Trump Isn’t Hitler. But the Lying … - New York Times

Trump Isn’t Hitler. But the Lying …

Charles M. Blow

It is a commonly accepted rule among those who are in the business of argument, especially online, that he or she who invokes Adolf Hitler, either in oratory or essays, automatically forfeits the argument.

The reference is deemed far too extreme, too explosive, too far beyond rational correlation. No matter how bad a present-day politician, not one of them has charted or is charting a course to exterminate millions of innocent people as an act of ethnic cleansing.

Hitler stands alone in this regard, without rival, a warning to the world about how evil and lethal human beings can be, a warning that what he did can never be allowed again.

That said, there are strategies that Hitler used to secure power and rise — things that allowed his murderous reign — that can teach us about political theory and practice. And very reasonable and sage comparisons can be drawn between Hitler’s strategies and those of others.

One of those lessons is about how purposeful lying can be effectively used as propaganda. The forthcoming comparison isn’t to Hitler the murderer, but to Hitler the liar.

This is it exactly. There are others like trump, but no one in our country has bought their constant shifting of truth for a very long time...

According to James Murphy’s translation of Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”:

“In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.”

The text continues:

“It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”

This demonstrates a precise understanding of human psychology, but also the dangerously manipulative nature that operates in the mind of a demon.

And yet, as many have noted, no person of sound reason or even cursory political awareness can read this and not be immediately struck by how similar this strategy of lying is to Donald Trump’s seeming strategy of lying: Tell a lie bigger than people think a lie can be, thereby forcing their brains to seek truth in it, or vest some faith in it, even after no proof can be found.

Trump is no Hitler, but the way he has manipulated the American people with outrageous lies, stacked one on top of the other, has an eerie historical resonance. Demagogy has a fixed design.

It should be mentioned that Vanity Fair reported in 1990 that Trump’s first wife, Ivana, “told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler’s collected speeches, ‘My New Order,’ which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed.” The magazine pointed out that “Hitler’s speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist.” (At the time, Trump said, “If I had these speeches, and I am not saying that I do, I would never read them.”)

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.

Trump has found a way to couch the lies so that people believe they don’t emanate from him but pass through him. He is not a producer but a projector.

One way he does this is by using caveats — “I was told,” “Lots of people are saying” — as shields.

Jenna Johnson of The Washington Post addressed this in June 2016, writing about Trump’s use of the phrase “a lot of people are saying”:

“Trump frequently couches his most controversial comments this way, which allows him to share a controversial idea, piece of tabloid gossip or conspiracy theory without technically embracing it. If the comment turns out to be popular, Trump will often drop the distancing qualifier — ‘people think’ or ‘some say.’ If the opposite happens, Trump can claim that he never said the thing he is accused of saying, equating it to retweeting someone else’s thoughts on Twitter.”

In August of 2016, Gregory Krieg and Jeff Simon came to a similar conclusion about Trump’s use of these phrases, pointing out on CNN:

“Trump has a habit of punctuating his more self-assured claims with the phrase ‘believe me.’ But when he wants space between himself and the words he is about to speak or tweet, he defers to other sources, relying on a rhetorical sleight.”

Just this week, Trump told the colossal lie that “President Obama and other presidents, most of them didn’t make calls” to the families of fallen soldiers.

When called out about this lie, he quickly retreated to one of his shield phrases: “That’s what I was told.”

He even projects his own ignorance onto others with his lies. As Steve Benen pointed out in July on MSNBC.com, Trump’s “awkward process of discovery has, however, produced a phrase of underappreciated beauty: ‘A lot of people don’t know that.’ These seven words are Trump’s way of saying, ‘I just learned something new, and I’m going to assume others are as ignorant as I am.’ ”

This is not a simple fear of the truth; it is a weaponizing of untruth. It is the use of the lie to assault and subdue. It is Trump doing to political ends what Hitler did to more brutal ends: using mass deception as masterful propaganda.

Maybe I have crossed the ink-stained line of the essay writer, where Hitler is always beyond it. But I don’t think so. Ignoring what one of history’s greatest examples of lying has to teach us about current examples of lying, particularly lying by the “president” of the most powerful country in the world, seems to me an act of timidity in a time of terror. It is an intentional self-blinding to avoid offending frail sensibilities.

I have neither time nor patience for such tiptoeing. I prefer the boot of truth to slam down to earth like thunder, no matter the shock of hearing its clap.

