The ‘Budapest playbook’: A blueprint we can’t afford to follow

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead 

16 November, 2024 
Right-Wing Watch

Orbán’s authoritarian playbook, which Trump and his fellow MAGA Republicans seem to idolise, shows just how vulnerable democratic institutions are in the face of rising populism, and how quickly democratic models can be eroded. The need for a robust defence of democratic values has never been more critical.

As Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House, far-right populist leaders across Europe are celebrating, using his victory as a rallying cry for their own nationalist agendas.

Among them is Viktor Orbán, Hungary’s authoritarian prime minister, who sees Trump’s success as a transformative moment for global nationalism. “History has accelerated… The world is going to change,” he said.

And Trump makes no secret about his admiration for Orbán, having referred to him as a “strongman” and a “real boss.”

This raises an urgent question: Could Orbán’s Hungary serve as a blueprint for Trump to follow, and even more concerning, could such a model be applied in the UK, where Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration party has also achieved electoral success?

Reform MP and the party’s former leader Richard Tice said that the US election had been a “comprehensive rejection of the status quo” and voters “have had enough of classic, smooth wafflers who talk a good game but fail to deliver.”

The MAGA movement

Those who are celebrating Trump’s return in Europe share ideological affinities with Trump’s MAGA (Make America Great Again) movement. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found that stronger borders, lower taxes, better international agreements, Conservative judges, more freedom, and anti-migration policies are what define the MAGA movement for Trump supporters.

And these MAGA Republicans have been described as being ‘obsessed’ with Viktor Orbán. JD Vance, Trump’s 2024 running mate, said that the US “could learn a lot” from Hungary, while Trump himself said, “There’s nobody that’s better, smarter, or a better leader than Viktor Orbán. He’s fantastic.”

The winning side of history?

Orbán, once politically isolated in Europe, has positioned himself as the leading figure in the far-right movement, promoting a vision of a Europe that resists multiculturalism and globalism. He has long asserted that he and his growing coalition of nationalist allies are destined to emerge on the winning side of history.

And it’s not difficult to understand the far-right’s adulation of Orbán. While electoral success is one thing, maintaining power is another, and Orbán has been prime minister of Hungary, with a constitutional majority, for 14 consecutive years. As such, he has had remarkable influence on reshaping the country to his own vision.

Similar to Trump and Nigel Farage, some of Orbán’s appeal is owed to his ability to address people with convincing messages centred on national pride, defending borders, prosperity and more, in a simple way.

However, Orbán’s ‘success’ is, more broadly, rooted in his ability to avoid unpopular measures by constructing a political, media and economic infrastructure on personal connections.

Under his leadership, Orbán and his party have effectively seized control of Hungary’s democratic institutions. Today, every major institution is headed by individuals that have been hand-picked by Orbán.

Hungary has also seen the orchestration of a nationwide right-wing media network that promotes government narratives and suppresses dissent, creating a political climate reminiscent of propaganda regimes.

The Voice of America reported in 2022 that Orbán’s allies “have created a pervasive conservative media ecosystem that dominates the airwaves and generally echoes the positions of the Orbán government.”

Additionally, Orbán’s government has manipulated electoral processes to maintain its grip on power. This has included gerrymandering electoral districts and staffing critical institutions with loyalists.

The same can be said about Hungary’s judiciary system. In 2018, a law was passed to set up courts overseen directly by the justice minister. Critics warned that the move would allow interference in judicial matters and further undermine the rule of law.

“[The law] is a serious threat to the rule of law in Hungary and runs counter to values Hungary signed up to when it joined the European Union,” said the rights group Helsinki Committee.

The same year, the European Parliament voted to impose sanctions on Hungary for flouting EU rules on civil rights, democracy and corruption. Hungary rejected the accusations. So far, the EU, which Hungary has been a member of for almost 20 years, has suspended around 20 billion euros in funding for Hungary due to concerns over democratic backsliding and rule-of-law violation.

Exploiting state-of-emergency laws

Just last week, Orbán secured parliamentary approval to extend his authority to govern by decree for another six months, extended until May 2025. Being able to legislate by decree can occur in democracies during periods of crises, and Orbán cited the ongoing state of emergency related to the war in Ukraine as such a crisis. In 2016, he declared emergency powers because of the migration crisis and did the same in 2020 during the Covid pandemic.

His continuing reliance on state-of-emergency laws has raised concern. Human rights organisations, including Amnesty International, have warned that state-of-emergency laws are being exploited to weaken checks and power balances, diminishing the role of other governing bodies with little connection to the emergency at hand.

A ‘heroic protector’?

To sustain his populist appeal, Orbán presents himself as a “heroic protector” of Hungary against external threats, particularly from the European Union.

He regularly uses ‘national consultation’ surveys to give the illusion of democratic inclusion, but which are really manipulative surveys designed to solicit public support for anti-EU sentiments. Critics argue these consultations serve as propaganda tools rather than genuine democratic engagement.

Hungary under Orbán has been described as a “hybrid regime of electoral autocracy,” where elections are held without adhering to fundamental democratic principles. A 2022 report by Members of the European Parliament concluded that Hungary is no longer a fully functioning democracy, attributing this decline directly to Orbán’s policies.

“There is increasing consensus among experts that Hungary is no longer a democracy,” the lawmakers said, citing a series of international indexes that have in recent years downgraded Hungary’s status.

In their resolution, MEPs blamed Viktor Orbán, and condemned his government’s “deliberate and systematic efforts” to undermine the EU’s core values.

“Everything has fallen apart in Hungary. The state essentially does not function, there’s only propaganda and lies,” said Peter Magyar, the leader of the Respect and Freedom, or TISZA, party, which has campaigned on promises to root out deep-seated corruption in the government. Magyar has been outspoken about what he sees as the damage Orbán’s “propaganda factory” has done to Hungary’s democracy.

“It might be very difficult to imagine from America or Western Europe what the propaganda and the state machinery is like here,” Magyar said in an interview before the European elections with the Associated Press.

Hardline position on immigration and LGBTQ+ rights

Orbán’s government has also faced criticism for its hardline position on immigration and LGBTQ+ rights. His administration has enacted controversial laws, including the ‘Stop Soros’ legislation, which criminalises assistance to asylum seekers and positions migrants as a threat to national identity, fuelling anti-immigrant sentiment within Hungary and beyond.

In 2018, Orbán called refugees “Muslim invaders” as he defended his country’s refusal to take part in the EU’s resettlement programme. He added that a large influx of Muslims “inevitably leads to parallel societies”. He claimed Christian and Muslim communities “will never unite”.

“Multiculturalism is only an illusion,” he said.In 2021, in a long-running row over Hungary’s migrant rules, the EU’s top court ruled that the nation’s law criminalising activists and lawyers who help asylum seekers was in breach of European law. Orbán said Hungary had no plans to change the controversial laws.

