The Presidency

Some may think it's heresy to say that Trump's presidency is a blessing in disguise. Lessons are best learned by examples. This presidency is a perfect example, and should be a profound lesson for us, of how quickly a great democracy can be transformed into a dictatorship.

The president of a great nation should be, no, must be, a person of impeccable character. The president of a nation is the representative of that nation's virtues to the rest of the world. A nation is judged by others from the behavior and dignity radiating from the person elected by that nation's citizens to represent them before the world.

Has our president not managed to alienate most of the nations formerly friendly to us? Those who formerly regarded us with respect and as a leader, do they not quietly pity us and view our government with distrust?

Over a period of about two years a special counsel investigated the campaign of our president to determine whether or not there was "collusion" with Russia, a nation though not hostile, yet still antipodal in its objectives to those of our nation. Though discovering contacts by campaign leaders with Russia, the special counsel apparently could not elicit conclusive facts of collusion from documents or testifying witnesses. This caused the president to proclaim victory over "witch hunt", shouting out, as many times before, there was no collusion.

But whether or not there is or was collusion is not the essence of what should give us concern. Instead of trying to find collusion, we should address whether the president is or could become a subservient patsy of Russia. There is no doubt that Russia invested much effort and money in influencing our unsuspecting and one might say gullible electorate with hideous distortions of truth, seeking to cause them to vote for a candidate of Russia's choice. So why would a foreign nation, not friendly to us, try with might to change the outcome of an election to a particular candidate? is it wrong to say there is a rebuttable presumption that at least some control over that individual might exist? Has ever before in the history of our nation a foreign nation invested so much effort to push the outcome of an election to the highest office in our country toward a candidate of its choice?

Whether or not one believes our president was elected because of Russia's interference in campaign politics preceding the election depends on how one voted. But there should be a consensus that information on candidates ostensibly true disseminated prior to elections is used by the electorate in making a choice to vote for or against a certain candidate. Does all this not give rise to a well-founded conclusion that a concerted effort by Russia disseminating wrongly biased information favoring Russia's chosen candidate was helpful in electing him?

Has our president not been gratful for the help he has gotten? After he fired Comey, did he not comment to Russians something to the extent they could relax not that Comey is off their back? Did he not congratulate the Russian leader on his re-election? Did he not have a private telephone conversation with the Russian leader prior to and while delaying a punishing strike against targets of a mid-eastern nation for directing a gas attack against civilians? Did he not suggest and support a re-admission of Russia to the conference of the group of major economic countries in the world? Did he not have a one-on-one meeting with the leader of Russia without ever disclosing the actual contents of discussions to the congressional intelligence committees?

The elected head of our nation should be more than without proven improprieties, the president should be without even a hint or appearance of any impropriety.

Think about the issues raised in the above. Maybe one can develop and expand on some of the thoughts and maybe even give ideas to our congress, present or post 2020, on how to protect the future of our great nation.