Trump: Hero, Villain, Scapegoat

As I relate in our book, The Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex:

Long before Covid arrived, I’d joked with friends that if the ever boasting and self-promoting President Trump discovered the cure for cancer, his detractors would rather forgo the treatment than acknowledge he’d done something of value for humanity. It’s probably an inevitable outcome of America’s two-party system that any president may become the object of hyperbolic loathing. In the nineties, Republicans obsessed about President Clinton’s faults, real and perceived. In 2003, the columnist and psychiatrist Charles Krauthammer coined the expression Bush Derangement Syndrome as “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency—nay—the very existence of George W. Bush.”

During the presidency of Donald J. Trump this syndrome became so virulent that it created a strangely binary posture in public affairs. If Trump expressed even mild enthusiasm for a policy, person, or thing, his opposition automatically rejected it. To be sure, Trump often threw gasoline on the fire with his vices, his bombastic personal style, and occasional buffoonery. The qualities that had once been viewed as showman’s schtick were widely deemed unacceptable in a US President. The court jester had become king, and it drove the lords and ladies at court mad.

As anthropologists and psychologists have long understood, humans are hyper-social and tribal. Stanford Professor Rene Girard has pointed out that during times of stress and rivalry, we are inclined to ascribe blame not to a complex state of affairs, but to a particular person or group. Persistent problems and misfortunes build up negative psychic energy, which generates a collective yearning to destroy the person or persons on whom the blame is heaped. This process of scapegoating is amplified by what Professor Girard called mimesis—that is, imitation—the tendency to embrace an opinion or sentiment because everyone in a preferred group is embracing it. In trying to make sense of the world, we often look to those around us for cues to guide us in our perceptions and opinions.

So, it was when President Trump declared the old malaria drug hydroxychloroquine to be a potential game changer. Soon stories appeared under headlines such as “Trump’s Covid Cure” or “Trump touts hydroxychloroquine,” proclaiming the drug lacked efficacy and safety, and caused “irreversible retinal damage” and “dangerous heart arrhythmias.”

It seems to me that it was during the presidency of Donald Trump that the U.S. mainstream media adopted its current policy of lying about everything all the time. Even more disturbing was about half the public’s willingness to believe the lies—not because there was any reason to believe them, but simply because they were negative assertions about Trump. Likewise, if you wanted HALF the country to dismiss a proposition out of hand, all you had to do was get President Trump to state it.

It’s tempting to dismiss people who have such a childish and primitive way of responding to the world as emotionally dysregulated morons who can’t be helped. However, in the context of a national presidential election, such an attitude of contempt runs the high risk of leading to unbridgeable division and civil war.

Trying to understand other people’s perceptions of Trump is extremely challenging, because he elicits such deeply personal feelings. Years ago, when Trump was an occasional guest host on Saturday Night Live, he always reminded me of the real estate developer, Al Czervik (played by Rodney Dangerfield) in the 1980 comedy Caddyshack.

Ever since then, my mental posture towards Trump has always been humorous. Because humor is so disarming of hostility, I could never understand why people got so worked up about him. Many have told me about their visceral feelings of distaste when they see him and hear him speak. Some women regard him as loathsome to behold. Other women have confided in me that they are overwhelmed with sexual desire when they see him. It’s remarkable that the same man can evoke such an array of opposing feelings in people, and I’ve often wished that Jordan Peterson would do one of his marvelously clever analyses of Trump.

When Trump first entered politics, he struck me a protest candidate and as something akin to a Court Jester—that is, someone who was at liberty to make fun of the lords and ladies at court without getting into trouble for it. The trouble with the latter comparison is that the jesters in the old courts of Europe were protected (though Will Somers once had a very close shave with an angry King Henry VIII).

The interest groups that run this country behind the scenes did NOT find Trump funny. On the contrary, they regarded him as a mortal threat to their power and money, which they worship.

