Connect with us

News

‘Staggering Omission’ in Trump’s Official Health Assessment: Yale Psychiatrist

Published

on

On Friday, White House doctors released the results of President Donald Trump’s physical. They concluded that Trump is in “very good health overall,” but could afford to lose some weight.

But missing from the assessment was any information about Trump’s mental health. Yale psychiatrist Bandy X. Lee, who edited “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump” thinks the president suffers from mental problems that present a far bigger danger than his cholesterol levels.

Raw Story spoke with Lee about the president’s psychological problems and what should be done about it.

Tana Ganeva: What do you think of the president’s health care results?

Bandy X. Lee: What is staggering are the omissions. It is almost as if the White House doctor took an “It won’t exist if we don’t look” attitude. The most pressing questions, in my mind, are: Is the president capable of protecting the interests of the United States? Is he capable of keeping the country safe without placing it in further danger? Is he capable of discharging the duties of his office?

These are not comfortable questions to ask, but there cannot be a more urgent matter; any other consideration is of far lower priority. These questions have become more medical than political because of the severity of his signs of impairment.

When it becomes obvious that the president is incapable of making political decisions because he lacks the capacity to make rational decisions altogether, he should be tested medically.

Tana Ganeva: But the President’s apparent irrationality is being ignored?

Bandy X. Lee: This issue has been completely ignored. My Yale colleague of internal medicine Dr. Anna Reisman stated that one would “not need to see” the results of the president’s exam, as they will likely be false reassurances.

Medical ethicist Dr. Arthur Caplan of NYU School of Medicine said he “won’t be listening” to the outcome. It is unfortunate that so many have come to view the release of information as being less informative than no release at all.

The theatrical nature is observable in other ways. For instance, why were there “11 Board certified specialists”? All we have called for was a functional, mental capacity evaluation; this takes only one specialist, that is, an independent, forensic mental health professional.

The second most important specialist might be a cardiologist, but whether or not Mr. Trump consults one is his private affair, since he is not posing an imminent danger to the public because of a cardiac condition. He is, however, already posing a danger to the public, as objective reports and empirical evidence confirm, because of the multiple and consistent signs of emotional instability, cognitive decline, and violence-proneness. That there is some unseen logic that outweighs the harm—or that Mr. Trump is even capable of it—would only be proven in an exam, and the onus should now be on the president.

Tana Ganeva: The president is not likely to seek mental health care.

Bandy X. Lee: We know that those who need mental health care the most are the least likely to submit to proper evaluation and treatment. Mr. Trump’s reappointment of Dr. Ronny Jackson, who declared him “mentally fit to serve” last year despite lacking the training or the independence to do so, therefore, stands out as a warning signal if not a symptom.

Those who have awaited Mr. Trump’s annual exam for clarification on the false “mental health exam” a year ago, which was neither replaced nor redone after Dr. Jackson himself was removed from his position as the president’s personal physician, will be rightly disappointed. As a reminder, Dr. Jackson, in response to the public’s concerns over the president’s mental stability, performed a sham 10-minute dementia screen on which full-blown Alzheimer patients and hospitalized schizophrenia patients are known to score up to 30 out of 30.

Fitness for duty, in any case, is determined not through a personal health exam but through an independent functional test that evaluates a person’s ability to do a job and not to put others in danger.

Tana Ganeva: You’ve officially recommended that President Trump be tested for mental fitness. What did that look like?

Bandy X. Lee: The World Mental Health Coalition’s working group on an expert panel for presidential fitness created an ad hoc committee for dangerousness because of presidential incapacity last year, and we sent a letter to all members of Congress before Mr. Trump’s nomination of a Supreme Court justice and his Helsinki conference with Vladimir Putin.

Our recommendation was for him to undergo testing before he embarked on any more critical decisions, given the serious signs of mental incapacity that he had shown. We know the outcomes of the controversial Supreme Court justice nominee at the time (who himself exhibited many signs of impairment) and the very bizarre Helsinki conference, where Mr. Trump sided with a nation that attacked us against our country’s own intelligence officials.

Yesterday, the ad hoc committee issued another letter of warning to all Congress members addressing the president’s need to demonstrate mental capacity before making additional critical decisions such as declaring a national emergency. As of today, he has done so against all advice and despite the absence of any evidence of an emergency.

Tana Ganeva: What other acts by the president made you worried?