A UN report into the state of democracy in Eastern Europe found that democracy in Hungary under Orbán has deteriorated more than any other country in the region except Russia. The report noted that in 2022, Hungary was 43 percent democratic compared to 45 percent a year earlier, the report noted.

The report particularly denounces the conduct of the last parliamentary elections, which were marred by “irregularities, abuse of administrative resources and media distortions,” as well as “the Orbán regime’s growing intolerance for dissenting voices.”

The threat of a broader resurgence of authoritarianism

As Europe’s far-right parties gain momentum, with Orbán’s Hungary serving as a model, the threat of a broader resurgence of authoritarianism is increasingly concerning, especially with Trump’s imminent return to the White House. While, as Magyar remarked, Americans and Westerners may struggle to comprehend the extent of propaganda and state machinery in Hungary, they may soon face similar challenges at home.

Like Orbán, Trump has long targeted the mainstream media. He has routinely labelled the press as ‘dishonest’ and ‘scum’ and has singled out individual news organisations and journalists. As well as a distrust in the media, both leaders share the same populist, nationalist, anti-immigration, centralisation of power, and cultural conservatism values

.

But what about in Britain, where, with Labour landsliding in July, the political landscape has diverged from the growing far-right momentum seen across Europe and now, in the US?

We might now have a centre-left government but admiration for Viktor Orbán is not absent in Britain. In 2023, three veteran Conservative MPs – Sir Edward Leigh, Ian Liddell-Grainger, and Sir Christopher Chope – were criticised for their close association with Orbán during a conference in Budapest, where they mingled with leaders from other far-right parties such as Belgium’s Vlaams Belang and Spain’s Vox. Leigh even tweeted a photo of the trio with Orbán, bragging they had been “learning about his country’s effective ways of combating illegal migration.”

In 2022, Nigel Farage, whose Reform UK party helped topple the Conservatives in July and who is of course a close friend of Trump, was among a number of right-wing speakers at America’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). The event, which took place in Hungary, also featured Viktor Orbán. Just days before it, Orban had made reference to the ‘great replacement’ conspiracy theory which claims that there is a liberal elite plot to replace the white populations of Europe and the US through immigration and demographic growth with non-white people.

The event marked the first time that CPAC was held in Europe, as was seen as part of wider efforts to cement bonds between far-right movements both in Europe and America.

Having exited the EU, and with Donald Trump’s impending return to the White House, Keir Starmer finds himself somewhat politically isolated on the global stage. Instead of the centre-left/social democratic alliance he may have dreamt of, Starmer faces a US administration that is not only ideologically distant but also openly hostile to Labour, which Trump’s campaign labelled as “far left.”

Meanwhile, Orbán’s authoritarian playbook, which Trump and his fellow MAGA Republicans seem to idolise, shows just how vulnerable democratic institutions are in the face of rising populism, and how quickly democratic models can be eroded. The need for a robust defence of democratic values has never been more critical.

“The great hope is that the ‘Budapest Playbook’ never becomes an international bestseller and eventually fades into irrelevance, even in Hungary,” wrote Tibor Dessewffy, a council member of the European Council on Foreign Relations.

Right-wing media watch – Daily Mail accused of ‘rank hypocrisy’ after running to ECHR

If there’s one newspaper that has called the loudest for Britain to leave the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), it’s the Daily Mail.

‘Rishi Sunak leaves the door open to Britain quitting ECHR – as he ‘would choose UK’s security over being a member every single time,’ was a headline in January.

In February, Daniel Hannon, a columnist for the paper and staunch Brexiteer having co-founded Vote Leave, wrote: ‘If Euro judges block Rishi Sunak’s new plan to stop small boats, quitting the ECHR is the only way to protect our borders.’

And last month, the Mail shouted about Boris Johnson’s calls for the UK to have a referendum on its ECHR membership. Johnson is, of course, also a columnist for the Mail and vocal campaigner for quitting the Strasburg court.

This week, news emerged that the publisher of the Daily Mail has won a court battle in the ECHR, leading to cries of ‘rank hypocrisy.’

The publisher took the UK government to the court in Strasbourg about its own human rights, which it claims were breached by being forced to pay “success fees” to lawyers representing people it had paid damages to.

Associated Newspapers won the ruling opposing “excessive” costs incurred by claimants in privacy and defamation cases. The publisher argued that its right to freedom of expression, under Article 10 of the European Convention, had been breached.

It won on conditional fee arrangements (CFAs) and the UK was ordered to pay it €15,000 in costs and expenses. A further decision will be made on any pecuniary damages. But Associated Newspapers was not successful on the part of its case relating to After the Event (ATE) insurance premiums for two recent cases for which it had to pay the extra costs.

News of the hearing sparked disbelief, ridicule and calls of ‘hypocrisy.’

“Daily Mail wins ECHR case against ‘success fees’ paid to lawyers, well well. Daily Mail having slagged off ECHR (Court) endlessly for clickbait…goes “bleating” to the court Funny how their “human rights” matter to the Mail when money is involved!” Carol Vorderman posted on X.

“Beat this for rank hypocrisy. The Daily Mail has been calling for the UK to leave the ECHR for years, yet when they think their human rights have been breached what do they do?…” wrote Leeds for Europe in a Facebook post.

Another reader simply asked:

“Just how hypocritical can you get?”

Smear of the Week – Right-wing press continue its absurd campaign to paint Starmer as an antisemite

It seems we’re witnessing something of a (watered-down) replay of 2019, when the right-wing media used every vitriolic headline in the book to present Jeremy Corbyn as an antisemite.

Fast forward five years, and the same media outlets are now targeting Keir Starmer with similar accusations. Having regularly expressed solidarity with Israel and whose formula of moderation and caution about the Gaza conflict and lack of speed in pressing for a ceasefire, has upset many on Labour’s left, you would think that Starmer would be absolved from such accusations.

But that’s not been the case.

In an article headlined: “Starmer accused of allowing anti-Semitism in Britain to ‘deteriorate,’ the Telegraph describes a “string of “performative” policies which “only serve to satisfy an extreme cadre” of ultra-left-wing groups.”

Jewish Labour members, according to the article, assert that Starmer’s actions have emboldened “increasingly aggressive” pro-Palestinian protests and have “added to a climate of intolerance and hate” faced by British Jews.”

The Telegraph cites Labour Against Antisemitism (LAAS), a grassroots group of predominantly Jewish party members, who criticise government actions such as the embargo on arms sales to Israel and the resumption of funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine (UNRWA) after claims of its members’ involvement in the October 7 attacks.

The irony of the article did not go unnoticed.

