Republicans have for many years worked to elect a president who is not brilliant or particularly capable, but who could be manipulated through flattery and false subservience. (Dick Cheney more or less ran the George W. Bush show.) They thought Trump would be the perfect tool but badly miscalculated. Now they are the tools of a narcissistic psychopath who aims to be an autocrat.
Thanks for the invitation to the Zoom meeting, Dr. Lee. I based my CAT/SAST time conversion on 14:00 EDT, arriving at 19:00 SAST. However, it appears that 14:00 EST (20:00 CAT/SAST) is being used, which is difficult for me tonight, as I am shortly going into another program (no weekend cooling off!). Therefore, I will add another written perspective in addition to the previous one(s). It would be helpful to the general society in America and globally if all of this expert psychiatric, psychological scholarship pertaining to one person, a former U. S. president, and, seemingly, to his mega group, can also be translated into general terms that can benefit the whole society. If the necessary expertise directed toward an individual remains purely on the individual level, there is a danger of other, similarly inclined persons, repetitively "reinventing the wheel" of deplorable, dysfunctional, socially, ethically and morally unacceptable behaviors, personally or/and representatively. Therefore, if this superlative scholarship addressing the issue at hand, the conduct and sentencing of a former U. S. president, as well as the other pertinent, previous and current writings on the topic, can also be comprehensively put into general terms, of course with specific examples, this scholarship can be studied semester after semester endlessly by generations of mental health students in America and around the globe, by persons of all disciplines and by the general public, with a continually nurturing, educating and guiding effect, that will assist in the transformation and upliftment of human societies around the globe. I look forward to the Zoom recordings between my online semesters. God bless and good night!
I attended most of the symposium. If your concern is one of language alien to *a non-practitioner, l can assure you that I am not trained in these areas. Gratefully, in this remarkable meeting, I confronted little in the way of jargon; the ideas elucidated were crystal clear to lay(wo)men (e.g., me).
Thank you, Ned McDoodle. The video recording attests to the veracity of your observations. All that contributes to universal applicability and avoidance of a "pass the buck" mentality is helpful.
WOW. Your Zoom-with-a-view was really something for me to remember. As a conservative by temperament from an essentially Republican family, I assure my more progressive friends that, not to worry, we will be on the same side of the barricades, *should the worse come to *the worst case. Your encouragement that the larger human system re-adjusts (i.e., heals) quickly once the source of the social psychopathy is removed, hopefully, will preclude those barricades. You cite the following thought that zapped me between the eyes (and thank you for that unsettling sensation):
🫣✍️🤔🤝😇
"A forensic psychiatrist or psychologist may first begin by evaluating how serious the crimes were that a particular convicted criminal committed. For example, the crimes that Donald Trump committed may lexically appear to be the same as something relatively harmless—so-called 'white lies' or 'white collar' misdemeanors, cheating people of a few dollars, etc.—or could indicate deliberately and systematically attempting to subvert and suspend the Constitution of the United States and the rule of law, and to replace our democracy with a dictatorship."
🗽🙏💡✌️⚖️
You cut to chase, here, Dr Lee. While I may disagree on specific political views with many in today's forum, what we face is no longer a question of national politics but one of the values anterior to our politics. That Trump drumpfs many ideas and behavioral norms we hold dear indicates his mental illness. *Yet he is not crazy in the sense that his warped thinking exempts him from accountability. Trump is consciously attacking the values anterior to our cherished polity, without which no democracy can function:
> all (wo)men created equal and entitled *to opportunities to advance;
> freedom to dissent and to dissent not only openly, but also vociferously;
> privacy in our persons and personal lives;
> spiritual and religious autonomy and protection;
> governmental powers coming from the citizenry and NOT the other way; as well as,
> many other values articulated during the Age of Enlightenment.
For 55 years, with the famous decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), SCOTUS has emphasized the limits that Trump’s speech has exceeded. The “constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not” protect any speech that has been proved to constitute “advocacy of the use of force” or “advocacy” of any other “law violation” when “such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and it “is likely to incite or produce such action.”
Since at least January 6, 2021, Trump’s own speech—and the lawlessness and violence of the people who hear or see his speech—repeatedly have created copious evidence that Trump’s speech does incite, and Trump intends his speech to incite, imminent lawless action (including violence). For many years, starting with Trump’s rallies, Trump’s own speech has created evidence that it has the power—and he intends it—to incite imminent lawless action (including violence) by people because they see or hear Trump’s speech.