The world has seen powerful leaders use lying as a form of mass manipulation before. It is seeing it now, and it will no doubt see it again. History recycles. But the result doesn’t have to be — and hopefully never will be again — a holocaust. It can manifest as a multitude of other, lesser horrors, in both protocol and policy, including the corrosion and regression of country and culture.

That is the very real threat we are facing. Trump isn’t necessarily a direct threat to your life — unless of course you are being kept alive by health care that he keeps threatening, or if you’re in Puerto Rico reeling in the wake of two hurricanes — but he is very much a threat to your quality of life.

The only question is: Are enough Americans sufficiently discerning to understand that this time they are the ones being manipulated?

Obama and Bush launch dual coded attacks on Trump as former presidents denounce 'politics of division' - Independent

Obama and Bush launch dual coded attacks on Trump as former presidents denounce 'politics of division'

Former presidents break with tradition to turn on White House

Harry Cockburn

Turning their backs on Trump: the former presidents implied the Trump administration had taken US politics back to the last century AFP/Getty

George W Bush and Barack Obama have both publicly criticised the political climate in the US, in what has been interpreted as a thinly-veiled attack on Donald Trump’s administration.

Neither of the former presidents named Mr Trump, but Mr Obama railed against the “politics of division”, and implied the Trump administration had set US democracy “back 50 years”, while Mr Bush criticised the “casual cruelty” and “bigotry”, which he said threatened American politics.

An unwritten rule in US politics is that former presidents maintain a silence over their successors, but Mr Bush and Mr Obama delivered an unprecedented twin blow to the White House on Thursday morning.

George Bush takes down Trump: 'Bigotry seems emboldened'

Donald Trump's Iran deal decision pushes US 'down the road to war'

Obama says US has been set back 50 years in veiled swipe at Trump

Barack Obama returns to campaigning in Virginia and New Jersey

Speaking at a Democratic campaign rally in Newark, Mr Obama said: “Our politics is so divided and so angry and so nasty.”

“Instead of our politics reflecting our values, we’ve got politics infecting our communities. Instead of looking for ways of working together to get things done in a practical way, we’ve got folks who are deliberately trying to make folks angry, to demonise people who have different ideas… to provide a short-term tactical advantage.”

He added: “If you have to win a campaign by dividing people, you won’t be able to govern them.”

"What we can't have is the same old politics of division that we have seen so many times before, that dates back centuries."

Earlier in the morning, the last Republican before Mr Trump to occupy the White House, Mr Bush issued his own warning while speaking in New York.

Mr Bush said: “Bigotry seems emboldened. Our politics seems more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and outright fabrication.”

Donald Trump links UK crime rise to ‘radical Islamic terror'

“There are some signs that the intensity of support for democracy itself has waned - especially among the young.”

He added: “At times it can seem like the forces pulling us apart are stronger than the forces binding us together.

“We've seen nationalism distorted into nativism, forgotten the dynamism that immigration has always brought to America.”

Dr Jacob Parakilas, an expert in US foreign policy at Chatham House, told The Independent the move signals a new willingness on Mr Obama’s part to re-engage in the political discourse.

He said: “It’s not entirely unprecedented, but it is very rare for presidents to criticise their successors, it’s notable that neither Obama nor Bush called out Trump directly. I think they’re both still trying to give voice to criticisms without declaring war directly on Trump.”

He added: “What this represents is Obama beginning to move out of that framework and become a little bit more willing to reengage in the political debate.

“Trump relishes a feud, particularly with those he can cast as members of the establishment. If you still support Trump, you’re not going to be moved by George W Bush or Barack Obama.”

Nuclear North Korea is non-negotiable, diplomat says = BBC News

Nuclear North Korea is non-negotiable, diplomat says

20 October 2017

North Korea has stepped up its missile testing in recent months

A North Korea diplomat has said the country's ballistic nuclear weapons programme is non-negotiable.

Choe Son-hui said the US should "be prepared to co-exist with" a nuclear North Korea.

She said it was "the only way to secure lasting peace on the Korean peninsula".

CIA director Mike Pompeo earlier warned that North Korea would probably be able to hit the US with a nuclear missile within months. North Korea claims it already has the capability.

Mr Pompeo stressed that Washington still preferred diplomacy and sanctions but said force remained an option for the US.

How to talk to the world's most secretive country

North Korea crisis in 300 words

How advanced is the nuclear programme?