Posting the article on X, children’s author Michael Rosen wrote: “Poor old Starmer. He purges the Labour Party of antisemites, he says he a Zionist, he says Israel has the right to defend itself, he says he ‘does Friday nights’ with his Jewish wife, and yet… he’s still dodgy.”

The latest feeble attempt to associate Starmer with antisemitism, follows absurd claims in September when the PM made a slip during his conference speech, inadvertently calling for a “return of the sausages” when addressing the subject of Gaza.

The gaffe was seized upon by Allison Pearson – described by comedian Stewart Lee as Britain’s worse columnist – who suggested that it proved that Starmer doesn’t care about Israel.

“If the Labour leader can’t make a minor slip in a speech without being accused of being anti-Israel, no wonder he’s retreated to Arsenal’s corporate box,” Lee mocked.

Ultimately, smear articles like these only serve only to blur the lines between credible, fact-based journalism and right-wing ‘news’ opinion and misinformation. They degrade political discourse and distract from meaningful debate, revealing more about the smearers than their targets.

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is author of Right-Wing Watch


Related posts:

Viktor Orbán is taken apart in European Parliament and told he’s the ‘useful idiot of Russia and China’

Suella Braverman to speak alongside far-right Viktor Orban at Conservative event

Labour can’t afford complacency about the ethnic minority vote

‘Brexpress’ accused of stooping to ‘new low’ for column moaning about resignation of far-right Hungarian Brexit sympathisers

The Plague of Disaster Nationalism

Review of Disaster Nationalism: The Downfall of Liberal Civilization by Richard Seymour (Verso, 2024)

By Chris Green
November 13, 2024
Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

In case you have not heard, Donald Trump was just elected President of the United States for a second time. The United States is in for some extremely difficult months and years ahead. The situation is made worse by the narrow vision and cluelessness of mainstream liberals pooh poohing legitimate voter concerns about the cost of living increases which played a major role in securing Trump’s victory. At their worst, these liberals have argued that the Biden economy was absolutely marvelous and anyone disagreeing was brainwashed by right wing propaganda. They have cited strong economic indicators achieved under Biden’s presidency but are oblivious to the fact that all too many Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, barely keeping their heads above water. It is foolish to think that Trump will do anything but make the affordability crisis of health care, child care, transportation, housing and groceries worse. But the Democrats have been feeble in offering their own solutions to these problems. 

From mainstream media analysis in recent years it has been easy to get the impression that Trump is a populist with a “white working class” base but that is misleading. As political scientist Anthony Dimaggio and others have shown, the core of the MAGA base is in the middle and upper middle classes. In this year’s election, 37% of the eligible voting population did not participate. Trump was elected with the votes of only 29% of the eligible electorate. Poor and working class people are significantly overrepresented among non-voters, the largest group among the electorate in this and every presidential election in recent memory. 

Nonetheless, as this year’s election showed, Trumpism has a visible foothold in the working class. Exit polls indicate he won 45% of union voters, 53% of voters with household incomes between $30,000 and $50,000 and 51% with household incomes between $50,000 and $100,000

Richard Seymour’s Disaster Nationalism

How did we get to this point? Is there anything we can do to effectively defeat Trumpism? Some heavy food for thought on these questions is provided by the book Disaster Nationalism: the Downfall of Liberal Civilization, published late last month. 

The book’s author, Richard Seymour, is a highly impressive intellectual with an interesting life story. He had a troubled childhood in Northern Ireland but eventually achieved a PhD in sociology at the London School of Economics. He rose to public notice in the 2000s as the proprietor of a blog called Lenin’s Tomb and as a luminary in the British Socialist Workers Party (SWP). In 2013, being of courageous and independent minded character, Seymour made a public break with the SWP’s leadership after revelations emerged that the party had covered up multiple sexual assaults by a leading party member. He has published numerous books on subjects such as British politics, social media, the history of American anti-imperialism and the intellectual decline of the late Christopher Hitchens. These days his main publishing forum is a Patreon page. Along with the noted Marxist fiction writer China Mieville, he is a member of the editorial collective of Salvage, a UK based radical left journal of fiction, sociological and political essays. He also periodically writes for The Guardian. 

In Disaster Nationalism, Seymour seeks to understand the far right populism that has become ascendant in the United States and around the world. He attaches the term “disaster nationalism” to these movements. For Seymour, disaster nationalism has not yet reached outright fascist proportions–although he allows that in many cases it has made significant strides towards that end. 

For example, he observes that during the George Floyd summer of 2020, MAGA took on the characteristics of an outright counterrevolutionary insurgency. Trump was faced with mass protests–which had significant popular support, at least initially–seeking fundamental progressive transformation of US law enforcement. The response by MAGA officialdom at the national level and among local police was to cooperate with violent, far right thugs like the Proud Boys. They embraced the vigilante murderer Kyle Rittenhouse and seemingly quietly approved of the dozens of vehicular assaults by vigilantes on BLM protestors. Meanwhile, federal law enforcement agents, operating secret police style in unmarked vehicles, started snatching BLM activists from the streets of Portland, Oregon, and in Washington state, local police deputized as US Marshals conducted an apparent extrajudicial execution of Michael Reinoehl, an antifascist activist accused of murdering Proud Boy Aaron Danielson. 

Seymour suggests that among Trump’s global allies, Israel governed by Netanyahu and India under Narendra Modi’s premiership have reached the farthest on the road to facism. Netanyahu, of course, is currently waging a literal war of extermination in Gaza. Modi’s Hindu fundamentalist government has imposed a regime of outright totalitarian terror in Kashmir and actively eroded citizenship rights for India’s Muslim minority, while police terror and mob violence against the latter has soared under his watch. For example, since Modi rose to power in 2014, hundreds of Indian Muslims have been lynched by Hindu vigilantes enforcing government laws banning the slaughter of cows and consumption of beef.

Modi, of course, is most famous for being the chief minister of the Indian state of Gujarat in 2002, leading the incitement of Hindu mobs that–with police complicity–massacred hundreds, perhaps thousands of Muslims. Seymour devotes a few paragraphs to describing the gruesome methods through which many of those Muslims were murdered. Another major Muslim pogrom overseen by Modi was the Delhi riots of February 2020, incited by politicians of Modi’s BJP party in response to mass protests against the erosion of the citizenship rights of the country’s Muslims. As Seymour observes, this pogrom occurred concurrently as Modi–-making the ultimate symbolic statement–received his friend Trump on an official state visit, just a few miles from the central area of the violence. 

Disaster Nationalism: Fascist or Prefascist?