Yes, and this was proven in civil court in the Colorado 14th Amendment trial which found Trump was responsible for inciting the Jan 6 insurrection. The dynamics between Trump and his followers leading to violence at his command were explored in detail by an expert witness Dr. Peter Simi. This may be influential to Judge Merchan since the testimony was given in a civil trial with cross-examination by Trump's aggressive attorneys.
The whole trial is on C-SPAN, Dr. Peter Simi's testimony starts here:
Some examples of Trump’s threats expressed of violence he intends to commit if he is free to run for president:
1. Explicit extortionary threat to all voters “There will be a bloodbath if I don’t win”.
2. Above being a declaration he intends to take the presidency by violent action, if he loses.
3. Asking a retired general advising him “Can’t we just shoot them? (the Black Lives Matter protesters)? Such a statement betrays the extremely violence-oriented, irrational ideology of the man, not to mention his cluelessness re the Constitutional right to redress of grievances to our government and First Amendment free speech rights of expression! Any eighth-grader knows these things—but not ex-president Trump!
4. Seven citizens died as a direct result of what Trump conspired with many Republican operatives deliberately to do on January 6, 2021. His sentence must reflect punishment for the terrible loss seven families suffered because Trump attempted to overthrow the election result he could not accept!
To protect all of us from this certain further violence, he must be incarcerated for the maximum sentence allowed.
As a mental health professional and former editor, I’d like to make a few suggestions.
First, some of the writing in the conclusion is a bit awkward. You may wish to hone it as well as the body of the document. Ensuring that the language is both precise and accessible is essential.
If you don’t have an editor on your team, I volunteer.
Second, you may want to provide more context for the physical violence assessment, such as the type of factors considered, what Trump’s score of eight signifies, and what the “normal” range is.
If the body of the document does not provide examples of how you arrived at your overall assessment (e.g., observing Trump call for General Milley’s execution), they probably should be incorporated into the conclusion.
More substantively, I wonder whether you would consider including:
1. The impact of what appears to be dementia on Trump’s psychopathy. To my mind, the interaction between the two conditions makes him even more dangerous.
2. The role of Trump’s psychopathy in fostering violence contagion, which in turn feeds into his psychopathy.
What is not being considered is emergency legislation. If such does not exist, NOW is the time to create it. Such would propose that DT be shown the door out of the US despite having birthright citizenship. Anything else is going to have us (not him) chasing our tails trying to deal with his willful malignance.
So basically you are filing an amicus brief to the State of New York Judge Merchan. I’m here for it ‘cuz Mike Flynn filed one to the appellate court and to the Untouchables on the bump stock case.
I know some intelligent, good people who are fairly strong Trump fans. To try to understand this phenomenon I asked them why so many people still support Trump even after Jan. 6. Most cited policy concerns. The most intriguing response was perhaps the most insightful. "People still support Trump because he's so popular."
That struck me as analogous to something I'd read about in connection with a visit to Istanbul, Turkiye. When today's Istanbul was occupied by Romans, it was known as Constantinople and it was the capital of the Eastern Roman (a.k.a. Byzantine) Empire. Istanbul still has a wealth of amazing Roman sites and artifacts. The location of the Roman hippodrome (where chariots were raced) is just across from the amazing Hagia Sophia (and right beside the Blue Mosque).
Events at the hippodrome eventually led to incredibly destructive Nike riots involving two factions known by their colors (Blues and Greens). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nika_riots. The following are excerpts from that page:
"The Roman empire had well-developed associations, known as demes, which supported the different factions (or teams) to which competitors in certain sporting events belonged, especially in chariot racing." By "the 6th century the only teams with any influence were the Blues and Greens." "The demes had become a focus for various social and political issues for which the general Byzantine population lacked other forms of outlet. They combined aspects of street gangs and political parties, taking positions on current issues, including theological problems and claimants to the throne."
Toward the end of a day of races:
the partisan chants changed from "Blue" or "Green" to a unified Nίκα ("Nika", meaning "Win!", "Victory!" or "Conquer!"), and the crowds broke out and began to assault the palace. For the next five days, the palace was under siege. Fires started during the tumult destroyed much of the city, including the city's foremost church, the Hagia Sophia (which Justinian would later rebuild).
