right in the middle of playing with its toys.
Sometimes you have to wonder if the cable talk shows will ever get it right.