Truth has consquences
“Truth or Consequences” was a popular quiz show that ran on radio and TV for 48 years. The reality show President Trump is hosting daily from the White House — disguised as a press briefing — might well be called “Truth Has Consequences.”
Throughout his Presidency, Trump has played fast and loose with the facts. During his first three years in office, the Washington Post documented 16,241 “false or misleading claims,” and the pace of his perfidy continues to accelerate. But many of his untruths have been relatively harmless: boastful bluster enhancing his ego.
Now, however, the President’s impulse to mislead and misinform the public could have an impact. The latest example: Trump’s relentless promotion of unproven antimalarial drugs like hydroxychloroquine as a miracle cure for the COVID-19 virus. In a typical tweet last month, he announced the drugs have “a real chance to be one of the biggest game-changers in the history of medicine.”
Trump’s own medical experts have said his optimism is unjustified, and contradicts basic scientific principles. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said on CBS, “In terms of science, I don’t think we can definitely say it works.” On Fox News, he warned the country to be “careful that we don’t make that majestic leap to assume that this is a knockout drug.”
During a White House briefing, a CNN reporter directly asked Fauci his opinion of the antimalarial medications boosted by Trump. The president physically — and metaphorically — inserted himself between the reporter and the doctor. “You don’t have to answer,” the President insisted. And Fauci fell silent.
That episode epitomizes the President’s approach to the pandemic, and why it’s so profoundly dangerous. Yes, he’s occasionally listened to Fauci and other experts, especially when the rising death toll made it clear the country couldn’t follow the President’s hope to reopen the economy by Easter. But he thrashes and trashes his way through every day, eager to practice medicine without a license and contradict the scientists whose cautious counsel, he believes, will throttle the economic recovery and his own reelection chances.
In promoting the use of antimalarial drugs, “Dr. Trump” blithely tells the public, “What have you got to lose?” Plenty, say the experts.
Dr. Patrice Harris, president of the American Medical Association, told CNN she wouldn’t prescribe hydroxychloroquine for a patient with the coronavirus because it could cause fatal heart problems. “You could lose your life,” she said. “It’s unproven.”
Another example of the President’s perilous refusal to acknowledge the consequences of the truth: his reaction to a report by the inspector general in his own Department of Health and Human Services. That survey of more than 300 hospitals revealed “severe shortages” of testing kits and personal protective equipment, but when asked about it, Trump said dismissively: “It’s just wrong.”
When pressed by a Fox News reporter, he told her she’d asked a “horrid” question and should be offering him “congratulations” — a statement that shows he just ignores the journalistic method as he does the scientific method.
Trump’s refusal to understand and accept scientific findings goes far deeper than the current pandemic. Exhibit A: He’s repeatedly contradicted the consensus on global warming and called it “a total, and very expensive, hoax!”
Indeed, the President’s disdain for experts of any kind, especially those who try to hold him accountable for his actions, is a hallmark of his presidency. Right in the middle of the pandemic, he found time to fire Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community’s inspector general who had forwarded the whistleblower’s complaint to Congress that led to Trump’s impeachment.
Trump accused Atkinson of doing a “terrible job” and promoting a “fake report,” when the exact opposite is true. Atkinson did his job superbly well, transmitting to Congress a report that has been proven valid in virtually every detail.
As the Washington Post editorialized, Atkinson’s dismissal “was the most blatant and shameful act of retribution yet by a president who has sought to shut down all independent checks on his behavior.” To prove the Post’s point, Trump then removed Glenn Fine, the inspector general assigned to oversee the $2 trillion pandemic rescue package.
The pattern is now clear. Trump will not listen to experts who contradict his prejudices or political selfinterest. And he will get rid of anybody who provides a check on his behavior.
Only one force remains that can provide that check: the voters.
Steven Roberts teaches politics and journalism at George Washington University. He can be contacted by email at stevecokie@gmail.com.