Of course, I'd recommend speaking with an attorney with experience in criminal matters at the trial level. The prosecutor's office also might be willing to offer suggestions.
i asked #ChatGPT to create a storyboard using elements ive suggested, i e., red 1967 @Cadillac ambulance, men and women in white coats, a #straitjacket size 56 #portly, and actors like #Robert_De_Niro cast in supporting roles to maximize news coverage of the filing of senior #mentalhealth professionals' consensus sentencing recommendation
Thank you, Dr. Lee, for the opportunity to review the recorded meeting and comment on the proposed recommendations. I am appreciative of all you and your colleagues are doing to alert and protect the public.
I am not a mental health professional.
I have the entire written statement in front of me, but it appears from the meeting that you are requesting comment solely on the recommendations in italics which you read aloud. I will confine my comments here to that. (I do have issues/comments on the non-italicized text which proceeds the recommendations and it’s unclear to me whether that text is intended to be included in the letter which will reach the probation officer, the DA, and the Judge, etc.)
My comments:
“… the only way to protect our democracy, and the legal and electoral structure without which it will cease to exist, from the defendant’s attempt to destroy it—the crime of which he has just been convicted…” Because the sentencing is for the crime(s) for which DJT was just convicted, it would be wise to bring a legal mind on board to help you parse out language that clearly describes this conviction. Once that is clarity is achieved, the panel can address the breadth of the damage that this specific conviction(s) has caused, and how it relates to both past behavior (E. Jean Carroll) and the escalation in behavior that followed and for which he is now indicted in other cases (January 6th, Election interference, Classified documents). From my lay person’s perspective, the behavior related to this specific conviction (falsification of 34 business records with conspiracy/intent to further a crime?) has affected people on an individual level, resulting in the imprisonment of two colleagues and a woman questioning the “power balance” in a sexual encounter that occurred years earlier. On a broader level, the behavior deprived people of information that would have helped inform their opinion as to the fitness of the candidate for the office of President.
“Standardized, evidence-based violence risk assessment tools agree with our assessment.” The panel is comprised of psychiatrists who are also medical doctors, and, at their core, scientists. The scientists need to generally explain the sources of the observations that were applied to the risk assessment tools to get the scoring. It’s my understanding that the panel has not conducted any in-person evaluations of DJT, so it should be made clear where/how observations were made, and from what time period. (I know, DJT is driven to be “out there” 24/7, and this is, oh, so obvious.)
“It should not be overlooked that he still has pending cases of election fraud, conspiracy against the government, and theft of classified documents that has endangered national security…” Prosecutor Jack Smith charged DJT with four counts of conspiracy, three of which could fall under your description of “conspiracy against the government,” but the fourth was a “conspiracy against rights.” The DOJ is alleging that there was a conspiracy to disenfranchise voters. This needs to be included here as it speaks to the breadth of the alleged damage; people are affected individually as well as on a societal/governmental level. (DJT “came after you;” it can happen to anyone.)
“It is also notable that he has been adjudicated to be guilty of sexual assault, likely rape.” I believe this was flagged by others, but legal input is needed here to correctly describe the finding of sexual abuse by the jury in the civil case. The legal definition of rape has changed over time in New York state and what constitutes rape today may not be the same as it was when the incident of sexual assault happened.
Thank you for your consideration of my comments and I wish us all good luck.
Feedback re draft statements for Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg, New York State Justice Juan Merchan, news release, and op-ed submission:
- Consider presenting your primary comments for Bragg and Merchan in “conversational,” layman's terms, supplemented for them with an addendum for more technical information, including much of your current draft paragraphs 2 (standardized, evidence-based risk assessment tools) and 3 (Foucalt quote).
- Perhaps assume that Bragg and Merchan are going to recommend/order generally as you yourselves recommend and then that your messages are offering muscular, even empathetic support for the fraught, momentous decisions they must make.
- Ask yourselves in preparing your Bragg and Merchan messages: How and what can we communicate that, when received by them, they’ll think or feel: “Yes! This is the kind of information and support I need!”
- Determine the most impactful way to identify/name yourself as a group to optimize chances for your messages to be seen directly by Bragg and Merchan or their trusted staff advisers. Include that as sender on the envelope you will mail to try to optimize the chance your messages will get directly to Bragg and Merchan. Send by certified or appropriate delivery to ensure someone has signed for receipt.
- Determine whether it’s optimal to send/release all 4 communications simultaneously or to hold the news release and op-ed submission for possible use post-sentencing. By delaying release of the news release and op-ed submission, should Bragg/Merchan recommend/order generally as you recommend and then experience extreme MAGA blowback, you then could provide publicly muscular, professional affirmation of their decisions. Further, if all were released simultaneously, Bragg and Merchan might feel you’re trying to put outside pressure on them. Additionally, public new release/op-ed messaging during this pre-sentencing period might prompt premature MAGA public blowback before sentencing, possibly compromising the sentencing mandates. There might be arguments for releasing all simultaneously. I can’t see them clearly at this moment.
