As things get even uglier in Syria I’m seeing some Trump supporters struggling to justify or dismiss the completely indefensible acts of human butchery that this administration has been inflicting upon that country. They’re arguments I’ve seen recycled in the MAGA crowd every time news breaks about the president once again continuing the reprehensible neoconservative policies of his predecessors and doing the exact opposite of what he pledged to do on the campaign trail, and I thought I’d like to address a few of them here.

For those unfamiliar with my work, I have written extensively about the many legitimate grievances that can be leveled at this administration here, here, here, here, and elsewhere. I have also written extensively about the completely illegitimate accusations that have been leveled against this administration here, here, here, here, and elsewhere. I don’t see Trump as good or helpful, let alone as the populist savior his supporters hold him to be, but I also don’t see him as the psychotic Nazi Putin puppet his detractors try to paint him as either, or even significantly different from his predecessors in any way that meaningfully impacts America’s policy and behavior. I would now like to write a bit about some of the bad arguments that are made in support of this administration.

I’m going to address a few arguments I see a lot which are just plain stupid, from a nonpartisan, non-ideological perspective. Depending on your personal opinions about immigration, fiscal policy and so on you’ll certainly have plenty of reasons to argue for or against the current administration; I’m not interested in addressing those here. I just want to focus on the few stupid, annoying arguments I keep seeing made in defense of the sitting president that are based entirely on bad logic and poor understanding, which stagnate real debate about real concerns. Here are three of them:

1. “ Hillary would have been worse.”

I happen to agree that Hillary Clinton would have been worse in some very important ways. Her campaign pledge to install a no-fly zone in an area where Russian military planes are conducting operations was horrifying and disqualifying, and she would have put less inertia on the war machine in a few key areas. Nevertheless, pointing this out is never, ever a legitimate defense of the things that Trump is doing.

Okay, sure, Hillary would have been worse. So what? How is that a legitimate response to someone condemning this administration’s nuclear escalations with Russia, keeping thousands of troops in Syria with the goal of effecting regime change, approving arms sales to Ukraine, working to shut down WikiLeaks and arrest Julian Assange, perpetuation of the Orwellian surveillance state, keeping troops in Afghanistan, escalating tensions with Iran and North Korea, etc? All you’re doing is disingenuously trying to take the target of criticism off the sitting president’s head and drag the conversation kicking and screaming into a moronic partisan debate about who would have been worse. You’re killing legitimate debate with an irrelevant red herring.

Responding to criticisms of this administration’s depravity with “yeah but Hillary” is like a lawyer trying to defend an accused murderer by pointing out that Jeffrey Dahmer did way worse. It’s stupid. It’s annoying. Stop doing it.

2. “Trump is playing 57-D chess!”

We’ve talked about this before. The above video depicts Cenk Uyger on MSNBC alongside Glenn Greenwald in 2010 ranting about the way Obama supporters were defending their president in exactly the same way the MAGA crowd defends Trump today.

“Because you remember what they told us: Obama’s a genius! I couldn’t possibly understand his genius — he’s playing three-dimensional chess!” Uyger exclaims in the eight year-old clip. “Well what part of three-dimensional chess do you give away your queen, your knight, your bishop, and the House of Representatives? No! They were wrong, we were right. It’s time to fight.”

Yes, it is time to fight. It’s time to stop defending your president’s nonstop capitulations to the swamp as some great feat of strategic wizardry.

While we’re on the subject, I often see Bernie people making the same “chess” argument about Sanders’ promotion of the new cold war and other dangerous establishment kowtowing. It’s not a legitimate defense of Sanders any more than it’s a legitimate defense of Trump now or Obama eight years ago.

There is a powerful unelected second government that is controlling the behavior of your elected officials, and by dismissing it as brilliant strategic maneuvering you are actively shoving that urgent problem out of the spotlight. It’s stupid. It’s annoying. Stop it.

3. “Trump is fighting the Deep State!”

No, he is not. Trump isn’t fighting the deep state, he’s collaborating with it. He’s continued and expanded the same warmongering Orwellian policies as Bush and Obama, and he’s playing right along with the deep state’s new cold war escalations as well.

