President Trump and Demon DNA: Trump Cited a Coronavirus Expert Who Isn’t Really an Expert

Donald Trump, White House photo

There are experts, and there are quacks, and there are quacks who sound like experts. During his news conference yesterday, President Donald Trump talked about a ridiculous quack medicine video that he had tweeted about. This video features Stella Immanuel, a physician who reports that dreaming about having sex with demons and witches affects a person’s DNA.  Since she's a physician, Trump tried to make her sound like an expert. Anyway, her video touts hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin and zinc as a cure for the novel coronavirus. “Hello,” she says, “you don’t need a mask. There is a cure.”

Using this bizarre video to defend his long-standing advocacy of hydroxychloroquine, Trump used three classic propaganda tricks:


1. He created the impression that there is a major scientific controversy when there isn’t one.

2. He also implied that his opponents are politicizing hydroxychloroquine.

3. Finally, he continued his long-standing attitude that expert opinions aren’t really worth much.


Hydroxychloroquine, a commonly prescribed malaria drug, has, the FDA notes, proven to be ineffective for treating coronavirus, regardless of whether it is or is not combined with azithromycin.

Nevertheless, hydroxychloroquine has, just like a zombie, come back from the dead. That’s not because evidence has suddenly shown that it works. No, instead, the mighty forces of propaganda, financed by gobs of dark money, and promoted (sigh, once again) by President Donald Trump, have brought quack medicine back to our national consciousness.

Let's go back to the video. Apparently sponsored by a dark money Tea Party group, the video features Texas physician Stella Immanuel claiming that she can cure coronavirus with hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin. Very unlikely. FactCheck notes that “the current scientific evidence doesn’t support the conclusion that hydroxychloroquine is effective in treating the disease.”

Alas - after his prepared remarks today, President Trump answered a reporter’s question:

“Q Mr. President, two questions quickly. First, can you clarify your position on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine after you retweeted a video making claims that it is effective?

“THE PRESIDENT: Well, that was — I wasn’t making claims. The — it’s recommendations of many other peoples and — people, including doctors. Many doctors think it is extremely successful — the hydroxychloroquine — coupled with the zinc and perhaps the azithromycin. But many doctors think it’s extremely good, and some people don’t. Some people — I think it’s become very political.

I happen to believe in it. I would take it. As you know, I took it for a 14-day period, and I’m here. Right? I’m here. I happen to think it’s — it works in the early stages. I think frontline medical people believe that too — some, many. And so we’ll take a look at it.” [boldface added]

Let's parse this statement. Although the president’s claim that hydroxychloroquine treats the coronavirus is scientifically discredited, Trump evaded science with several crafty persuasive moves.

First, using conservative conspiracy theorists’ classic move, Trump tried to make out that there was a major scientific controversy about the drug: “But many doctors think it’s extremely good, and some people don’t.” Okay. Some doctors think that antibiotics are good for sinus infections, while others don’t. Some people think that Pluto is a planet; others don't. Those are real controversies. But, as I noted above, prominent infectious disease experts generally do not think that hydroxychloroquine treats the coronavirus. Trump was able to find a shadowy physician sponsored by the Tea Party movement to endorse his points. This lets him pretend that there’s a significant scientific controversy. 

Earlier: Jay Sekulow at the Impeachment Trial, Why Are Conspiracy Theories Persuasive?

Second, Trump said that: “But many doctors think it’s extremely good, and some people don’t. Some people — I think it’s become very political.” His claim that “it’s become very political” gave the impression that his political enemies are making it political. But the source he cites, Dr. Immanuel, seems to be affiliated with the Tea Party. In Business Insider, Tom Porter writes that Dr. Immanuel's group is involved with the Tea Party Patriots, who have "raised $24 million to support Republican Candidates and causes since 2014."  So, she and President Trump, and not Trump’s opponents, are the ones who are politicizing medical science. Trump created the misimpression by careful phrasing: “it’s become very political.” He didn’t say “Democrats are making this political,” which would be factually incorrect and absurd. He couldn’t say, “I am making this political,” which would give away his game. So, he said “it’s become very political.” Sneaky. Tricky. But persuasive. 

