ShareThis Page
Joseph Sabino Mistick: We can’t unsee Trump taking Russia’s side |

Joseph Sabino Mistick: We can’t unsee Trump taking Russia’s side

Joseph Sabino Mistick
| Monday, July 23, 2018 11:06 a.m

Some things, once seen, cannot be unseen. Donald Trump standing on stage with Vladimir Putin, taking Russia’s side over America’s, promoting Putin’s lies instead of asserting the hard truths of the American intelligence community — those things can never be unseen.

No amount of explaining can explain that away. None of the excuses after the fact or one-word changes or late expressions of confidence in our intelligence agencies can make up for this. What’s done is done, and while sadness is an appropriate response, so is alarm. Trump stood there with Putin and took his side against our side.

Trump has praised strongman leaders in Turkey, Korea and the Philippines, and he makes no secret of his desire to be one, too. But while Trump physically towers over Putin, Putin somehow made Trump look small on that stage. He even tossed Trump a soccer ball, with a grin, as if to say, “Nice play, kid.”

This time, even Trump’s usual media cheerleaders saw the performance for what it was. Fox News commentators struck hard at Trump, with John Roberts claiming, “There’s a growing consensus that the president threw the United States under the bus.” Neil Cavuto called Trump’s performance “disgusting,” saying he “set us back a lot.”

Fox’s Shepard Smith, a rare critical voice at the pro-Trump network, exclaimed, “Shameful, disgraceful, treasonous: three of the descriptions of what President Donald Trump did today in Helsinki. Asked whether he believes American intelligence or the Russian thug standing next to him, President Trump declined to stand up for his own people and instead embraced Vladimir Putin.“

A Wall Street Journal
editorial said that Trump
“… projected weakness. He was the one on stage beseeching Mr. Putin for a better relationship, while the Russian played it cool and matter of fact.”

And those are his friends.

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, in her new book, “Fascism: A Warning,” describes how Benito Mussolini consolidated power in Italy in the 1920s.

He compared it to cleaning a chicken in preparation for dinner. Mussolini said, “If you pluck the chicken one feather at a time, nobody will notice.”

Describing the events of last week, including Trump’s assault on our NATO allies and his coziness with Putin, Albright warned, “We have just plucked a lot of feathers here. And I think that it’s very important for us to make clear that Trump has overplucked.”

No matter what he says or does, much of Trump’s base will remain with him. As he once famously claimed, he could “shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue” and not lose any support. This phenomenon is common enough that the law has a term for it, calling it “willful blindness,” an intentional effort to remain unaware of inconvenient facts.

But, for those swing voters who supported Trump because they were sick of the same old politics and wanted to shake things up, this is different. What was seen last week cannot be unseen.

For whatever reason, Trump puts Trump first when it comes to Russia — ahead of our allies, ahead of our own intelligence agencies, ahead of America.

Joseph Sabino Mistick is a
Pittsburgh lawyer. Reach him at

Joseph Sabino Mistick is a Pittsburgh lawyer. Reach him at

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.