Seymour is reluctant to label disaster nationalist movements as outright fascist: he states that, at the moment, they show predominantly prefascist characteristics. None of the movements Seymour studies have fundamentally destroyed preexisting institutions of bourgeois democracy. None of them have the ideological coherence of Hitler or Mussolini and none of them–Modi’s BJP is perhaps an exception–are able to mobilize the sort of political and social organizations with deep and widespread roots among ordinary people that Hitler and Mussolini could.. Unlike the movements of Hitler and Mussolini (to say nothing of the neoconservatives ascendant during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush), adherents of disaster nationalist movements like MAGA show no particular fervor for global military expansionism. Unlike Hitler and Mussolini, leaders like Trump and Modi have made no pretense of eliminating the economic stratification produced by unregulated capitalism. Trump, Modi and their ilk worldwide accept the fundamental inequalities produced by neoliberal capitalism–although they have sometimes offered rhetoric criticizing aspects of that capitalism. 

Seymour notes there is another major difference between the disaster nationalists of today and the classical fascists of yesteryear. First and foremost, ruling classes of both Germany and Italy backed fascist politics as their primary method in destroying vibrant radical left and labor movements that were ascendant in both countries. In contrast, disaster nationalists in the United States and around the world face a political landscape where radical left movements and labor unions have been in serious long term decline. 

Unlike classical fascists, disaster nationalists are notable for a complete lack of rationality. There is no organized group or political current that presents any serious threat to overturn existing social and economic hierarchies in the United States (or practically anywhere else in the world). However, the minds of MAGA adherents are often filled with the most idiotic paranoia and fantastical conspiracy theories about George Soros, Antifa, undocumented immigrants, pro-transgender teachers, Chinese communists and similar malefactors imminently poised to completely destroy American institutions and traditions. Many adherents of disaster nationalist movements like MAGA–in their capacity as political thinkers and activists–are profoundly stupid people. The irrationality and ineptitude of MAGA followers led to a serious setback for their movement on January 6th and we can only hope that there will be more cases of them self-destructing. 

For Seymour, a prime illustration of disaster nationalist idiocy and irrationality is the spread of the rumor during the Summer of 2020 that wildfires in eastern Oregon were set by Antifa activists. Scores of armed MAGA sympathizer vigilantes spread out in the region, setting up checkpoints on roads and in other ways harassing people in order to hunt down the mythical Antifa malefactors. Seymour observes that the actual primary trigger for the wildfires was climate change. 

At the same time, as noted above, Seymour is willing to allow that modern disaster nationalism does share characteristics with classical fascism. Obviously, leaders like Trump and Modi-as with Hitler and Mussolini before them–use racist demagoguery, scapegoating of alleged subversives–immigrants, Muslims and political progressives in the case of Trump and Modi– to mobilize their base. Seymour predicts that destruction caused by climate change in the years and decades ahead will provide further opportunities for fascist style politics. He points out that this is already the case in the Indian state of Assam where Modi’s regime has been inciting violence and conducting terror against Muslim Bangladeshi refugees who have fled climate disaster in their native country. 

Although modern disaster nationalists lack the fervor for state economic intervention of HItler and Mussolini, they often call for governments to adopt industrial policies that will supposedly reverse deindustrialization (for example Trump’s fervor for imposing tariffs on Chinese imports). Like Hitler and Mussolini, disaster nationalists often adopt a populist tone, posing as the champion of a “deserving” (i.e. white) working class whose hard-earned income has supposedly been siphoned off for welfare payments to undocumented immigrants and who have been abused and exploited by “woke” big business. 

Seymour notes that a region like eastern Oregon is particularly vulnerable to far right propaganda. Its key industries of fishing and logging in long term decline at the time of the Great Recession in 2008, the region was hit with particularly severity by the meltdown and has not recovered since. In connection to this dynamic of social and economic disintegration, Seymour quotes a 2020 statistic that 12% of the population of Oregon overall were alcoholics. 

Similar to the fascism of Hitler and Mussolini, the disaster nationalism of Trump has gained its initial core support among middle class elements fearful of downward mobility in the midst of economic and social breakdown caused by neoliberal economic policies.Seymour observes that this core support rooted in the middle class–in the case of both classical fascism and modern day disaster nationalism–eventually makes inroads into other economic classes, including the working class. 

Seymour writes that in spite of Trump’s promise to provide material bounty for American workers, “average incomes under Trump grew more slowly than under his predecessor, and the rich gained far more than anyone else.” What really has drawn masses of Americans to Trump’s movement is not material improvement but what Seymour calls the “psychological surplus offered by nationalist renewal” and “the ethic of popular war against national enemies” e.g. undocumented immigrants, Antifa, “wokeness,” etc. 

Seymour notes that this dynamic of a charismatic demagogic leader enchanting masses of ordinary people and inciting them to their worst instincts of hatred and cruelty was clearly on display in the Philippines after the election of Rodrigo Duterte as president in 2016. By the time Duterte left office in 2022 he was the most popular head of state on the planet, gaining an almost unanimous approval rating from all economic classes of Filipinos–in spite of the fact that poverty in the already deeply impoverished country steadily increased under his presidency. As president, Duterte incited regular police and private vigilantes to form death squads that murdered tens of thousands of alleged drug addicts and street criminals. This anti-crime campaign served as a convenient cover for a reign of terror against Duterte’s political dissidents, particularly those on the left. 

Marx and Freud

Seymour’s argument that demagogues like Trump and Duterte divert ordinary peoples’ attention from the injustices caused by economic elites with the device of demagogic scapegoating of society’s weakest groups–or that they pretend to be populist while actually serving economic oligarchy–is not particularly original. What is original are the tools of analysis he brings, fusing Marxist analysis with psychoanalysis. At some point, perhaps 7 or 8 years ago, references to the psychoanalytic theory of the likes of Sigmund Freud and Jacque Lacan started to appear in his writings–to the distaste of a few of his Marxist admirers. He latched onto psychoanalysis at least in part as a way of understanding his own childhood traumas–but also in order to mine it for insight into the human mind that might facilitate the revolutionary socialist goal of achieving the full flowering of human freedom. Like a true revolutionary socialist, Seymour argues that the best antidote to the disaster nationalism of Trump & company is the creation of conditions for the full flowering of what Karl Marx called the “species-being”: the fundamental needs of humans to create, live, work, love and play, without coercion and in solidarity with other people. 

There is one point in the book where Seymour’s laborious psychoanalytic dissection of the motivations of followers of disaster nationalist movements has me a little lost. It is in the book’s chapter where he makes an argument, which I find unconvincing, relating to persons who believe the conspiracy theory that the Covid vaccine contains a microchip which allows Bill Gates to spy on persons receiving the vaccine. In holding such beliefs, according to Seymour, people are really attempting to unconsciously suppress “erotic fantasies of bodily penetration.” I think he is on stronger ground when he applies this same Freudian analysis to fans of Andrew Tate, the American-British, pro- Trump misogynist influencer and reputed sex trafficker. Tate, who has achieved an alarmingly wide influence among young males in the UK, has heavily implied publicly that he would be willing to rape women if he felt like it. In defending Tate’s stance–that he deserves to get away with rape because he is a “top G”–Seymour posits that the influencer’s “extremely suasible male fans” are really displaying an unconscious openness to being raped by Tate himself, should their hero desire it. 