During his presidency, Trump was brave and scrappy and had good instincts, but he was totally lacking in sophistication about how to deal with the vipers who surrounded him. This was especially evident during the pandemic, when he allowed Gnome Fauci and Bescarved Birx to hover around him and undermine his executive authority. Why he allowed himself to be hemmed in by that duplicitous duo remains a mystery. I would have certainly told them to beat it.

The COVID-19 Pandemic presented by far the greatest challenge to Trump’s presidency. All of the previous BS intrigues, starting with the Russian-Collusion Hoax, were nothing in comparison. Alas, because he allowed Fauci to remain in the driver’s seat, and because he endorsed the fraudulent and dangerous COVID-19 vaccines, he will have a difficult time escaping the perception that the pandemic was his Waterloo.

To me, it seems obvious that Trump is an infinitely more desirable candidate than the braindead Joe Biden, but I have to recognize that half the country does not share my perceptions. The true challenge Trump faces now is not how to win the election, but how to heal the enormous divide that runs through the soul of this country—a divide amplified by white hot passions.

America’s greatest political thinker, James Madison, spent innumerable hours thinking about the ruinous effect of passions on public life, and the practical question of how to subordinate them to reason. He believed that managing public passions was the single greatest challenge that faced an elected leader, and he frequently expressed skepticism that it was possible. Alas, I fear that—as funny as I find him—Trump is not up for this challenge.


FDA Grants Paxlovid Full Approval but Patients Prefer Ivermectin-Based Multidrug Protocols

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

Emily Harris, writer for JAMA reported on June 7, 2023, that the US FDA fully approved Paxlovid for the acute ambulatory treatment of COVID-19. Paxlovid is dosed from a bubble pack: 2 tabs nirmatrelvir 300 mg plus 1 tab ritonavir 100 mg taken every 12 hours for 5 days. In the video I remind you that the CDC has a public health advisory on Paxlovid rebound or prolongation of the syndrome. Additionally, I review the issue of drug-drug interactions while taking Paxlovid.

You can see that a recent Twitter poll indicated that despite the FDA approval, 99% of respondents would rather have an ivermectin-based protocol (McCullough Protocol, FLCCC, others) than Paxlovid monotherapy. Listen to the entire update to get familiarized with the McCullough Protocol, particularly the viricidal nasal sprays and OTC bundle which you should have at home and ready to go at the first signs of illness.

Please support the Courageous Discourse Substack so we may serve you with this and many more public health updates and critical analyses.

Harris E. FDA Grants Full Approval to Paxlovid, COVID-19 Antiviral Treatment. JAMA. 2023;329(24):2118. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.9925

CDC HEALTH ADVISORY Distributed via the CDC Health Alert Network May 24, 2022, 9:00 AM ET CDCHAN-0467 COVID-19 Rebound After Paxlovid Treatment

McCullough Protocol©: Risk Stratification Prior COVID-19 Infection Must be Noted PETER A. MCCULLOUGH, MD, MPH™ OCT 11, 2022

McCullough Protocol©: Nasal-Oral Viricidal Washes and Gargles Treat the Infection at the Source PETER A. MCCULLOUGH, MD, MPH™ OCT 13, 2022

McCullough Protocol©: Nutraceuticals and Prescription Drugs The Art and Science of Medicine Required to Face a Novel Threat PETER A. MCCULLOUGH, MD, MPH™ OCT 14, 2022

No Silencing Recording Artist Aly Cook–Profile in Valor

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

I had a chance to sit down with iconic artist Aly Cook who has been an unstoppable force in New Zealand. Her son who is a truck driver is suffering from chronic myopericarditis after taking the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. They have been waiting 14 months to see a cardiologist since there have been so many specialists sidelined for refusing to take the risk of COVID-19 vaccination. Aly Cook is a New Zealand based Multi award-winning songwriter and performer, who has taken her music to the world with a power house vocal and a maturity to that brings out the best in her voice belting out Country Blues and Roots. 