- Contents of news release and op-ed submission can be generally the same as the “conversational” letters to Bragg and Merchan, customized and adapted for their specific audiences and for timing of their release.
NOTE: I am a retired former journalist and corporate communications professional. Should you request any assistance in crafting and editing your messages, I’m pleased to assist. The commenter during the Zoom meeting with professional experience as a publicist appeared a good resource as well.
GENERAL, “CONVERSATIONAL” LETTER TO BRAGG AND MERCHAN (customizing slightly as needed for their separate, distinct roles in the process):
1) Introduce yourselves and your qualifications.
2) Assert your high-level conclusions re Trump — e.g., severely mentally impaired and a continuing danger specifically to the many people he has threatened personally and generally (if not existentially) to the U.S. and global publics.
3) Summarize your high-level recommendations:
- (immediate?) restraint by incarceration up to legally permitted limits as a public safety protection
- comprehensive mental and physical evaluation, including MRI brain imaging; if needed, hospitalization up to 30 days for that; impartial panel of experts to receive evaluation and monitor his rehabiliation progress and dangerousness
3) Cite your primary examples of Trump's dangerous words and actions — e.g.:
- deadly mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic, based on his motivations and factors of his perceived political benefit, ignorance, hubris, and delusion;
- instigating the Jan. 6, 2021, deadly, injurious insurrection;
- harming and undermining our nation’s highly reliable election system by baselessly (and delusionally?) in advance predicting fraud should he lose in 2016, 2020, and 2024; and falsely (and delusionally?) asserting that the 2020 election was stolen from him — beginning post-election in November 2020 and continuing today, despite mountains of evidence contrary evidence, including analysis of a fair election from close 2020 campaign advisers and his high-level government appointees;
- being adjudged civilly liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll and for repeatedly harming her through defamatio;
- expressing innumerable threats to groups and individuals, including parties performing legal roles in his trial(s) and involving his other criminal investigations and indictments, such as saying the FBI was planning to assassinate him when gathering evidence in case where he’s charged with illegally retaining classified documents and obstruction of justice;
- undermining and steadily eroding and harming our rule of law by basely claiming that civil claims, criminal charges, judgments, and convictions are politically motivated “witch hunts” and by repeated violations of gag orders during his criminal trial.
4) Cite your observations of evidences of his severe mental impairments — e.g.,
- wholly unrepentant for his legion of offenses;
- without restraint in expressing dangerous words and actions and effectively encouraging others to act violently on his grievances;
- psychopathy and example?
- malignant narcissism and example?
- delusions and example?
- messianic? And example?
- other disorder?
- other disorder?
- other disorder?
Closing: Empathize with Bragg, Merchan, noting that you have done soul-searching regarding your own professional obligations regarding warning of Trump’s mental unfitness and danger and in cases faced retribution and threats for choosing to act on your duty to warn. Thank them for their dutiful administration of their roles on this fraught matter of historical importance and national and global public safety.
APPENDIX TO BRAGG AND MERCHAN:
All the more detailed and technical information you believe relevant to bolster your conversational conclusions and recommendations.
Those are arguments better suited to civil commitment than to criminal punishment. When some argued that “the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein,” they were right only to the extent that Iraq became a different place.
I expect that Judge Merchan will consider Trump’s lack of remorse, low likelihood of deterrence of general criminal activity and dim prospects of rehabilitation as pointing toward prison time, although not to the maximum since this was the same crime accomplished through 34 records when it presumably could have been done with a single false invoice, false check and a handful of accounting entries. Probationary sentencing is problematic because Trump has shown that he will push the limits to breakage and defy the criminal justice system to impose sanctions.
Republicans have for many years worked to elect a president who is not brilliant or particularly capable, but who could be manipulated through flattery and false subservience. (Dick Cheney more or less ran the George W. Bush show.) They thought Trump would be the perfect tool but badly miscalculated. Now they are the tools of a narcissistic psychopath who aims to be an autocrat.
Sounds a lot like Thyssen et al. in Germany in 1933.
