Donald Trump

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Donald Trump is Henry VIII. There's a new movie coming out "Firebrand" with Jude Law as the monstrous egomaniac king, told though the eyes of his sixth and last wife Catherine Parr. BBC website has a good preview; it shows that both Law and the film's director base their take on Henry partly on what they see in Trump - the abuse of power, a readiness to use violence against those who disagreed with him, how he was physically and emotionally abusive to all his wives, not just the two he murdered, Henry often jamming his fingers into a woman's mouth "whenever he felt like it." For mouth, read pu**y, of course. This revisionist and feminist view of the Tudor tyrant has been around in historical scholarship for quite a while - see Karen Lindsey's Divorced, Beheaded, Survived for example - but it gains added resonance from having a modern political figure similarly bloated in both body and ego to compare it to. Coincidentally last week I watched A Man For All Seasons (1966) again, with Robert Shaw as Henry, and it struck me then how much Trump resembles him. Shaw is astonishing in the scene where he berates Thomas More (Paul Scofield), alternating between wild rage ("No opposition, no opposition, I say!"), paranoid suspicion of those around him, and exaggerated praise of his own many talents - as a musician, in this particular scene. Trump is recognizable at every turn and is only missing the gangrenous leg that Henry dragged around for the last years of his life.

I think the only point I’d make as a slight counterpoint is that by the time he married Catherine Parr, Henry was completely shot mentally. I don’t mean clinically insane, like Trump probably is (although Henry probably was) but in the sense that the fight had gone out of him, beaten down by years of misfortune and, as you suggest, his puss-riddled leg which had become unbearably painful.

Whatever you say about Trump, he still has some fight in him, partly for reasons of self preservation, and Henry, of course, didn’t have the benefit of contemporary medicine and stimulants to ameliorate his condition and to accentuate that fight.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I'm not a fan by any stretch but I thought this interview was quite a good insight into the man. Hopefully Lex gets to interview more politicians and former politicians.

Watched up to about thirteen minutes (might watch more later) and he doesn’t challenge him enough on his answers, with particular reference to the questions on Ukraine. Think the index questions are decent enough, but he doesn’t challenge his responses.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Watched up to about thirteen minutes (might watch more later) and he doesn’t challenge him enough on his answers, with particular reference to the questions on Ukraine. Think the index questions are decent enough, but he doesn’t challenge his responses.

Thats a flaw that almost 100% of political interviewers have these days. The word "why" as a question is overlooked and under used. Instead of letting politicians spout their bullshit unchallenged just ask them "and why would that be" and watch the flounder. Oh and that way you make it an interview not a monologue

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Thats a flaw that almost 100% of political interviewers have these days. The word "why" as a question is overlooked and under used. Instead of letting politicians spout their bullshit unchallenged just ask them "and why would that be" and watch the flounder. Oh and that way you make it an interview not a monologue

Yes, thought exactly the same. He said Ukraine shouldn’t have happened, and would have been avoided (in his watch), without the interviewer probing the reasoning and the gateway for that. Trump, of course, wouldn’t have answered that, and would have talked around it, but a robust and effective interviewer would have pinned him down at that point.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I've noticed that Trump gets sidetracked easily when talking about damage - he rambles about the amount of destruction in Ukraine, just as he does when talking about injuries to e.g. servicemen.

It's weird.

 

[Irwell]

He isn't a political interviewer though, as he says himself at the end. It isn't intended to be a robust political interview, all Lex's interviews are about having a comfortable subject who wants to open up and explain their thinking to you. I didn't go into it expecting it to go deep into policies, but I did think it gave a good feel for Trump's mindset.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

He goes completely off the rails - if we don't win the election, there might not be another one.
... the Democrats are evil people...the enemy within
... "fortunately" he didn't go to Epstein's island... fortunately is not a word to use there, surely?

The host telling him he's probably the most famous person in the world is very weird behaviour.
Parroting back how great he was at negotiating and end wars was pretty odd to hear to. Not really a balanced statement for an interviewer.

It suggests that the neutral facade is allowing a lot through - as per GDM's comment about lack of challenge to comments made. It strikes me that it's a good platform to make lunatic statements and have them on record.

 

[Blue Maverick]

He isn't a political interviewer though, as he says himself at the end. It isn't intended to be a robust political interview, all Lex's interviews are about having a comfortable subject who wants to open up and explain their thinking to you. I didn't go into it expecting it to go deep into policies, but I did think it gave a good feel for Trump's mindset.

He also does it for clicks and likes if he challenged Trump he’d get dogs abuse via social media.

 

[laserblue]

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]