Third, there is the view that everyone’s opinion is as good as everyone else’s. Recall that Trump said: “I happen to believe in it. I would take it. As you know, I took it for a 14-day period, and I’m here. Right? I’m here.” Yes, sure, people like Dr. Anthony Fauci went to college for years and then spent many more years engaged in scientific research. But why should their medical opinion count more than President Trump’s? Why should Dr. Fauci’s opinion count more than that of an obscure physician from a small clinic who seems to have been sponsored by a Tea Party group? Rationally, the opinions of real experts are worth more than the opinions of politicians or random people from the street. But part of the democratic ideal seems to be that everybody is entitled to their own opinion, regardless of their competence. Trump found a slick way to tap into that expertise-denying attitude.

The press conference did not end well for the president. CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins, who had done her homework, asked a question about Immanuel’s video:

“Mr. President, the woman that you said is a great doctor in that video that you retweeted last night said masks don’t work and there is a cure for COVID-19, both of which health experts say is not true. She’s also made videos saying that doctors make medicine using DNA from aliens, and that they’re trying to create a vaccine to make you immune from becoming religious.”

Space aliens. Anti-religion vaccines. Witches. Demons. Trump’s expert was even stranger than expected. Trump replied, “I thought her voice was an important voice, but I know nothing about her.” Humiliated, he abruptly ended the press conference and trudged out of the room. 

Earlier: Trump Uses Medical Quackery to Divert Attention from Real Issues

Here is the rhetorical dilemma that Trump has created for himself. There is, at this point, no cure for the coronavirus. People who get sick receive only supportive care. The only effective way to control the pandemic would be to implement public health measures. But Trump has never asked his supporters to do anything so difficult. So, he diverted attention by implying that a cure already exists (when it does not) and appealed to his core supporters’ paranoid attitudes to help them think that hydroxychloroquine might solve the problem. He implied that the cure is unused only because experts and political opponents get in the way. He denied responsibility and tried to create false hope – all with a few cleverly chosen words.

No, President Trump does not have an effective coronavirus policy. Never, however, underestimate his persuasive skill.


P.S.: Kaitlan Collins had done her homework. President Trump had not. The fact that she caught him unprepared and flat-footed did not, however, prevent him from giving social media plenty of soundbites to reinforce the next day’s conspiracy theories. Isn’t that what this was all about?

P.P.S. When you are the leader of the free world, and your policy is so foolish that you need to quote a physician who believes in demon DNA, maybe it’s time to change your policy.

John R. Lewis 1963 March on Washington Speech Hit Racial Injustice Head-on

John R. Lewis

Congressional Representative John R. Lewis, who passed away yesterday from cancer, burst into national prominence at the age of 23 when he gave a fiery speech at the 1963 March on Washington, the same event where Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his famous “I Have a Dream” speech. At the time, Lewis was the leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. Although the March on Washington’s organizers asked him to tone down his original draft, Lewis still hit the issues of racial justice hard and fast.

My high school music teacher said that the most important parts of a song are the beginning and end. That’s when people are listening the most. The same is true of speeches. Lewis began his speech, not giving by an amusing anecdote, quoting a historical figure, or even introducing himself. Instead, hesitating not one second, he lashed out against economic and legal injustice:

“We march today for jobs and freedom, but we have nothing to be proud of.  For hundreds and thousands of our brothers are not here.  For they are receiving starvation wages, or no wages at all.  While we stand here, there are sharecroppers in the Delta of Mississippi who are out in the fields working for less than three dollars a day, twelve hours a day.  While we stand here there are students in jail on trumped-up charges.  Our brother James Farmer, along with many others, is also in jail. We come here today with a great sense of misgiving.”

As a statement against racial injustice, Lewis’ speech introduction was stark and powerful. Lewis made his most important point first, un-embellished and specific. He offered no pleasantries. Instead, he said, as long as injustice ruled, “we have nothing to be proud of.”

Earlier Post: The Biblical Imperative in Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream"

Lewis’ speech introduction offered vivid details: “starvation wages, or no wages at all.” “Working for less than three dollars a day.” “Students in jail on trumped-up charges.” “Our brother James Farmer, along with many others, is also in jail.” Lewis didn’t talk about a promised land that had already arrived; instead, he talked about “a great sense of misgiving.”