Speaking at a non-proliferation conference in Moscow, Ms Choe repeated phrasing used before by North Korean officials that nuclear weapons are "a matter of life and death" for the country.

Earlier this year, she was reported as saying that the country's government would be open for talks with the US, if conditions were right.

But on Friday Ms Choe said North Korea would consider the implementation of "so-called UN sanctions resolutions" an act of aggression and war.

Since North Korea stepped up its missile testing earlier this year, sanctions against its economy have intensified.

Mr Pompeo said military force had to remain an option

The Australian government said on Friday that it had received a letter from North Korea, seemingly also sent to other countries, urging it to distance itself from the US.

On Thursday, Mr Pompeo warned that Pyongyang's missile expertise was now advancing so quickly that it was hard for US intelligence to be sure when it would succeed, but said it would happen soon.

"When you're now talking about months our capacity to understand that at a detailed level is in some sense irrelevant," he said.

Xi Jinping has more clout than Donald Trump. The world should be wary - Economist

Xi Jinping has more clout than Donald Trump. The world should be wary

Do not expect Mr Xi to change China, or the world, for the better

AMERICAN presidents have a habit of describing their Chinese counterparts in terms of awe. A fawning Richard Nixon said to Mao Zedong that the chairman’s writings had “changed the world”. To Jimmy Carter, Deng Xiaoping was a string of flattering adjectives: “smart, tough, intelligent, frank, courageous, personable, self-assured, friendly”. Bill Clinton described China’s then president, Jiang Zemin, as a “visionary” and “a man of extraordinary intellect”. Donald Trump is no less wowed. The Washington Post quotes him as saying that China’s current leader, Xi Jinping, is “probably the most powerful” China has had in a century.

Mr Trump may be right. And were it not political suicide for an American president to say so, he might plausibly have added: “Xi Jinping is the world’s most powerful leader.” To be sure, China’s economy is still second in size to America’s and its army, though rapidly gaining muscle, pales in comparison. But economic heft and military hardware are not everything. The leader of the free world has a narrow, transactional approach to foreigners and seems unable to enact his agenda at home. The United States is still the world’s most powerful country, but its leader is weaker at home and less effective abroad than any of his recent predecessors, not least because he scorns the values and alliances that underpin American influence.

The president of the world’s largest authoritarian state, by contrast, walks with swagger abroad. His grip on China is tighter than any leader’s since Mao. And whereas Mao’s China was chaotic and miserably poor, Mr Xi’s is a dominant engine of global growth. His clout will soon be on full display. On October 18th China’s ruling Communist Party will convene a five-yearly congress in Beijing (see Briefing). It will be the first one presided over by Mr Xi. Its 2,300 delegates will sing his praises to the skies. More sceptical observers might ask whether Mr Xi will use his extraordinary power for good or ill.

World, take note

On his numerous foreign tours, Mr Xi presents himself as an apostle of peace and friendship, a voice of reason in a confused and troubled world. Mr Trump’s failings have made this much easier. At Davos in January Mr Xi promised the global elite that he would be a champion of globalisation, free trade and the Paris accord on climate change. Members of his audience were delighted and relieved. At least, they thought, one great power was willing to stand up for what was right, even if Mr Trump (then president-elect) would not.

Mr Xi’s words are heeded partly because he has the world’s largest stockpile of foreign currency to back them up. His “Belt and Road Initiative” may be puzzlingly named, but its message is clear—hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese money are to be invested abroad in railways, ports, power stations and other infrastructure that will help vast swathes of the world to prosper. That is the kind of leadership America has not shown since the post-war days of the Marshall Plan in western Europe (which was considerably smaller).

Mr Xi is also projecting what for China is unprecedented military power abroad. This year he opened the country’s first foreign military base, in Djibouti. He has sent the Chinese navy on manoeuvres ever farther afield, including in July on NATO’s doorstep in the Baltic Sea alongside Russia’s fleet. China says it would never invade other countries to impose its will (apart from Taiwan, which it does not consider a country). Its base-building efforts are to support peacekeeping, anti-piracy and humanitarian missions, it says. As for the artificial islands with military-grade runways it is building in the South China Sea, these are purely defensive.

Unlike Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, Mr Xi is not a global troublemaker who seeks to subvert democracy and destabilise the West. Still, he is too tolerant of troublemaking by his nuke-brandishing ally, North Korea (see Schumpeter). And some of China’s military behaviour alarms its neighbours, not only in South-East Asia but also in India and Japan.