Bandy X. Lee: He has created many emergencies. As of February 1, 2019, he has withdrawn the U.S. from a long-standing nuclear weapons treaty with Russia, reversing course from decades of arms control diplomacy and setting the stage for a new nuclear arms race. Meanwhile, other nuclear powers, such as North Korea, Pakistan, and India, are following suit. Despite this initiation, Mr. Trump stated that he believes he had “no choice” but to withdraw, and would rather “outspend and out-innovate all others” in the production of weapons of mass destruction. As expected, Russian President Putin vowed to do the same. This is precisely what numerous mental health professionals have warned against, in underscoring Mr. Trump’s “psychological attraction” to nuclear weapons and nuclear war, especially in the public-service book, The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump.

Tana Ganeva: What’s your overall message about the president’s ability to lead?

Bandy X. Lee: Mental health is inseparable from overall health. The absence of the typical degenerative diseases of old age is not only a sign of good health if we consider the larger context. In my twenty years of treating violent offenders, I have often seen arrested emotional development have the side effect of unexpectedly lower levels of the typical adult diseases stemming from the stress of being responsible for and worrying about others, the larger society, or the world.

These individuals may more often be in a wheelchair or walk with a cane by age thirty, or suffer from head trauma-induced dementia, than be plagued of the typical cardiac or cerebrovascular problems that afflict older individuals. The condition Mr. Trump does have—obesity—is a well-known adult consequence of childhood emotional trauma, precisely the kind that can lead to arrested development. Physical signs of dangerous individuals are not well studied, but we know that they often have oddities in speech (I have especially found a difficulty in pronouncing “s” in ways that are unrelated to mechanical problems) and excessive hand gestures that compensate for poor speech. These are both observed in the president but are unlikely to be picked up by a physician performing a limited physical exam.

The signs are numerous, and we recognize the pattern very well. It is time that the president undergo proper testing and be offered proper care, rather than further enable his pathology.

 

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Judge Tosses Kennedy Center’s Lawsuit Against Artist Who Canceled Over Trump’s Name

Published

on

A judge on Friday tossed out a lawsuit brought by the Kennedy Center against an artist who withdrew from a performance after the organization’s board voted to add President Donald Trump’s name to the venue, The Washington Post reports.

The artist, jazz musician Chuck Redd, pulled out over what he called “the defiant and illegal name change happening to the Kennedy Center,” according to the Post.

But, as D.C. Superior Court Judge Tanya Jones Bosier found, Kennedy Center officials had not made a legally binding agreement with Redd, and there could be no breach of contract claim as a result.

“There’s no dispute that he did not sign the 2025 agreement,” the judge said.

In a statement, Redd’s attorney, Lisa Banks, said Redd had been sued “because he publicly and rightly objected to adding Donald Trump’s name to the Kennedy Center, a living memorial to former President John F. Kennedy.”

Banks called the lawsuit “political retribution, pure and simple, by the Trump Kennedy Center,” and said that “the Court correctly saw it as such in dismissing the case with prejudice.”

According to the Post, after Redd withdrew, then-Kennedy Center president Richard Grenell said in a letter to Redd, “This is your official notice that we will seek $1 million in damages from you for this political stunt.”

In December, Redd told the Associated Press, “When I saw the name change on the Kennedy Center website and then hours later on the building, I chose to cancel our concert.”

On Thursday, the general counsel for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts ordered Trump’s name to “immediately” be removed from the building after a federal judge found adding the president’s name to the Center was unlawful, The New York Times reported.

“The memo gave staff members detailed instructions on the materials that needed to be updated, including social media accounts, email signatures and voice mail messages,” the Times reported. “It specified that outdoor and indoor signage with the barred name must be altered by June 12.”

Late last month, a federal judge ordered that President Donald Trump could not rename the Kennedy Center, nor could he close it for what the Trump administration said were two years of renovations.

“The Kennedy Center’s organic statute makes crystal clear that the Center is to be named for President Kennedy, and it cannot bear any other formal name or public memorial based on the Board’s unilateral say-so,” the judge wrote, CNBC reported. “Congress gave the Kennedy Center its name, and only Congress can change it.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

How ‘Inept’ Trump Is Getting ‘Worse at All of This’: Political Scientist

Published

on

“All presidents lose. Trump loses more often, on more things, than most,” says political scientist Jonathan Bernstein in a written conversation with New York Times Opinion editor John Guida.

Bernstein argues that Trump is an “inept” president who “actually gets worse at all of this as he goes along.”