Lewis’ original draft said that the Johnson administration’s civil rights bill was “too little and too late.” The draft complained that the bill offered no defense against police brutality. Again, he made this specific, and even the final version as he delivered it said this about police brutality:

“In its present form this bill will not protect the citizens of Danville, Virginia, who must live in constant fear of a police state. It will not protect the hundreds and thousands of people that have been arrested on trumped up charges. What about the three young men, SNCC field secretaries in Americus, Georgia, who face the death penalty for engaging in peaceful protest?”

And, although the final draft deleted Lewis’ call for “our own scorched-earth policy and burn Jim Crow to the ground – nonviolently,” he still ended with a powerful call to action. He didn’t just call his own audience to action; he called the entire nation to wake up:

“By the forces of our demands, our determination and our numbers, we shall send a desegregated South into a thousand pieces, put them together in the image of God and Democracy. We must say, wake up America, wake up! For we cannot stop, and we will not and cannot be patient.”

Emotional power made this a great speech. Overshadowed in publicity by King’s magnificent “I Have a Dream,” Lewis' speech made a powerful enough impact that he was able to represent Georgia in the United States Congress for 33 years. He rose to a leadership role in Congress, received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and indefatigably pursued racial justice.

Earlier Post: Did Spike Lee Trick President Trump into Revealing a Guilty Conscience?

What made this a great speech? Powerful language? Of course. Clear, articulate, and confident delivery? Yes. Most important, however is that Lewis never pulled his (nonviolent) punches. He said what he thought unmistakably, and he gave the details. He created a vivid image in the audience’s mind.  He articulated issues that still haunt us today. Speakers are so often eager to pull back, to compromise their vision, to be, in general, too timid. But Lewis became an icon of the civil rights movement precisely because, although he firmly held to his nonviolent, general principles, he said what he thought, drove his point home, and refused to compromise his basic principles. Granted a remarkable opportunity with an unprecedented audience, he wasted no time telling people what he wanted them to hear.

What about today? For, even as we honor Lewis’s life, anti-police brutality marches have filled our cities for months. The federal government dispatched mysterious, heavily armed, camouflaged officers to arrest seemingly peaceful Black Lives Matter protesters on the slightest pretext. Vandals painted over murals that say “Black Lives Matter.” Lewis did not just tell a message from the past. He spoke to us today. Did America wake up? Are we listening?

Image: John R. Lewis, US Congress, via Wikimedia Commons

Trump, Biden, and Defunding the Police: Once Again, Trump Suffers from Talking Points Disease

Donald Trump, White House photo

Alas, like many politicians before him, President Donald Trump has fallen ill from the Talking Points Disease. He repeated a common but false talking point because he had not taken time to inform himself. Relying on ridiculous conservative talking points instead of research, Trump falsely accused likely Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden of seeking to defund the police. Fox News correspondent Chris Wallace made him look silly. The cure is for speakers to inform themselves before they speak.

What Is Talking Points Disease?

The Talking Points Disease occurs when a someone repeats prepared political talking points but has no idea what they mean, much less whether they are true. Talking points are not ideas; they’re just empty words. Political parties often prepare talking points for their politicians, not to mention their media friends. They print these up and hand them out to supporters. Often they try to keep them secret, but sometimes they post their talking points on the Internet. Rarely are these talking points accurate.

Earlier: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Suffered from Talking Points Disease in their 2016 Debates

For example, political operative Frank Luntz's famous memo about Republican 9/11 talking points advised Republicans to say things like, "Communicate that you are leading the fight for the principles of freedom and security." Lutz offered sample passages entitled "Words that Work." Politicians didn't need to understand any of this; they just needed to say the words. Republicans who used Luntz' talking points and "words that work" won several elections.

What Was Trump's Biden / “Abolish the Police” Talking Point?

In this case, Trump repeated a conservative talking point, that Biden wants to defund and abolish the police. Of course, “Defund the Police” is a left-wing talking point that the more extreme politicians mindlessly spread. Usually, what they really mean is that they want to reallocate some police funding toward social spending and social work.

Earlier: Mike Lee Suffered from Talking Points Disease in His Ridiculous Seahorse Speech 

Conservatives lay out talking points in media outlets that liberals don’t even notice. That works out well for them; they don’t need to keep their tactics secret if oblivious liberals don’t bother to look. For example, writing in the conservative The Federalist a few weeks ago, David Marcus wrote that Biden would simply give in to defunding the police. 