Thanks for the invitation to the Zoom meeting, Dr. Lee. I based my CAT/SAST time conversion on 14:00 EDT, arriving at 19:00 SAST. However, it appears that 14:00 EST (20:00 CAT/SAST) is being used, which is difficult for me tonight, as I am shortly going into another program (no weekend cooling off!). Therefore, I will add another written perspective in addition to the previous one(s). It would be helpful to the general society in America and globally if all of this expert psychiatric, psychological scholarship pertaining to one person, a former U. S. president, and, seemingly, to his mega group, can also be translated into general terms that can benefit the whole society. If the necessary expertise directed toward an individual remains purely on the individual level, there is a danger of other, similarly inclined persons, repetitively "reinventing the wheel" of deplorable, dysfunctional, socially, ethically and morally unacceptable behaviors, personally or/and representatively. Therefore, if this superlative scholarship addressing the issue at hand, the conduct and sentencing of a former U. S. president, as well as the other pertinent, previous and current writings on the topic, can also be comprehensively put into general terms, of course with specific examples, this scholarship can be studied semester after semester endlessly by generations of mental health students in America and around the globe, by persons of all disciplines and by the general public, with a continually nurturing, educating and guiding effect, that will assist in the transformation and upliftment of human societies around the globe. I look forward to the Zoom recordings between my online semesters. God bless and good night!
I attended most of the symposium. If your concern is one of language alien to *a non-practitioner, l can assure you that I am not trained in these areas. Gratefully, in this remarkable meeting, I confronted little in the way of jargon; the ideas elucidated were crystal clear to lay(wo)men (e.g., me).
Thank you, Ned McDoodle. The video recording attests to the veracity of your observations. All that contributes to universal applicability and avoidance of a "pass the buck" mentality is helpful.
WOW. Your Zoom-with-a-view was really something for me to remember. As a conservative by temperament from an essentially Republican family, I assure my more progressive friends that, not to worry, we will be on the same side of the barricades, *should the worse come to *the worst case. Your encouragement that the larger human system re-adjusts (i.e., heals) quickly once the source of the social psychopathy is removed, hopefully, will preclude those barricades. You cite the following thought that zapped me between the eyes (and thank you for that unsettling sensation):
🫣✍️🤔🤝😇
"A forensic psychiatrist or psychologist may first begin by evaluating how serious the crimes were that a particular convicted criminal committed. For example, the crimes that Donald Trump committed may lexically appear to be the same as something relatively harmless—so-called 'white lies' or 'white collar' misdemeanors, cheating people of a few dollars, etc.—or could indicate deliberately and systematically attempting to subvert and suspend the Constitution of the United States and the rule of law, and to replace our democracy with a dictatorship."
🗽🙏💡✌️⚖️
You cut to chase, here, Dr Lee. While I may disagree on specific political views with many in today's forum, what we face is no longer a question of national politics but one of the values anterior to our politics. That Trump drumpfs many ideas and behavioral norms we hold dear indicates his mental illness. *Yet he is not crazy in the sense that his warped thinking exempts him from accountability. Trump is consciously attacking the values anterior to our cherished polity, without which no democracy can function:
> all (wo)men created equal and entitled *to opportunities to advance;
> freedom to dissent and to dissent not only openly, but also vociferously;
> privacy in our persons and personal lives;
> spiritual and religious autonomy and protection;
> governmental powers coming from the citizenry and NOT the other way; as well as,
> many other values articulated during the Age of Enlightenment.
I regret speaking over the good doctor at the end of the salon; anxiety in complimenting her, sincerely, got the better of me. 👎
For 55 years, with the famous decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), SCOTUS has emphasized the limits that Trump’s speech has exceeded. The “constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not” protect any speech that has been proved to constitute “advocacy of the use of force” or “advocacy” of any other “law violation” when “such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and it “is likely to incite or produce such action.”
Since at least January 6, 2021, Trump’s own speech—and the lawlessness and violence of the people who hear or see his speech—repeatedly have created copious evidence that Trump’s speech does incite, and Trump intends his speech to incite, imminent lawless action (including violence). For many years, starting with Trump’s rallies, Trump’s own speech has created evidence that it has the power—and he intends it—to incite imminent lawless action (including violence) by people because they see or hear Trump’s speech.
Yes, and this was proven in civil court in the Colorado 14th Amendment trial which found Trump was responsible for inciting the Jan 6 insurrection. The dynamics between Trump and his followers leading to violence at his command were explored in detail by an expert witness Dr. Peter Simi. This may be influential to Judge Merchan since the testimony was given in a civil trial with cross-examination by Trump's aggressive attorneys.