At home, Mr Xi’s instincts are at least as illiberal as those of his Russian counterpart. He believes that even a little political permissiveness could prove not only his own undoing, but that of his regime. The fate of the Soviet Union haunts him, and that insecurity has consequences. He mistrusts not only the enemies his purges have created but also China’s fast-growing, smartphone-wielding middle class, and the shoots of civil society that were sprouting when he took over. He seems determined to tighten control over Chinese society, not least by enhancing the state’s powers of surveillance, and to keep the commanding heights of the economy firmly under the party’s thumb. All this will make China less rich than it should be, and a more stifling place to live. Human-rights abuses have grown worse under Mr Xi, with barely a murmur of complaint from other world leaders.

Liberals once mourned the “ten lost years” of reform under Mr Xi’s predecessor, Hu Jintao. Those ten years have become 15, and may exceed 20. Some optimists argue that we have not yet seen the real Mr Xi—that the congress will help him consolidate his power, and after that he will begin social and economic reforms in earnest, building on his relative success in curbing corruption. If he is a closet pluralist, however, he disguises it well. And alarmingly for those who believe that all leaders have a sell-by date, Mr Xi is thought to be reluctant to step down in 2022, when precedent suggests he should.

Reasons to be fearful

Mr Xi may think that concentrating more or less unchecked power over 1.4bn Chinese in the hands of one man is, to borrow one of his favourite terms, the “new normal” of Chinese politics. But it is not normal; it is dangerous. No one should have that much power. One-man rule is ultimately a recipe for instability in China, as it has been in the past—think of Mao and his Cultural Revolution. It is also a recipe for arbitrary behaviour abroad, which is especially worrying at a time when Mr Trump’s America is pulling back and creating a power vacuum. The world does not want an isolationist United States or a dictatorship in China. Alas, it may get both.

This article appeared in the Leaders section of the print edition under the headline "The world’s most powerful man"

Xi Plans to Turn China Into a Leading Global Power by 2050 - Bloomberg

Xi Plans to Turn China Into a Leading Global Power by 2050

By Ting Shi

October 18, 2017,

Once-in-five-year Communist Party gathering starts Wednesday

China is ‘approaching the center of the world stage’: Xi

Xi Says Will Keep Growing at Medium to High Speed

President Xi Jinping warned of “severe” challenges while laying out a road map to turn China into a leading global power by 2050, as he kicked off a twice-a-decade party gathering expected to cement his influence into the next decade.

In a speech that ran for more than three hours on Wednesday, Xi declared victory over “many difficult, long overdue problems” since he took power in 2012. He said China would continue opening its doors to foreign businesses, defend against systemic risks, deepen state-run enterprise reform, strengthen financial sector regulation and better coordinate fiscal and monetary policy.

“Right now both China and the world are in the midst of profound and complex changes,” Xi said. “China is still in an important period of strategic opportunity for development. The prospects are very bright, but the challenges are very severe.”

China's Xi Lays Out Nation's Road Map to 2050

Xi warned of the severe challenges faced by China. Bloomberg’s Tom Mackenzie reports from Beijing.

The speech signaled that Xi would prioritize extending the influence of the Communist Party in China over the next five years, raising questions over his commitment to implementing tough reforms and expanding the role of the market. While economic growth has surprised on the upside in recent quarters, inefficient state-owned enterprises and ballooning corporate debt pose threats to stability. S&P Global Ratings last month cut China’s sovereign rating for the first time since 1999.

He also devoted significant time to defining China’s place in the world, calling for a strong military while also saying it would never seek global hegemony. Xi is seeking to boost China’s global clout with infrastructure spending and avoid a conflict with U.S. President Donald Trump over North Korea.

“The focus is on strengthening the Party as an instrument to lead China to the promised land,” said Steve Tsang, director of SOAS China Institute at the University of London. “Politics will remain the focus of his next five years. The Party will direct the economy and economic reforms.”

‘Bird-caged Economy’

A last-hour surge by some of China’s biggest companies kept the nation’s benchmark stock index in the green. The Shanghai Composite Index ended 0.3 percent higher, despite almost three stocks falling for each that rose. The onshore yuan was little changed against the U.S. dollar and 10-year bond yields held steady near the highest level since late 2014.

“We have a fairly clear blueprint of Xi Jinping’s political economy, with incredibly robust, strengthened state-owned sector playing a large role in propping up growth,” Jude Blanchette, engagement director at the Conference Board’s China Center, said in a Bloomberg Television interview. “We’re moving into a sort of China Inc. 2.0, a real upgraded version. That, sure, has markets and they’re going to play a really important role in this, but this is all within a birdcaged economy.”