Marcus’ accusation (like many others) lays out standard conservative talking points. Nevertheless, Marcus hedged his statement and never quite said outright that Biden sought to abolish the police. Instead, “Defund the Police” gave him a theme that helped him spin out a conspiracy theory. No doubt he hoped to hoodwink conservative voters. Instead, he, or someone like him, or maybe somebody on Twitter who said the same thing, hoodwinked President Trump. The problem comes when people, like President Trump, begin to believe their own propaganda.

So, using talking points that he did not understand, Trump had an interesting exchange during a Rose Garden interview with Fox News correspondent Chris Wallace. Wallace asked why the shootings and violence in cities seem to have become so much worse. Trump responded that the Democrats run cities poorly and added:

“It’s really because they want to defund the police. And Biden wants to defund the police.”

Wallace interrupted Trump and said,

“Sir, he does not.”

Trump interrupted Wallace and said,

“Look, he signed a charter with Bernie Sanders…”

Wallace interrupted in turn:

“And he said nothing about defunding the police.”

Irritated, Trump sneered and said,

“Oh really, it says abolish, it says defund . . .” He then snapped, “Let’s go get me the charter, please.”

Trump’s staff obtained the charter summary. Trump looked through it, as Wallace explained later, “But he couldn’t find any indication, because there isn’t any, that Joe Biden has sought to defund and abolish the police.” Wallace chuckled.

So, Trump repeated a talking point, but Wallace, who was better-prepared, caught him red-handed. This time around, Trump generated plenty of self-induced bad publicity. PolitiFact gave Trump's claim a Pants on Fire rating. National newspaper USA Today promptly described the embarrassing exchange. Forbes entitled their story "Trump Wrongly Suggests Biden Supports Defunding the Police in Fox News Interview."

Oh, the Talking Points Disease!

Trump's Rose Garden debacle teaches us several lessons about the Talking Points Disease.

First, speakers need research. There is no substitute, and I mean none, for being a well-informed speaker. “Defund the Police” is a slogan, not information. Trump needed to inform himself about Biden’s policy positions. He obviously did not.

Earlier: Speakers Need Research: Trump and Bleach Injections

Second, talking points are, by their nature, shallow, phony, and meaningless. “Defund the Police” is a superficial slogan to begin with. Apparently, it never occurred to Trump that Biden would have laid out a more nuanced position.

Most people would like to think that our leaders know more about what’s going on than the rest of us. But politicians who suffer from Talking Points Disease know less than the rest of us, not more. In this case, kudos to Chris Wallace for correcting Trump so quickly and efficiently.

The worst part is that Trump believed his own talking points. He was so convinced that he barked at his staff to get him the document. The document did not support him. Oops! Unlike Trump, Wallace had done his homework. He had read the Biden-Sanders document and knew what it said.

When I was on my college debate team many years ago, the best debaters I encountered on the circuit were not the glib fast talkers. No, indeed, the best debaters showed up for the contest with the best research. They knew the debate topic from front to back. They carried files of facts, quotations, and statistics ready for whatever happened during the debate. Yet, we live in an era when facts are disparaged and conspiracy theorists seem to rule the nation. Beware of Talking Points Disease! Talking points sometimes win elections, but Talking Points Disease can put a constitutional republic into the ICU.

P.S. "Defund the Police" is a ridiculous slogan. "Reform the Police" conveys what most liberals really want, and "Defund" just gives ammunition for, well, conservative talking points.

Shaktikanta Das Gave a Central Banker's Perspective on the Coronavirus Depression

Shaktikanta Das, Governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), just gave an important speech about India’s economic outlook. Das' speech taught worldwide lessons about economic recovery during the coronavirus pandemic. Like all good speakers, he knew to emphasize his central point with forceful language and repetition.

While President Donald Trump and his people are pushing the United States’ economy and schools to reopen while the pandemic reaches across the land, Das pointed out what we all should have noticed: that the pandemic itself creates the obstacle to economic recovery.