Trump isn’t fighting the deep state, and the deep state isn’t fighting him. There is no “coup”. Everything has completely changed since certain factions within the FBI and CIA had agendas against him prior to his taking office. The leaks from inside the intelligence community during his transition and the early days of his administration have completely stopped. For many many months now whenever you hear about a new leak it’s coming from congress, from inside the administration, or from people who interacted with his campaign.

The only people fighting Trump at this point are Democrats and Never-Trumpers, and that’s not what the deep state is. The deep state is the unelected power establishment consisting of a loose and often conflicting collaboration between plutocrats (including war profiteers), intelligence and defense agencies, and the corporate media which serves as their propaganda wing. It is completely nonpartisan and uses America’s elected government in whatever way will best advance its many agendas. The Democrats and John McCain types working to weaken Trump isn’t a deep state agenda, it’s normal politics.

This is a crucial distinction. Russiagate was constructed by the US intelligence community and pointed at Trump in 2016, but now that he’s demonstrated he’ll be a good little boy and play along with pretty much every one of their agendas they haven’t been targeting him. They don’t need to. They never cared about impeaching Trump, they cared about getting their new cold war and crippling the Russia-China tandem. Since they don’t have to get the sitting president impeached to accomplish that (a very risky move anyway), they’re content to work with him until the next presidential puppet rolls into office. It’s the Democrats and their allies who are fueling the Trump-Russia collusion narrative at this point, not the deep state.

If you want to support Trump, that’s fine, but don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining. Don’t tell me you support this president because he’s working to overthrow the unelected power establishment which uses the US government as a weapon to advance its agendas. That argument is contradicted by the raw facts of everything that has happened in the last year. It’s stupid. It’s annoying. Stop it.


Thanks for reading! My daily articles are entirely reader-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following me on Twitter, bookmarking my website, checking out my podcast, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalor buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!

10 responses to “Three Stupid, Annoying Things People Often Say When Defending Trump”

  1. As a Libertarian, Liberty loving guy like millions of others, I am embarrassed and disgusted that “we the people” had to choose a POTUS between an EASY to see career criminal of epic proportions and a carrot top, orange julius clown. Both the primaries were comedy routines. Trump won not due to a “white lash” he won because of the “disgust lash” that Hillary is allowed to walk free. Obama was a better choice than Insane McCain and YES, B.O. promised 1. Troops come home 2. Close Guantanamo 3. Transparency 4. etc. etc. ALL were lies and Amerika LOVED it. So, the wars for corporate profit continue, more wars coming, The FED still printing, Police State with all it’s draconian power grows with an insane Sessions on parade, still NO real investigation of 9/11 and yeehaw the Trump kool-aid drinkers think they won the Lotto. We are SOO screwed.

  2. I would disagree w/you about the Deep State. I understand your argument, but there are some flaws in it. Trump was the accidental president & was never the intended, chosen president that the Establishment wanted. Both the Jackass Party & GOP Establishment were opposed to him from the beginning. The Jackasses mistakenly thought that Trump was the weakest link & could be easily defeated. That’s why they goofed & elevated him in the nomination process. Just watch YouTuber & your fellow Aussie’s recent video showing overt threats to Trump from members of the Deep State/shadow gov’t.

  3. There IS a battle going in with the Deep State, but it is not being led by Trump. It began before Trump came into office. It is a loose but increasingly effective alliance of military intelligence investigators, marine units, private security contractors and “good guys” in the FBI and CIA. Local law enforcement has also FINALLY had an opening to pursue activities like drug-running, pedophilia and human trafficking (including child-trafficking), resulting in thousands of related arrests around the country in the past years.

    There is also a jaw-dropping record number of secret indictments – approaching 12,000, many of which appear to be related to evidence uncovered in these other arrests and the defections from the criminal syndicate arm of the deep state.

    Indications of this battle are coming from diverse directions – not just the “Q” leaks, and these sources are growing in number and increasingly corroborating each other.

    So this is not a Trump-led campaign but it appears that he is aware of it, and it does make him the target of the deep state, because these crimes were a source of income and entertainment (!) for many of them.

    Suffice to say, it is also unlikely that this would proceed under a President Clinton.