One of a Kind

I fully admit that I don’t always follow some of Seymour’s Freudian analysis or fully understand all of his theoretical arguments, at least upon first reading. As when I read essays on his Patreon page, Disaster Nationalism had me periodically resorting to the proverbial dictionary (Google) because the author sometimes peppers his prose with advanced vocabulary (for example, detumescence and misprision). I can report that the author’s use of such vocabulary didn’t derail my understanding of his fundamental arguments. 

I also believe that Disaster Nationalism (and his other writings) show Richard Seymour to be an extremely intelligent person with whom I never fail to feel intellectually stimulated after I’ve read him. In Disaster Nationalism, I particularly recommend chapter 6, which features Seymour applying his concept of disaster nationalism to Israel’s current genocide in Gaza. It is the best part of the book. It contains really first rate writing and analysis. 

In the breadth of his knowledge, intellectual curiosity and intelligence, Seymour, in important ways, is comparable to the late Mike Davis. He is a treasure amongst the English speaking Marxist left. 

Opinion: Donald Trump's Joe Rogan interview was a brain-rotted waste of 3 hours

“The wind drives whales crazy. … I want to be a whale psychiatrist.”

Bill Goodykoontz, 

Arizona Republic
Sat, October 26, 2024 


Have you ever been in a bar or restaurant and overheard two people who clearly don’t have any idea what they’re talking about, but they just keep talking anyway? And the dumber it gets, the louder it gets? And eventually the shrimp just isn’t that tasty anymore?

That’s what it was like listening to “The Joe Rogan Experience” Friday night, when Rogan released his much-ballyhooed interview with Donald Trump, recorded earlier in the day. It was bad, and it wouldn’t end.

What a waste of three hours.

I thought Rogan might challenge Trump, whom he has criticized before. Maybe make him defend some of his more indefensible positions, or at least try to. Every now and then he did, a little. But mostly Rogan would just bring up a topic, Trump would start talking and Rogan would let him go, unchallenged.

It's part of both Trump and Kamala Harris' efforts to use non-traditional forms of media to court voters — and to attract young male voters in particular. Trump recently held a rally at Arizona State University's Mullett Arena, for instance. It may seem like a sliver of the electorate, but in a historically close race (if you believe the polls), every little bit helps, in theory.
Trump wants to be a 'whale psychiatrist,' um, and also president

They discussed, among other things, how bull riders occasionally die, aspects of concrete and the effects of wind on whales.

“What is happening with the whales?” Rogan asked as Trump disparaged windmills, an alternative form of energy

“The wind drives whales crazy. … I want to be a whale psychiatrist.”

He also wants to be president, and he hit on several of his campaign’s greatest hits. He disparaged Harris’ intelligence, praised tariffs (“To me the most beautiful word … in the dictionary today is the word tariff. It’s more beautiful than love. It’s more beautiful than anything”) and, why not, once again falsely claimed that he won the 2020 election.

“I don’t want to get you in any disputes, but I won that election so easy,” Trump said, referring to the election he lost to President Joe Biden.

“I want to talk to you about that,” Rogan said, which, in this conversation, amounted to pushback. He did ask Trump why none of his claims of election fraud held up in court, but Trump just fell back on the usual complaints about a bad court system.
'This show is too valuable to talk about concrete' and yet

Perhaps the best quote from the entire thing, from Trump: “This show is too valuable to talk about concrete.”

I’m not sure that’s true.

Honestly, it’s kind of hard to describe what it was really like, slogging through the whole thing, just a marathon of mediocrity. Imagine a Trump rally, only if Trump was more energetic than he has been lately, with someone onstage echoing him. Even if Rogan asked Trump to explain himself, however gently, he didn't stay with it too long.

Trump told Rogan at one point forest fires could be prevented if they just raked the forest floor.

“Could you really rake the whole forest though?” Rogan asked. “I don't think you could rake the whole forest.”

And that’s the kind of tough questioning that gets you nearly 15 million listeners on Spotify alone.
Trump and Rogan seemed delighted with each other

The two seemed delighted with each other’s company, just a couple of bros talking trash between compliments and praise for MMA fighting. Just two people who cut from the same reality-show cloth, where they found big audiences and somehow became important.



“Did you just assume that because people loved you on ‘The Apprentice’ they were going to love you as a president?” Rogan asked at one point.

“Well, I was thinking it would be so easy,” Trump said.

“Well it probably would have been if the media didn’t attack you the way they did, if they didn’t conflate you with Hitler. … They love to take things out of context and distort things,” Rogan said.

“They don’t even have to,” Trump said. “They make them up entirely.”

“They do that, too,” Rogan said.

And so it went.

Another hard-hitting question from Rogan: “How are you so healthy? Is it golf?”

“No,” Trump said, “it’s genetics, I believe.” Of course he does.

Opinion: Trump's rhetoric empowered haters

They didn't cut through the noise. They amplified it

Somewhere someone is listening to this podcast and saying, finally. Just a couple of guys with some real talk. Except that it wasn’t. It was two guys surprisingly sympathetic to one another in a three-hour marathon meeting of the mutual appreciation society.

They didn’t cut through the noise. They amplified it. Rogan said at one point that while Harris has said she won’t appear on his show, he hopes she still will. It would be interesting from the standpoint of comparing how he talks to her and how he talked to Trump.

Interesting from the listener’s point of view, at least. From her perspective, why bother?

Reach Goodykoontz at bill.goodykoontz@arizonarepublic.com. Facebook: facebook.com/GoodyOnFilm. X: @goodyk. Subscribe to the weekly movies newsletter.

This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Opinion: Donald Trump's Joe Rogan interview? Don't bother

Joe Rogan Quizzes Trump On Election Fraud Claims: 'Give Me Some Examples'

Hilary Hanson
Sat, October 26, 2024 

Podcaster Joe Rogan pressed former President Donald Trump on Friday about his false claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him.

“You’ve said over and over again that you were robbed in 2020,” said Rogan, who hosts the popular and controversial “Joe Rogan Experience.”

“How do you think you were robbed?” he continued.

Trump tried to pivot.

“Well, what I’d rather do is, we’ll do it another time,” said the Republican, who’s now seeking to retake the White House. “And I would bring in papers that you would not believe. So many different papers. That election was so crooked. It was the most crooked election.”

Rogan tried to extract more specifics:

Rogan: OK, but give me some examples of how.

Trump: Well, let’s start on the top and the easy ones. They were supposed to get legislative approval to do the things they did, and they didn’t get it. In many cases, they didn’t get it.

Rogan: What things?

Trump: Anything.

Rogan: Legislative approval of?