Xi’s speech -- officially known as the party work report, China’s most important policy document -- included sections on politics, the economy, national defense, foreign policy and Hong Kong and Taiwan. He reiterated the goal of attaining “moderately prosperous society” by 2020, which has helped drive economic policy over the past five years.

Xi also laid out an ambitious plan to make China a “great modern socialist country” over two stages in the following 30 years -- part of what he has called the “Chinese dream.”

By 2050, he said, China will become “a global leader in terms of comprehensive national strength and international influence” with the rule of law, innovative companies, a clean environment, an expanding middle class, adequate public transportation and reduced disparities between urban and rural areas.

“Chinese people will enjoy greater happiness and well-being, and the Chinese nation will stand taller and firmer in the world,” Xi said of his vision for 2050. He said China “is approaching the center of the world stage.”

Xi painted China’s governance system as a unique development model while hailing signature policies like his Belt-and-Road infrastructure initiative and anti-corruption campaign, which has ensnared some 1 million officials since 2012 and sidelined many of his would-be rivals.

Xi affirmed the Communist Party’s supremacy and said that China shouldn’t copy the political systems of foreign nations, repeatedly emphasizing that the country had entered a “new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics.” He called for the rejection of the “Cold War mentality” in addressing global challenges, and said China would never seek global hegemony.

Xi said the Communist Party will strive to fully transform the People’s Liberation Army into one the world’s top militaries by 2050, and emphasized the need to modernize its combat capability.

“A military is built to fight,” he said.

Throughout the week, more than 2,000 delegates to 19th Party Congress will discuss and approve Xi’s report and revisions to the party charter. They will also appoint a new Central Committee, which will elect the party’s Politburo and its Standing Committee -- China’s most powerful body -- the day after the congress ends on Oct. 24.

‘Get Rich’

Xi is set to emerge as one of the country’s top three leaders along with Deng Xiaoping and Mao Zedong, who founded the People’s Republic of China in 1949. He’ll be looking to secure a majority of allies on the new Standing Committee, which may potentially include possible successors who could rule until 2032.

The Communist Party has been adept at changing course and finding ways for its citizens to make money, according to Fraser Howie, co-author of the books “Red Capitalism” and “Privatizing China.”

“The bargain certainly in the past 25 years plus has been forget political freedoms, we will allow you to get rich,” Howie said in a Bloomberg TV interview. “Keeping power has been of absolute paramount importance to the party, and that’s the focus of what these meetings are about.”

— With assistance by Keith Zhai, Peter Martin, Jeff Kearns, David Tweed, Enda Curran, and Xiaoqing Pi

A White House meltdown in the making - BBC News

A White House meltdown in the making

Anthony Zurcher

16 August 2017

At some point during the campaign last year, most Republicans came to the conclusion that Donald Trump was like nuclear energy. His was a force that, if properly harnessed, could power their party for a generation.

And so the party embraced Mr Trump. Republican functionaries like Reince Priebus and Sean Spicer joined the White House team. The nuclear dragon would be tamed.

But after nearly seven months the depth of their miscalculation may be growing too obvious to ignore.

Without adequate controls, everything Mr Trump touches could end up radioactive.

"I think his ability to effectively govern is dwindling by the hour," CNN Jim Acosta quotes a Republican leadership source as saying.

Veteran reporter Carl Bernstein says that high-level Republican, conservative, and military officials are privately saying that Mr Trump is "unfit to be president".

Bush presidents wade into Trump furore

America - diminished and dismissed

What made Trump remarks so offensive?

As party officials stare at the glowing crater left from the president's latest meltdown, they are left wondering. What now? What next?

At least so far, many Republicans have opted for the path of least resistance. They make stern condemnations of white supremacists and the hate that motivated the violence in Charlottesville - in carefully worded statements and tweets - hoping it will provide political shelter from the ongoing storm.

Media caption'Amoral' president leaves world stunned

When it comes to taking aim at the president himself, however, Mr Trump is He Who Must Not Be Named. Their criticism is oblique and the condemnation implied. They may whisper uncomfortable views in private, but publicly they watch their words.

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan - who had plenty of experience distancing himself from Mr Trump during the campaign - provides a standard example of the manoeuvre.

"We must be clear," he tweets. "White supremacy is repulsive. This bigotry is counter to all this country stands for. There can be no moral ambiguity."