    This doesn’t make Trump’s other policies less alarming, but it cannot be a bad thing to root out corruption and criminality in the deep state and its syndicates.

    1. Tend to agree. It’s a long-haul battle. The policies are alarming, yes, but Trump’s apparent compliance with the deep state agenda doesn’t necessarily mean he’s a deep stater and will remain in compliance as long as he’s president. There’s too much going on. It’s very hard to tell either way exactly where Trump stands until we see some real action relating to the shadow govt allegedly addressed in the indictments.

      Who knows, though. This is a big question mark still. I think Caitlin’s conclusion with respect to point #3 isn’t sound based on her own logic, although she has a good point generally just making an effort to call him out. Somebody has to point this stuff out.

  4. What I liked most about your article, was the mention of how little us regular people effect what goes on in mainstay federal government decisions. This is what annoys me most about those in charge because they encourage stupidity among the masses who willingly go along to continue “free” benefits.
    We ( especially those of us who don’t get these “free” benefits) need to become more aware. Unfortunately I am at the point in life where I have to rely on a benefit ( Social Security) because of the trend in business to discriminate older workers at end of work life by layoffs. If I knew that at the start of my work life that the funds being deposited by the required FICA tax were being spent elsewhere and not invested, I would have made a better attempt to save money for my after working life. (I did some but not enough to live on ).
    I ask that people stop believing like sheep and actually think, and stop being so hypersensitive.

  5. Assuming everything you’re saying is correct and all the attacks are political and from Democrats and their allies on a political basis, and Trump is placating the deep state to keep them off his back, how does this prove Trump isn’t placating the deep state now as part of a longer term fight? If deep state is powerful, wouldn’t that strategy make sense?

  6. You touched on it in #2, but you could write a similar piece on “3 Stupid, Annoying Things That People Often Say When Defending Bernie Sanders.” For that matter, you could write another piece, perhaps longer, about Hillary Clinton.

  7. Caitlin, I noticed you also wrote an astrological book, which I hope, together with your latest, to get next month. I am going to respond from the transpersonal astrological perspective, since that is what I write about. Trump, when viewed from the transpersonal astrological; using Dane Rudhyar’s Sabian symbols, is exactly where he should be. When we take account of the Total Solar Eclipse last August, and all the lunar eclipses, including the one coming up shortly, plus the three Blue Moons, we will have the first three months of this year, I believe, especially when I look at his natal twelfth house and with Pluto 11Leo and Mars in 27Leo and his Ascendant 30Leo. My astrologer did his July 4th 2017 Event chart, and the North Node was conjunct natal Mars 27Leo. I believe that all that has occurred since the beginning of 2017, especially since August Total Solar Eclipse, and Pluto’s residence in Capricorn, has to do with the United States. He is the catalyst, for the “equilibration” that is the Great Work to commence. So, I voted for him, having hoped he would at least keep the promise to “end perpetual war.” I then put on the transpersonal astrological position, and as painful as it is to watch, even read what I read on my phone this morning, I still believe that, from the transpersonal astrological reading of the time; all is as it should be.
    I grieve for my fathers, mother, brothers, sisters, children caught up in this madness; since my family had to go into exile, leaving South Africa, seeking asylum, with the introduction of Apartheid, a month after I was born. I could go on and on, but am addressing the astrologer side, and thank you for being there doing and writing. You see, on the Mothership, one does not have that liberty, be thankful you are in Australia, if I read your article right. Thanks again, keep on writing.

    1. Caitlin, stuff like this rambling “astrology” garbage post is probably trolling/shilling designed to make your site look crazy. Your site is very important. It’s too important to have it discredited by junk shill posting like this, and it’s off topic anyway. I hope you will delete this garbage.

  8. Issue #1: I mostly agree and am disappointed.
    Issue #2: Something always bothers each of us. This is the one that I would label “just politics”.
    Issue #3: I have followed Sundance at the Conservative Tree House for several years. I am, therefore, at variance about much of what you have said.

    I have just started following you in the last month. To contribute to your cause, I need a mailing address–do not do the online thing. Sorry, my computer ineptitude.

Leave a Reply