Trump: Like for extensions of the voting, for voting earlier, for this — all different things. By law, they had to get legislative approvals. You don’t have to go any further than that.

Trump’s claim about legislative approvals is seemingly related to an argument from some Republicans that state officials changed certain election procedures in 2020 without proper authorization. In 2021, the fact-checking site PolitiFact called this a “flawed argument” in a detailed explainer on the legal issues involved.

Speaking to Rogan, Trump went on: “If you take a look at Wisconsin, they virtually admitted that the election was rigged, robbed and stolen. They wouldn’t give access in certain areas to the ballots because the ballots weren’t signed. They weren’t originals. They were — we could go into this stuff. We could go into the ballots, or we could go into the overall.”

In 2021, a nonpartisan audit of Wisconsin’s 2020 election found that although some absentee ballots had only partial witness signatures, the vote was — in the words of a GOP leader on the state Legislature’s Audit Committee — “largely safe and secure.” Only eight ballots were missing a witness signature altogether, and only three were missing a voter signature.

“Are you going to present this ever?” Rogan asked Trump, to which the Republican responded, “Uh.”

That exchange swiftly made it into social media posts from the Democratic campaign of Trump’s 2024 rival, Vice President Kamala Harris.

“Do you think, like — ” Rogan then started to ask, before Trump cut him off.

“Let me give you just one more,” he said. Trump then asserted that controversy around a laptop owned by Democrat Joe Biden’s son ― and false speculation by intelligence officials that stories about the laptop could be Russian disinformation ― significantly swayed the 2020 election in Biden’s favor.

Rogan’s three-hour conversation with Trump delayed a Michigan rally for the Republican, leaving his supporters waiting in the cold for him to appear.

Trump pushes false election claims, 'weaves' from topics during Joe Rogan interview

LALEE IBSSA , SOO RIN KIM, KELSEY WALSH and IVAN PEREIRA
Sat 26 October 2024


Former President Donald Trump used his appearance on "The Joe Rogan Experience" to push false claims about the 2020 election, bash his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, and attack his former White House staff.

The episode, which went live Friday night, likely reached one of the biggest podcast audiences in the country, with over 15.7 million followers on Spotify. Trump's interview caused a three-hour delay at a planned rally in Michigan Friday night.

PHOTO: In these screen grabs from a video, Joe Rogan interviews Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump during The Joe Rogan Experience podcast, on Oct. 25, 2024. (The Joe Rogan Experience)

With just over a week to go until November's election, Trump continued to spread doubts about the election results, slammed secure voting practices, such as mail-in voting and voting machines, and doubled down on his false beliefs that he won the 2020 presidential election.

"You had old-fashioned ballot screwing," Trump told Joe Rogan, making unfounded claims about unsigned ballots and "phony votes."

Rogan compared the label of election denialist to the labeling of anti-vaxxer, with Trump railing against mail-in voting despite telling his supporters to go out and vote however they want.

PHOTO: Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump speaks during an interview on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast, on Oct. 25, 2024. (The Joe Rogan Experience )

When Rogan asked Trump why he didn't publish comprehensive evidence of alleged voter fraud in 2020, the former president got combative, falsely claiming he did and argued he lost the election because judges "didn't have what it took."

When Rogan brought up Democrats and Harris labeling him a fascist, Trump shot back.

"Kamala is a very low IQ person. She's a very low IQ," the former president said.

Trump, who has come under fire after former Chief of Staff John Kelly said in interviews that Trump praised Nazi generals, told Rogan he had an affinity for Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee. "He took a war that should have been over in a few days, and it was, you know, years of hell of vicious war," Trump said.

MORE: Election officials, concerned about misinformation, confront Elon Musk on his own turf

The unedited episode was more of a conversation than an interview as Rogan asked Trump to reminisce on his political arch and let him ramble about various topics from the environment to the economy to health care.

However, in the freeform format, even Rogan got lost at times.

"Your weave is getting wide. I wanna get back to tariffs," Rogan said at one point.

Trump referenced his style of talking at a rally in August, calling it "the weave."

"I'll talk about like, nine different things and they all come back brilliantly together," he said at the time.

PHOTO: Joe Rogan interviews Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast, on Oct. 25, 2024. (The Joe Rogan Experience)

On the Rogan podcast, Trump defended his own age and cognitive acuity while attacking President Joe Biden's cognitive ability.

"Biden gives people a bad name because that's not an old – that's not an age. I think they say it because I'm three or four years younger, you know? I think that's why they say it. They say his age. It's not his age. He's got a problem," Trump said.

MORE: How Trump has undermined public trust in election system leading up to 2024 race

While talking about the first presidential debate between Trump and Biden, Rogan floated a disproven conspiracy theory that Democrats wanted the debate to happen earlier than usual to get Biden out of the race.

Trump acknowledged it but disagreed, saying, "I don't think anybody thought he was going to get out," referring to Biden.

PHOTO: Republican presidential nominee, former President Donald Trump, arrives for a campaign rally at Avflight at Cherry Capital Airport on Oct. 25, 2024, in Traverse City, Michigan. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Toward the end of the podcast, Rogan asked Trump about extraterrestrial life and if Trump believed in aliens to which the former president went on to say there may be life on Mars.

"Mars, we've had probes there and rovers, and I don't think there's any life there," Rogan pushed back.

"Maybe it's life that we don't know about," Trump retorted.

Trump pushes false election claims, 'weaves' from topics during Joe Rogan interview originally appeared on abcnews.go.com

Fact check: 32 false claims Trump made to Joe Rogan

Daniel Dale, CNN
Sun 27 October 2024 

Donald Trump sat down Friday with prominent podcast host Joe Rogan for a conversational interview that ran for nearly three hours — and the former president delivered his standard bombardment of false claims, at least 32 in all.

Many of those false claims are lies that were debunked months or even years ago. The claims spanned a variety of topics, including immigration policy, environmental and energy policy, the legitimacy of the 2020 election, Trump’s record in office, Vice President Kamala Harris, crowd sizes, and how schools deal with transgender children.

Here is a fact check of 32 false claims Trump made to Rogan. This is not intended as a complete list of the inaccurate statements Trump uttered in the interview; with just over a week to go until Election Day, we were unable to look into every dubious assertion he made.
Immigration

Migrants and murderers: Trump repeated his frequent false claim that “we had 13,099 murderers dropped in our country over the last three years.” In reality, as the Department of Homeland Security and independent experts have noted, that official figure is about immigrants with homicide convictions in the US today who entered the country over decades, including during Trump’s own administration, not over the past three years or under the Biden administration. You can read more here.

Trump’s border wall: The former president falsely claimed, “You know, I built 570 miles of wall.” That’s a significant exaggeration; official government data shows 458 miles were built under Trump — including both wall built where no barriers had existed before and wall built to replace previous barriers.