The whole trial is on C-SPAN, Dr. Peter Simi's testimony starts here:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?531511-1/president-trump-14th-amendment-hearing-colorado-day-2-part-1
Some examples of Trump’s threats expressed of violence he intends to commit if he is free to run for president:
1. Explicit extortionary threat to all voters “There will be a bloodbath if I don’t win”.
2. Above being a declaration he intends to take the presidency by violent action, if he loses.
3. Asking a retired general advising him “Can’t we just shoot them? (the Black Lives Matter protesters)? Such a statement betrays the extremely violence-oriented, irrational ideology of the man, not to mention his cluelessness re the Constitutional right to redress of grievances to our government and First Amendment free speech rights of expression! Any eighth-grader knows these things—but not ex-president Trump!
4. Seven citizens died as a direct result of what Trump conspired with many Republican operatives deliberately to do on January 6, 2021. His sentence must reflect punishment for the terrible loss seven families suffered because Trump attempted to overthrow the election result he could not accept!
To protect all of us from this certain further violence, he must be incarcerated for the maximum sentence allowed.
Very well stated. Thank you, Janis.
As a mental health professional and former editor, I’d like to make a few suggestions.
First, some of the writing in the conclusion is a bit awkward. You may wish to hone it as well as the body of the document. Ensuring that the language is both precise and accessible is essential.
If you don’t have an editor on your team, I volunteer.
Second, you may want to provide more context for the physical violence assessment, such as the type of factors considered, what Trump’s score of eight signifies, and what the “normal” range is.
If the body of the document does not provide examples of how you arrived at your overall assessment (e.g., observing Trump call for General Milley’s execution), they probably should be incorporated into the conclusion.
More substantively, I wonder whether you would consider including:
1. The impact of what appears to be dementia on Trump’s psychopathy. To my mind, the interaction between the two conditions makes him even more dangerous.
2. The role of Trump’s psychopathy in fostering violence contagion, which in turn feeds into his psychopathy.
Thank you for doing what you do.
What is not being considered is emergency legislation. If such does not exist, NOW is the time to create it. Such would propose that DT be shown the door out of the US despite having birthright citizenship. Anything else is going to have us (not him) chasing our tails trying to deal with his willful malignance.
Thank you so much for this. I agree with all my being.
So basically you are filing an amicus brief to the State of New York Judge Merchan. I’m here for it ‘cuz Mike Flynn filed one to the appellate court and to the Untouchables on the bump stock case.
I know some intelligent, good people who are fairly strong Trump fans. To try to understand this phenomenon I asked them why so many people still support Trump even after Jan. 6. Most cited policy concerns. The most intriguing response was perhaps the most insightful. "People still support Trump because he's so popular."
That struck me as analogous to something I'd read about in connection with a visit to Istanbul, Turkiye. When today's Istanbul was occupied by Romans, it was known as Constantinople and it was the capital of the Eastern Roman (a.k.a. Byzantine) Empire. Istanbul still has a wealth of amazing Roman sites and artifacts. The location of the Roman hippodrome (where chariots were raced) is just across from the amazing Hagia Sophia (and right beside the Blue Mosque).
Events at the hippodrome eventually led to incredibly destructive Nike riots involving two factions known by their colors (Blues and Greens). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nika_riots. The following are excerpts from that page:
"The Roman empire had well-developed associations, known as demes, which supported the different factions (or teams) to which competitors in certain sporting events belonged, especially in chariot racing." By "the 6th century the only teams with any influence were the Blues and Greens." "The demes had become a focus for various social and political issues for which the general Byzantine population lacked other forms of outlet. They combined aspects of street gangs and political parties, taking positions on current issues, including theological problems and claimants to the throne."
Toward the end of a day of races:
the partisan chants changed from "Blue" or "Green" to a unified Nίκα ("Nika", meaning "Win!", "Victory!" or "Conquer!"), and the crowds broke out and began to assault the palace. For the next five days, the palace was under siege. Fires started during the tumult destroyed much of the city, including the city's foremost church, the Hagia Sophia (which Justinian would later rebuild).
Thank you very much for sharing your insights and for addressing these issues!
I'm a lawyer and you're writing for a judge. So my analysis of the danger Trump poses would address the available evidence. See, e.g., "The Absurdity of Invoking Democracy to Help Trump Reign Again" https://blackcollarcrime.substack.com/p/the-absurdity-of-invoking-democracy?r=30ufvh
I also would address what the Framers of our Constitution said about people like Trump. See, e.g., "A Plea for Freedom of Speech in America" https://blackcollarcrime.substack.com/p/a-plea-for-free-speech-in-america?r=30ufvh
any thoughts on the path for an approved method for filing senior mental health professionals' sentencing recommendation with the Clerk of Court?