In his speech, given online in English to the Seventh Conclave of the State Bank of India, Das wisely put the pandemic foremost:

"The outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic is unambiguously the worst health and economic crisis in the last 100 years during peace time with unprecedented negative consequences for output, jobs and well-being. It has dented the existing world order, global value chains, labour and capital movements across globe and needless to say, the socio-economic conditions of large section of world population."

Although central banks usually focus on such mundane technicalities as interest rates and money supply, those arcane numbers do not give people food to eat, roofs over their heads, or healthcare for their children. Instead, real-world economic activity requires people to go to work and to produce, sell, and buy the goods and services that they desire. The pandemic, however, has blasted ordinary economic activity to pieces.

At the same time, a central banker cannot control the pandemic; all Das could do in his official role was to ensure that India’s financial system continued to work. He announced policies to increase India’s financial liquidity, cut interest rates, and to ensure that India’s banks were financially stable. Yes, those are properly his functions, but he never let the pandemic escape his audience’s notice. In fact, in his speech, which was about economics, he mentioned the word "pandemic" 12 times. For example:

"As a part of response to the pandemic the RBI has undertaken a series of measures which are already in the public domain."  

"While the multipronged approach adopted by the Reserve Bank has provided a cushion from the immediate impact of the pandemic on banks, the medium-term outlook is uncertain and depends on the COVID-19 curve."

"It is . . .still uncertain when supply chains will be restored fully; how long will it take for demand conditions to normalise; and what kind of durable effects the pandemic will leave behind on our potential growth." [italics supplied]

Earlier Post: Fed Chair Janet Yellen's Calm Speaking Style 

The general public pays little attention to the economic pronouncements of the world’s central bankers. The financial community, however, listens to every word. These calm, measured speeches often convey a lot of wisdom, and Das’ calmly-delivered speech, filled as it was with technical jargon, powerfully conveyed a central message: that the key to economic recovery is to make intelligent, hard-nosed decisions to control the spread of disease. Central banks can keep money flowing through the banking system, but they cannot get people safely back to work, provide a healthful environment in schools, or preserve supply chains that break down when the workers get sick. Public health measures need to come first, while the bankers can only do what they can do. And, yes, India's huge economy matters to all of us. Despite the angry, irrational calls for isolationism and trade restrictions, the world’s economy has been globalized for centuries. Lessons from one part of the world apply everywhere. 

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell made similar statements in May. It’s a simple message. Are the United States' elected officials listening? 

Congratulations to the Lincoln East High School Speech Team

East Lincoln High School

Congratulations to the Lincoln East High School speech team for their outstanding performance at The National Speech and Debate Tournament. Once at the tournament, they qualified for the elimination rounds of various events. One of the Lincoln East students, Victoria Thomas, qualified to speak during the final round in Poetry, and placed second in the nation for Poetry Interpretation. Due to the coronavirus epidemic, the organizers wisely decided to conduct the contest online.

Simply qualifying to participate in this tournament is a tremendous honor, roughly equivalent to getting an invitation to the NCAA basketball tournament. Only the very best high school speech students participate.

By developing their communication skills at such an early age, these fine young people are preparing themselves for success in life. Experience speaking in public, especially at such a high level of excellence, will stand them well as they go through life. The students learn to express themselves orally, to speak with confidence, and to convey their ideas and emotions clearly and persuasively. Speech skills never go out of style. 

Earlier Post: Greybull High School's Speech Team

Extracurricular activities are not really extras. Indeed, I learned more than I can explain from my many excellent teachers in high school and college. Few of them, however, made as much impression on me as my participation in my high school and college debate teams, high school literary magazine, and college newspaper, The Flat Hat. My own coaches and faculty advisors from many years ago, especially Barbara Sue Carter, Pat Micken, Richard Poinsett, and Donald McConkey, taught both by instruction and example. 

It’s particularly impressive that the East Lincoln students continued in their extracurricular activities when everything is so difficult. Special congratulations are also due to their coaches, English teachers Nick Herink and Elle Barts. Leading their students to such a high level of excellence during a health crisis represents a remarkable effort on their part, for which, I imagine, the school probably offered them little compensation.

Also, special thanks to their local newspaper, the Lincoln Journal-Star, which covered the speech team with the enthusiasm usually reserved for athletics. 

Image: Jared Winkler, Creative Commons License