Harris’ border role: Trump repeated a regular false claim about Harris: “She was in charge of the border.” She was not and is not; Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is the Biden administration official in charge of border security. In reality, President Joe Biden gave Harris a more limited immigration-related assignment in 2021, asking her to lead diplomacy with El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras in an attempt to address the conditions that prompted their citizens to try to migrate to the United States.

The number of migrants: Trump claimed that at least “21 million” people have illegally crossed the border during the Biden administration. Through September, the country had recorded under 11 million nationwide “encounters” with migrants during the Biden administration, including millions who were rapidly expelled from the country; even adding in so-called gotaways who evaded detection, estimated by House Republicans as being roughly 2 million, there’s no way the total is “21 million.”
Elections, campaigns and crowds

The outcome of the 2020 election: Trump repeated his lie that he won the 2020 election, falsely claiming, “I won that second election so easy.” He lost, fair and square, to Biden, who beat Trump 306-232 in the Electoral College and earned over 7 million more votes than Trump.

The legitimacy of the 2020 election: Trump made various specific false assertions about the 2020 election, claiming it was “crooked”; that his opponents cheated using the guise of the Covid-19 pandemic; and, vaguely, that it was marred by “old-fashioned ballot-screwing.” All of this is baseless.

Polling in 2016: Trump told a story about how, he said, a Washington Post/ABC News poll of Wisconsin during his 2016 race against Hillary Clinton showed him “down 17 points the day before the election,” but he knew it was wrong because of the size of his crowds, and he ended up winning the state: “I was down 17 points in Wisconsin and I won; it’s crooked stuff.” This story is false; the poll showing him down 17 the week of the election came during his 2020 race against Biden, and he lost Wisconsin that year — though by less than one percentage point.

The 2020 election and Wisconsin: Trump falsely claimed, “If you take a look at Wisconsin, they virtually admitted that the election was rigged, robbed and stolen.” This did not happen, “virtually” or otherwise; while some Wisconsin Republicans certainly support Trump’s claim that the election was rigged and stolen, the state’s elections authorities have not made such assertions — and as PolitiFact previously reported, even Republican-led election reviews did not find that Trump won the state.

An election ruling in Virginia: Trump falsely claimed that, just before he walked in for the Friday interview, there was a ruling in a legal “case where they found thousands of illegal ballots.” This case did not involve “illegal ballots”; rather, a judge ruled that Virginia had purged voter registrations from its rolls too close to Election Day. You can read more here.

Grocery stores and identification: Calling for strict voter identification laws, Trump spoke of how identification is required in other circumstances, saying, “When you go to a grocery store, you give ID.” This was a little vaguer than his previous declarations that “you need” ID to buy groceries, but it’s nonsense nonetheless; few grocery shoppers are required to provide identification unless they are paying by check or buying alcohol, tobacco or certain medications.

A Carter commission and mail-in ballots: Trump repeated his false claim that a commission led by former President Jimmy Carter published a report whose “primary finding was you cannot have mail-in ballots.” Trump added, “The one thing with Jimmy Carter: He had a very strong commission. It was, no mail-in ballots.”

Though the commission Carter co-chaired was generally skeptical of mail-in ballots, calling absentee voting “the largest source of potential voter fraud,” it did not say, “You cannot have mail-in ballots,” as Trump claimed. In fact, its report highlighted an example of successful mail-only elections — noting that Oregon, a state that has been conducting elections by mail-in voting since the late 1990s, “appears to have avoided significant fraud in its vote-by-mail elections by introducing safeguards to protect ballot integrity, including signature verification.”

The report also offered some recommendations for making the use of mail-in ballots more secure and called for “further research on the pros and cons” of voting by mail (as well as early voting).

Trump’s Las Vegas crowd size: In his latest exaggeration about crowd sizes, Trump claimed there were “29,000 people” at his event the night prior. His rally Thursday night, in Las Vegas, was at an arena with a capacity under 19,000.

Trump’s McDonald’s crowd size: Trump falsely claimed that there were “28,000 people sitting around” the McDonald’s in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where he held a publicity event last weekend in which he briefly performed some of the duties of an employee (the restaurant was closed to the public). This is fiction; while videos show there was a substantial pro-Trump crowd gathered in the vicinity of the restaurant, it is obvious that it didn’t approach 28,000. A local journalist on the scene, Tom Sofield, the publisher of Bucks County news outlets, wrote on social media Tuesday: “There were several thousand excited supporters nearby, but the figure wasn’t 25,000, as stated by the former president later.”

Harris’ schedule: Trump, criticizing Harris’ work ethic, falsely claimed she “took off yesterday” and “took off the day before,” and also that “she’s going to take off tomorrow or the next day.” Trump is entitled to argue that Harris isn’t campaigning hard, but she was not “off” or scheduled to be off any of these days. On Wednesday, she participated in a CNN town hall in Pennsylvania; on Thursday, she held a rally in Georgia; on Friday, she held a rally in Texas; on Saturday, she held a rally in Michigan; on Sunday, she is scheduled to make a series of campaign stops in Philadelphia.
Foreign policy

Trump and ISIS: Repeating one of his regular false claims, Trump said, “We defeated ISIS in record time. It was supposed to take years, and we did it in a matter of weeks.” The ISIS “caliphate” was declared fully liberated more than two years into Trump’s presidency.

Obama and Kim Jong Un: Trump, touting his relationship with Kim Jong Un, revived his old false claim that the North Korean leader refused to meet with Barack Obama when the then-president sought a meeting: “They wouldn’t meet Obama. He (Obama) tried to meet. They wouldn’t even talk to him about it.”

There is no evidence that Obama ever sought a meeting with Kim. Independent experts on North Korea and former Obama officials told CNN in 2019 that the claim is fictional.

Who pays tariffs: Trump repeated his frequent false claim that, through tariffs, “I took in hundreds of billions of dollars from China.” US importers make the tariff payments, not China, and study after study has found that Americans bore the overwhelming majority of the cost of Trump’s tariffs on China.

Previous presidents and tariffs on China: Trump repeated his frequent false claim that no previous president had imposed tariffs on Chinese imports, saying, “Nobody took in 10 cents, not one other president.” The US was actually generating billions per year in revenue from tariffs on Chinese imports before Trump took office; in fact, the US has had tariffs on Chinese imports since 1789. Trump’s predecessor, Obama, imposed additional tariffs on Chinese goods.

China and Taiwan: Trump repeated an exaggeration about China: “The day I left, they flew 28 bombers over the middle of Taiwan — 28 bombers.”

Trump was wrong about key details of this incident. On the third and fourth days of the Biden presidency, not the day Trump left office, China sent military planes into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone over the Taiwan Strait — not “over the middle of Taiwan,” a major difference. Also, the incident involved 28 Chinese planes but not “28 bombers.” The New York Times reported at the time that the Taiwanese military said eight Chinese bombers were involved; the other planes were fighters, anti-submarine aircraft and a reconnaissance plane.