He then returned to tweeting about Republican tax policy.

May to Trump: Far-right must be condemned

Antifa: Left-wing militants on the rise

Trump fans speculation on Bannon's future

Media captionDoes Trump react to some hate crimes faster than others?

Contrast that to Virginia congressman Scott Taylor's words.

"Today's statements by President Trump at his press conference were disappointing and a failure of leadership, which starts at the top, with him," he said in a press release. "I hope the president will focus on bringing people together and to challenge hate in the strongest unequivocal terms moving forward. There is no home for hate here in Virginia or America."

Or Arizona Senator John McCain.

"There's no moral equivalency between racists and Americans standing up to defy hate and bigotry," he tweeted. "The president of the United States should say so."

Others are caught in a political whipsaw, alternating criticism and praise for a president who, once again, seems to change his administration's position based on pique or whim.

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, for instance, called on Mr Trump to condemn white nationalists after his tepid response on Saturday and lauded his Monday scripted remarks by tweeting: "Well done Mr President".

On Tuesday it was back to blasting.

According to a count by the liberal website ThinkProgress, just 14 other Republicans in Congress, out of 292, have made similarly explicit condemnations of the president so far.

Those who haven't put out any kind of statement, however, risk getting pressed by reporters for their take.

When one journalist asked Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson what the president should say about the Charlottesville violence, he responded: "You tell me", adding that he wanted to move on.

That's a sentiment most Republicans probably share, but thanks to the president's combative press conference on Tuesday, "moving on" seems unlikely at least for now.

Within the administration officials are treading even more carefully. Chief of Staff John Kelly may have been caught by cameras repeatedly wincing during Tuesday's press conference, but he's back on the job today.

Trump's chief of staff glanced down at his feet throughout the Tuesday press conference

Gary Cohn - the president's top economic advisor who stood nearby as the president issued his remarks in Trump Tower - reportedly told friends he was "disgusted" and "upset" by the president's actions - but not so much that he would speak on the record.

Perhaps the reason why many Republicans are watching their words when it comes to the president is they have seen this film before.

During his presidential campaign, Mr Trump said undocumented Mexican migrants were criminals and rapists, he belittled Mr McCain's Vietnam War record, he insulted the parents of a Muslim US soldier killed in Iraq, he mocked a Hispanic beauty pageant contestant's weight, and a decade-old recorded emerged in which he boasted about using his celebrity status to sexually harass women.

After each of these episodes - and many more - Republicans eyed each other nervously and prepared to bolt for the exits, but Mr Trump eventually recovered. The storm passed, and in the end he prevailed.

A neon sign in Guam makes light of recent nuclear tensions with North Korea

"This too shall pass" isn't always a balm for the distraught. Sometimes it's a warning. It's a stern message for those who would doubt or abandon the president.

A HuffPost/YouGov poll conducted after the Charlottesville unrest (but before Mr Trump's Tuesday press conference) could also give clues as to why conservatives are taking pause.

Fully 77% of Trump voters think the president "did enough" to condemn white nationalist violence in Charlottesville. Two-thirds of them had no problem with the president's delay in mentioning neo-Nazis and white supremacists by name.

Perhaps most remarkably, 48% of Trump voters think the Charlottesville white nationalists either "have a point" (37%) or were "mostly right" (11%). And 68% of Trump voters see "a lot of discrimination" against white people in the US.

Protests raged outside Trump Tower during Trump's visit

Why draw the ire of a president known to keep close tabs on his friends and foes, Republicans may think, when the party's core voters largely still stand by his side, even through this latest political furore.

It's a calculation, however, that Mr Trump's corporate chieftans didn't have to make. After they abandoned the White House in growing numbers, the president was forced to announce his economic advisory boards were being shuttered.

Neither is political expediency a concern for much of the conservative media, which is showing growing signs of tiring of the presidential drama.

While some - like The National Review - have largely remained in the #neverTrump camp, the Federalist had often come to the president's defence. Until now.

"I don't think Trump is going to resign any time soon," says Robert Tracinski, a senior writer for the website. "But he needs to be left hanging out there all on his own without support from anyone in his party (or from anyone in the right-leaning media). He is a vortex of destruction, and the only way to survive is to get everything we love as far away from him as possible."

Mr Trump is a survivor. He outlasted all of his political opponents and bested many of his critics and naysayers. But a day of reckoning for Republicans could be fast approaching.