Of course, I'd recommend speaking with an attorney with experience in criminal matters at the trial level. The prosecutor's office also might be willing to offer suggestions.
i asked #ChatGPT to create a storyboard using elements ive suggested, i e., red 1967 @Cadillac ambulance, men and women in white coats, a #straitjacket size 56 #portly, and actors like #Robert_De_Niro cast in supporting roles to maximize news coverage of the filing of senior #mentalhealth professionals' consensus sentencing recommendation
see the storyboard here🙊
https://bit.ly/the_ChatGPT_storyboard
respectfully submitted,
@BarnumLives! 🎪
Thank you, Dr. Lee, for the opportunity to review the recorded meeting and comment on the proposed recommendations. I am appreciative of all you and your colleagues are doing to alert and protect the public.
I am not a mental health professional.
I have the entire written statement in front of me, but it appears from the meeting that you are requesting comment solely on the recommendations in italics which you read aloud. I will confine my comments here to that. (I do have issues/comments on the non-italicized text which proceeds the recommendations and it’s unclear to me whether that text is intended to be included in the letter which will reach the probation officer, the DA, and the Judge, etc.)
My comments:
“… the only way to protect our democracy, and the legal and electoral structure without which it will cease to exist, from the defendant’s attempt to destroy it—the crime of which he has just been convicted…” Because the sentencing is for the crime(s) for which DJT was just convicted, it would be wise to bring a legal mind on board to help you parse out language that clearly describes this conviction. Once that is clarity is achieved, the panel can address the breadth of the damage that this specific conviction(s) has caused, and how it relates to both past behavior (E. Jean Carroll) and the escalation in behavior that followed and for which he is now indicted in other cases (January 6th, Election interference, Classified documents). From my lay person’s perspective, the behavior related to this specific conviction (falsification of 34 business records with conspiracy/intent to further a crime?) has affected people on an individual level, resulting in the imprisonment of two colleagues and a woman questioning the “power balance” in a sexual encounter that occurred years earlier. On a broader level, the behavior deprived people of information that would have helped inform their opinion as to the fitness of the candidate for the office of President.
“Standardized, evidence-based violence risk assessment tools agree with our assessment.” The panel is comprised of psychiatrists who are also medical doctors, and, at their core, scientists. The scientists need to generally explain the sources of the observations that were applied to the risk assessment tools to get the scoring. It’s my understanding that the panel has not conducted any in-person evaluations of DJT, so it should be made clear where/how observations were made, and from what time period. (I know, DJT is driven to be “out there” 24/7, and this is, oh, so obvious.)
“It should not be overlooked that he still has pending cases of election fraud, conspiracy against the government, and theft of classified documents that has endangered national security…” Prosecutor Jack Smith charged DJT with four counts of conspiracy, three of which could fall under your description of “conspiracy against the government,” but the fourth was a “conspiracy against rights.” The DOJ is alleging that there was a conspiracy to disenfranchise voters. This needs to be included here as it speaks to the breadth of the alleged damage; people are affected individually as well as on a societal/governmental level. (DJT “came after you;” it can happen to anyone.)
“It is also notable that he has been adjudicated to be guilty of sexual assault, likely rape.” I believe this was flagged by others, but legal input is needed here to correctly describe the finding of sexual abuse by the jury in the civil case. The legal definition of rape has changed over time in New York state and what constitutes rape today may not be the same as it was when the incident of sexual assault happened.
Thank you for your consideration of my comments and I wish us all good luck.
Feedback re draft statements for Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg, New York State Justice Juan Merchan, news release, and op-ed submission:
- Consider presenting your primary comments for Bragg and Merchan in “conversational,” layman's terms, supplemented for them with an addendum for more technical information, including much of your current draft paragraphs 2 (standardized, evidence-based risk assessment tools) and 3 (Foucalt quote).
- Perhaps assume that Bragg and Merchan are going to recommend/order generally as you yourselves recommend and then that your messages are offering muscular, even empathetic support for the fraught, momentous decisions they must make.
- Ask yourselves in preparing your Bragg and Merchan messages: How and what can we communicate that, when received by them, they’ll think or feel: “Yes! This is the kind of information and support I need!”
- Determine the most impactful way to identify/name yourself as a group to optimize chances for your messages to be seen directly by Bragg and Merchan or their trusted staff advisers. Include that as sender on the envelope you will mail to try to optimize the chance your messages will get directly to Bragg and Merchan. Send by certified or appropriate delivery to ensure someone has signed for receipt.