And it’s worth noting that China also sent planes into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone during Trump’s presidency. In early 2021, Taiwan News reported that, according to a recent report funded by Taiwan’s government, “In 2020, the Chinese military violated Taiwan’s air defense identification zone (ADIZ) more times than in any year since 1996.”
Environment and energy

Global warming and sea level rise: Trump repeated a regular false claim minimizing the threat of climate change: “I watch these poor fools talking about, ‘Our oceans will rise one-eighth of an inch over the next 500 years.’” The global average sea level is rising more per year than Trump claimed that unnamed concerned people say it will rise over 500 years; NASA reported in March that the global average sea-level rise in 2023 was 0.17 inches per year, more than double the rate in 1993.

Electric vehicle charging stations: Trump falsely claimed that the Biden administration spent $9 billion on just eight electric vehicle charging stations: “They built the charger stations, right, in the Midwest. They built eight of them. They cost $9 billion.”

As FactCheck.org and others have noted, Trump was distorting news articles about the slow pace at which $7.5 billion in federal funds allocated for electric charging have been spent. The articles reported that, as of March, only eight charging stations had been built under the program (not all in the Midwest). The articles did not say that these stations had themselves cost the entire $7.5 billion, let alone $9 billion.

The number of charging stations built with this federal funding has increased since March. The Federal Highway Administration told USA Today that, as of October 11, 20 stations had been built with the money, with plans underway for more than 800 additional stations.

California and electricity: Trump, reviving his false claim about the stability of the electric system in California, said, “They want to go to all electric cars, but they have brownouts every weekend.” California does not have “brownouts every weekend.” A spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom told CNN in late August that the state had not had any outages because of electricity demand since 2020, and a spokesperson for the entity that manages the power grid for about 80% of the state said the same.

A LNG plant in Louisiana: Trump revived a false claim he repeatedly made during his presidency, claiming that he “instantly” secured a key environmental permit to allow for the construction of a massive liquefied natural gas facility in Louisiana after the initiative had been on hold “for 14 years.” In fact, this facility was granted its key permits under the Obama administration, and its construction also began under Obama.

Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve: Trump repeated his false claim that before the Biden administration suspended oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in 2021, “They were getting ready to start drilling. … It was all set to go.”

“To quote our friends at PolitiFact, what Trump said in this case qualifies as ‘pants on fire,’” Pavel Molchanov, an energy analyst at Raymond James & Associates, said last year after Trump made the same claim. Molchanov said, “No one was ready to start drilling there, in 2017 or at any other point in time.”

There is no drilling infrastructure in place in the refuge; major oil companies have shown little interest in the site; and the seven leases the Biden administration eventually canceled were all held by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, a state entity that is not an oil company.
Trump’s record and history

Trump’s response to “lock her up” chants: Trump repeated his false claim that he “never said” the words “lock her up” when his supporters chanted that refrain about his 2016 Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton. He added, “I’d always go, ‘Take it easy. Just relax.’” In fact, Trump repeatedly said the words “lock her up” in both 2016 and 2020, and he also repeatedly called for Clinton’s imprisonment using other language.

Trump and Oprah: Trump repeated a false claim he has been making for at least 11 years, saying he appeared on Oprah Winfrey’s popular television program during “one of her last shows” in “that final week.” In fact, Trump appeared about three and a half months before Winfrey’s show concluded, not during its star-studded final week.

Trump’s tax cuts: Repeating another regular false claim, the former president claimed that he signed the “biggest tax cuts in history.” Independent analyses have found that his tax-cut law was not the biggest in history, either in percentage of gross domestic product or in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Supreme Court appointments: Trump touted the fact that he appointed three Supreme Court justices, then said, “Most people get none,” adding that “even if a president is in there for eight years, oftentimes they never have a chance.” This is false; no president who served for eight years did not get a chance to appoint a single Supreme Court justice. Only four presidents didn’t get a chance to appoint one justice to the Supreme Court, as PolitiFact previously reported, and three of them served for less than a full four-year term, while the other, Carter, served for four years.

Trump’s uncle and MIT: Trump repeated a false claim that his uncle John Trump, whom he has repeatedly invoked as evidence of the smarts of his family, was the “longest-serving” professor in the history of the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology. John Trump was one of the longest-serving professors at MIT, but not the very longest; the school told Newsweek early this year that at least 10 other people were on the faculty for longer.
Miscellaneous

Schools and transgender children: Trump repeated his false claim that schools are sending children for gender-affirming surgeries without parental consent: “Who would want to have — there’s so many — the transgender operations: Where they’re allowed to take your child when he goes to school and turn him into a male — to a female — without parental consent.”

There is no evidence that schools in any part of the United States have sent children for gender-affirming surgeries without their parents’ approval, or performed unapproved such surgeries on-site; none of that is “allowed” anywhere in the country. Even in the states where gender-affirming surgery is legal for people under age 18, parental consent is required before a minor can undergo such a procedure.

Trump’s own campaign has not been able to find a single example of this ever having happened anywhere in the United States. You can read more here.

Alyssa Farah Griffin: Trump told a thoroughly false story about a former official in his administration, Alyssa Farah Griffin, who is now a co-host of the ABC talk show “The View” and a political commentator on CNN. Trump claimed Griffin worked in the administration as “like an assistant press secretary”; that, upon leaving the administration, she “writes me this gorgeous letter,” “the most beautiful letter,” declaring “he was the greatest president”; but then, upon joining “The View,” that she suddenly started “hitting the hell out of me” with criticism.

This is untrue in several ways.

Griffin had the top-tier role of White House communications director and assistant to the president upon her resignation in late 2020, not “assistant press secretary” (she had previously been Pentagon press secretary and Vice President Mike Pence’s press secretary).

Griffin did issue a statement upon her resignation saying, “It’s been the honor of a lifetime to serve in the Trump administration over the last three and a half years,” but did not say that Trump was “the greatest president.” She said Saturday that she has never written Trump a private letter.

And she began sharply criticizing Trump shortly after the riot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, not when she started guest-hosting “The View” in October 2021 or when she was named a permanent co-host in August 2022.

Abraham Lincoln’s sons: Trump told a story about how President Abraham Lincoln was a “very depressed” person in part because he lost his son “whose name was Tad.” Trump repeated later in the story that Lincoln lost his son “Tad.” In fact, Tad Lincoln outlived Abraham Lincoln by six years; the son Abraham Lincoln lost in 1862 was Willie. (This appeared to be an inadvertent mistake by Trump, but his claim was still inaccurate, and Trump has repeatedly bashed Biden over such mix-ups.)