She has two important documentaries to add to her resume, 1) Silent No More NZ about the vaccine-injured Kiwi’s and 2) Silenced An Independent New Zealand Documentary on the censorship of doctors. She is not stopping there. Her recent mega-petition to Parliament which must now be read is >1400 pages of documented vaccine injuries, disabilities, and deaths. She indicated that during the pandemic both houses of NZ Parliament signed a “pact” to remain completely silent on any vaccine concerns. Now elections bring new hope for the island nation.

Her story was recently featured on CHD TV and is well worth watching.

Please subscribe as a paying or founder member to support Profiles in Valor and the Courageous Discourse Substack.

New Zealand Documentary Memorial Day (Silent No More NZ)

“Silenced” – – An Independent New Zealand Documentary.

Good Morning CHD: JUL 1, 2023 SHARE Mother of Vaccine-injured Child Demands NZ Gov’t Investigate Harms

Critical Response to My 4th of July Essay

There’s a funny scene in the novel Imperium, by Robert Harris—an historical novel about Cicero’s adventures in the late Roman Republic—in which a Roman patrician comes to Cicero (a lawyer) complaining that his young wife has divorced him. He refuses to recognize the validity of her lawsuit for divorce, even though it’s perfectly valid under Roman law.

To bolster his argument, he has brought along to the meeting a renowned Greek philosopher, who presents a metaphysical argument for why the bond of marriage cannot be severed. Cicero listens carefully and then tells both men that they are missing the point. The divorce is not only valid; it is already accomplished, and no amount of philosophical argument is going to change it.

Since the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1783, Great Britain has recognized that the United States is an independent and sovereign nation. I suppose one could argue that King George III should NOT have done this, but the fact is, he did. Given the other conspicuous fact that I am a citizen of the United States and have enjoyed great security and prosperity as a result of my citizenship, on Independence Day I thought it appropriate to relate a funny and poignant story about Dr. Benjamin Rush, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. It’s a quirky habit I have of making celebratory gestures on occasions like weddings and anniversaries.

Since I posted my essay, a few readers have contacted me to say that Thomas Jefferson and the whole lousy lot of them were insufferable humbugs who wrote all high and mighty about “liberty” and the “inalienable rights of man” while they themselves owned slaves.

This criticism is not original. Indeed, responding to the colonists’ demands in 1775, the great English essayist, Samuel Johnson, asked, “How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?”

In his 1942 short story, The Bear, William Faulkner’s protagonist reflects on the possibility that the innocence of the natural wilderness of the American South was tainted as soon as the institution of slavery was introduced to it.

As I have remarked in previous posts, it seems to me that people who have enjoyed long periods of unprecedented prosperity and security—largely as a result of massive debt financing of everything—have a tendency to start thinking that they are very special and would have—had they lived in the past—discerned the injustices of the day and protested them.

I doubt it. If the COVID-19 pandemic has taught us anything, it’s that most people are very quick to comply with whatever dictates are issued by the prevailing authorities and to question little.


1). Because the principle author of the Declaration of Independence owned slaves, should we no longer celebrate our independence from Great Britain?

2). Should we Americans today—none of whom have ever owned a slave—petition King Charles III to reunite with Great Britain (which abolished the slave trade in 1807 and the institution of slavery in British colonies in 1833)?

3). If, as Faulkner seemed to suggest, white men tainted the innocent wilderness when they introduced slavery to it, what are we to make of deaths of hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers, most of whom didn’t own slaves? Is it reasonable to suggest that their violent deaths expiated their sins?

4). What are we to make of the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Union soldiers, including recent Irish immigrants, in the Civil War?

5). What are we to make of all the hard work and investment made in this country over the last two hundred years by people who never owned slaves?

I’ll conclude by posing a difficult question. If Jefferson had recognized his hypocrisy and corrected it by liberating his slaves before he drafted the document, what practical responsibilities could he have reasonably been expected to assume for his liberated slaves?

To frame the question more directly: Which of the following do you believe you would have done if, like Thomas Jefferson, you inherited upon your father’s death in 1757 a plantation and thirty slaves?

1). Offered your liberated slaves room and board, with no obligation to perform any work, for the rest of their lives?