- Determine whether it’s optimal to send/release all 4 communications simultaneously or to hold the news release and op-ed submission for possible use post-sentencing. By delaying release of the news release and op-ed submission, should Bragg/Merchan recommend/order generally as you recommend and then experience extreme MAGA blowback, you then could provide publicly muscular, professional affirmation of their decisions. Further, if all were released simultaneously, Bragg and Merchan might feel you’re trying to put outside pressure on them. Additionally, public new release/op-ed messaging during this pre-sentencing period might prompt premature MAGA public blowback before sentencing, possibly compromising the sentencing mandates. There might be arguments for releasing all simultaneously. I can’t see them clearly at this moment.
- Contents of news release and op-ed submission can be generally the same as the “conversational” letters to Bragg and Merchan, customized and adapted for their specific audiences and for timing of their release.
NOTE: I am a retired former journalist and corporate communications professional. Should you request any assistance in crafting and editing your messages, I’m pleased to assist. The commenter during the Zoom meeting with professional experience as a publicist appeared a good resource as well.
GENERAL, “CONVERSATIONAL” LETTER TO BRAGG AND MERCHAN (customizing slightly as needed for their separate, distinct roles in the process):
1) Introduce yourselves and your qualifications.
2) Assert your high-level conclusions re Trump — e.g., severely mentally impaired and a continuing danger specifically to the many people he has threatened personally and generally (if not existentially) to the U.S. and global publics.
3) Summarize your high-level recommendations:
- (immediate?) restraint by incarceration up to legally permitted limits as a public safety protection
- comprehensive mental and physical evaluation, including MRI brain imaging; if needed, hospitalization up to 30 days for that; impartial panel of experts to receive evaluation and monitor his rehabiliation progress and dangerousness
3) Cite your primary examples of Trump's dangerous words and actions — e.g.:
- deadly mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic, based on his motivations and factors of his perceived political benefit, ignorance, hubris, and delusion;
- instigating the Jan. 6, 2021, deadly, injurious insurrection;
- harming and undermining our nation’s highly reliable election system by baselessly (and delusionally?) in advance predicting fraud should he lose in 2016, 2020, and 2024; and falsely (and delusionally?) asserting that the 2020 election was stolen from him — beginning post-election in November 2020 and continuing today, despite mountains of evidence contrary evidence, including analysis of a fair election from close 2020 campaign advisers and his high-level government appointees;
- being adjudged civilly liable for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll and for repeatedly harming her through defamatio;
- expressing innumerable threats to groups and individuals, including parties performing legal roles in his trial(s) and involving his other criminal investigations and indictments, such as saying the FBI was planning to assassinate him when gathering evidence in case where he’s charged with illegally retaining classified documents and obstruction of justice;
- undermining and steadily eroding and harming our rule of law by basely claiming that civil claims, criminal charges, judgments, and convictions are politically motivated “witch hunts” and by repeated violations of gag orders during his criminal trial.
4) Cite your observations of evidences of his severe mental impairments — e.g.,
- wholly unrepentant for his legion of offenses;
- without restraint in expressing dangerous words and actions and effectively encouraging others to act violently on his grievances;
- psychopathy and example?
- malignant narcissism and example?
- delusions and example?
- messianic? And example?
- other disorder?
- other disorder?
- other disorder?
Closing: Empathize with Bragg, Merchan, noting that you have done soul-searching regarding your own professional obligations regarding warning of Trump’s mental unfitness and danger and in cases faced retribution and threats for choosing to act on your duty to warn. Thank them for their dutiful administration of their roles on this fraught matter of historical importance and national and global public safety.
APPENDIX TO BRAGG AND MERCHAN:
All the more detailed and technical information you believe relevant to bolster your conversational conclusions and recommendations.
Robert J. Moore
Columbus, Ohio
robertjamesmr75@gmail.com
614.563.9691
Those are arguments better suited to civil commitment than to criminal punishment. When some argued that “the world is a better place without Saddam Hussein,” they were right only to the extent that Iraq became a different place.
I expect that Judge Merchan will consider Trump’s lack of remorse, low likelihood of deterrence of general criminal activity and dim prospects of rehabilitation as pointing toward prison time, although not to the maximum since this was the same crime accomplished through 34 records when it presumably could have been done with a single false invoice, false check and a handful of accounting entries. Probationary sentencing is problematic because Trump has shown that he will push the limits to breakage and defy the criminal justice system to impose sanctions.