“Trump thinks winning elections is like winning a prize — the United States of America — to do with as he pleases,” he writes. “But what actually happens in elections is that the voters hire you to do a job. It’s a job with some 340 million bosses. And like all jobs, it has constraints and obligations.”

Trump “just doesn’t see that,” says Bernstein, who also notes that “Trump has hardly had a week where his approval exceeded his disapproval.”

What Trump is actually good at is being “a really good reality TV star.”

“He’s very good at grabbing attention,” which “can help a president set the agenda,” Bernstein says. “Political scientists have found that presidents aren’t very good at changing what people think, but they can be good at changing what people think about.”

Trump has been good at creating “a Democratic Party eager to fight — and that may even, in time, undermine the 50 years of successful G.O.P. gains in the courts,” but he has not worked to get his agenda passed in Congress.

“With the power to set the agenda, skilled presidents can get things done: by pressing Congress to vote on something they would rather not vote on or by pressing the bureaucracy to pay attention to their directives,” says Bernstein. “Trump is an inept president, so he mostly squanders the attention he gets — and at least half the time, he winds up drawing attention to things that don’t help him at all.”

Trump has not been successful at getting Congress to pass his most important legislation: the SAVE America Act, or at getting the Senate to kill the filibuster. Recently, even some GOP lawmakers crossed the aisle in a significant rebuke of the president — namely the War Powers Act legislation — and some have balked at Trump’s $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund.

Meanwhile, “Trump has managed to do a lot of damage that will be truly hard to undo,” says Bernstein. “Legal talent has drained from the Justice Department. The same thing is happening virtually everywhere in the federal Civil Service, especially after work force cuts.”

It will “take time to rebuild,” but it will “be hard for any future president to recover from the foreign policy debacles,” he warns.

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

Why James Carville Says Voters Should Back Graham Platner — Despite His ‘Flaws’

Published

on

Democratic political consultant James Carville wants Maine voters to back Graham Platner despite the candidate’s flaws — and partly because of some of them. Platner is currently the likely Democratic nominee in Maine’s U.S. Senate race. If Platner wins the primary, he will face Republican Senator Susan Collins, who was first elected in 1996.

“I understand he’s f—— up,” said Carville on his Politicon podcast. “Yeah, maybe we need a combat veteran right on that Senate floor, who is f—— up.”

Carville berated Senator Collins by calling her “the most pliable member in the history of the United States Senate.”

He warned that he believes the country is “in imminent peril — I mean, imminent peril,” and asked: “Who is most likely to slow this criminal in charge?”

“I think it’s Graham Platner.”

“I ask all of you to understand his flaws, and understand the peril that this nation is in, and maybe he might be the right guy at the right time,” said Carville.

“Graham Platner grew up, I think, pretty privileged,” Carville said, sharing some of the likely Democratic nominee’s backstory. “He went to some kind of fancy fancy boarding school. He graduated, he joined the United States Marine Corps. He was in for eight years. He had three combat deployments. He gets out of the Marine Corps, and he goes to GW.”

Then Platner “joined the Maryland National Guard. Oh, you know what happened? He gets deployed a fourth time.”

“He’s f—— up,” said Carville. “He’s been shot at. He’s a veteran. All right? He’s got a little bit weird. He’s an oysterman. I know what oystermen do. I live in Louisiana. I think that oyster harvesting is the same the world over, it’s hard a—— work.”

Carville acknowledged that he has concerns, but said that maybe senators “need to look at this guy before they start sending young people off to fight wars, and see what the consequence of it is. Maybe he ought to run and say, ‘You don’t know, I’m gonna be on a veterans affairs committee, and I wanna be on a mental health subcommittee, ’cause I know something about… Yeah, I might be five degrees off dead center. So f—— what?’ They need that.”

He said he doesn’t agree with Platner’s economic stances, that they are “to the left of anything I’d say I’m for.”

“But you know what? He recognizes this horrific inequality in this country. And it actually would do some good to have somebody in there.”

Carville called Platner’s tattoo “very troubling.”

He said, “what I have to consider first, is this country is about to lose it. The whole goddamn thing.”

“Okay, we gotta win this,” Carville concluded. “And if we got a person who’s understandably got issues, yeah, good. And maybe people ought to see it, and maybe we ought to just be reminded of what these stupid wars have brought about in the consequence of said stupid wars. It’s [what] stupid Susan Collins been for all her political life.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.