2). Offered a daily wage in return for maintaining their occupations as plantation laborers?

3). Paid for their transportation to Africa?

4). Found them jobs as laborers working in the growing cities of the colonies?

5). Exhorted them to “Go West, young man and woman,” and seek their fortunes on the frontier?

As always, I welcome and am delighted to read your comments.


Complaint Filed Against Department of Education Concerning Public Health Education and Promotion of COVID-19 Vaccines

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

Many older adults ask me “Why aren’t young persons concerned about the safety and long term effects of COVID-19 vaccines?” One of many factors is that that our educational K-12 and college level courses are probably chocked full of misleading promotional materials for the genetic vaccines.

I learned recently from William Sumner Scott, J.D., executive director of World Peace Through Education Foundation who explained: “Formal education can grant the license for accreditation only if the US Department of Education (“DoEd”) approves. The DoEd has traditionally delegated the review of the accreditation process to the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (“NACIQI”) to provide a recommendation of the grant of accreditation authority by the Secretary of the DoEd. 

Scott, myself, and Steve Kirsch, President of the Vaccine Safety Research Council, are formally complaining that the DoEd NACIQI has failed to conduct proper past pandemic reviews of the Council on Education of Public Health (“CEPH”) which has resulted in serious conflicts of interest by graduates of the schools its accredits in the promotion of vaccines without proper evaluation standards because of monetary incentives and research grants provided by the USG and Big Pharma to the public health schools.   We have requested a public hearing and denial of the renewal application for accreditation authority of CEPH because it has failed to adopt proper criteria to accredit public health schools, particularly they neglected to teach that conflicts of interest must be eliminated.  Promotion of COVID-19 vaccines has been influenced by the favor of acceptance of bonuses, bribes, grants, and employment, and as a result, has caused death and injury to patients as a result of CEPH failure to properly enforce public health education standards.” 

We will keep you updated on the progress of these proceedings. Our hope is to get this to the level of official comment and dialogue so that safety data can be acknowledged by educational leaders and on the record for all to see.

Please subscribe to the Courageous Discourse Substack to stay abreast of breaking developments. Support us as paying or founder members.

The World Peace Through Education Foundation, Inc

Bringing the Military-Industrial Complex to Heel

FDR once remarked that, “I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made.” When I first heard this in my younger days, I thought it sounded like mere bravado. Nowadays, having lots of enemies in high places strikes me as the surest sign that one is doing the right thing.

For years, RFK, Jr. has done a splendid job of making enemies among the Vaccine Mafia, and they have made him pay dearly for it. Last Tuesday, June 20, he gave a speech at Saint Anselm College in Goffstown, New Hampshire in which he took on the Military-Industrial Complex.

You wouldn’t know it from the abysmal media coverage—a short and tendentious little report from NBC 10 in Boston tops the Google search for it—but his speech sets forth the boldest and clearest vision of a new path forward, out of the brutal and sordid swamp of American foreign policy that we’ve been mired in since President Johnson sent American regular soldiers to Vietnam in 1965.

Students of American history may recall that President Eisenhower warned the American people about the frightening rise of war-mongering swamp critters in his Farewell Address of 1961. As he put it:

We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.

Eisenhower’s warning provided a useful model for Dr. McCullough and me as we outlined our book, The Courage to Face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex (with a Forward by RFK, Jr.).

We believe the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex—responsible for the creation of SARS-CoV-2 and the criminal COVID-19 vaccine disaster—is an outgrowth of the Military-Industrial Complex that Eisenhower warned about.

Mr. Kennedy’s speech presents a fascinating portrait of American history between Eisenhower’s warning and his uncle President John Kennedy’s assassination less than three years later. JFK tried to heed his predecessor’s warning.

RFK, Jr.’s speech about the danger and debasement of warmongering strongly resembles James Madison’s thoughts on the matter. As Madison wrote in a letter in 1795:

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

I highly recommend that our Substack readers listen to RFK Jr.’s revealing, heartfelt, and profound speech. If you too find it intriguing and inspiring, please share it with your networks.