Trump's Lies and His Lying Accomplices

10.26.19

To the editor:

Jennifer Senior (NYT 10.26.19) points out how President Trump's attack against the truth has been sustained by self-serving Republican politicians and by media that profit from packaging and disseminating lies. A large number of Trump supporters believe these lies.

This historical moment reflects a profound betrayal of the public trust. At the end of the day, no one likes being lied to. As the impeachment inquiry moves forward, patriotic civil servants - with unimpeachable integrity - will come forward in public hearings to literally speak truth to power. Will President Trump's political cronies engage these brave men and women as truth seekers? Or will their political agenda demand they attack and discredit? I suspect the latter. Either way, I am hopeful that more and more Americans will recognize they have been fed a steady diet of lies and ultimately repudiate this President for degrading our country and the office he holds.

Respectfully

Larry S Sandberg

The Mueller Report and Complacency

1.31.19

To the editor:

Many Americans wait with a mixture of desperation and hope for Robert Mueller's report to free this country from the menace of President Trump. But our elected officials should act to remove President Trump from office independent of the findings of Mueller's investigation. Trump (NYT, 1/31/19 An Angry Trump Pushes Back Against His Own 'Naive' Intelligence Officials), in harshly criticizing and challenging the findings of Intelligence officials, makes blatant his inability to integrate objective facts into his own thinking and decision making. This danger cannot be overestimated given the power he possesses. He poses a threat to all Americans. I urge all citizens to contact their Congressional representatives and to avoid complacency by placing their hopes on the outcome of the Mueller investigation.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg MD

Empty Storefronts on the Streets of NYC

11.24.19

To the editor:

Tim Wu writes persuasively about the impact of e-commerce on brick and mortar small businesses that have historically fulfilled an important service while being part of the social fabric of the neighborhoods in which we live (NYT, Better, cheaper and faster than Amazon, 11.24.19). What I don't understand is how landlords prefer to have empty storefronts generating no income rather than supporting businesses that are part of the character of our communities. How does a landlord profit from having no tenant in a space for years on end? What role does the city play in regulating occupancy rates? If this is the new normal during economically good times, what will happen during hard times? As a lifelong resident of New York City I would like to know what, if anything, city agencies are doing to confront the epidemic of lost businesses on the streets of New York.

Sincerely,

Larry S. Sandberg

See No Evil ... Hear No Evil ...

11.18.19

To the editor:

It is disheartening to know that many Americans are tuning out the impeachment hearings and not availing themselves to unadulterated information from career non-partisan civil servants who have put patriotism before self-interest to speak truth to power (House hearings roll on, but many tune out, 11.18.19). The integrity of those who have come forward (with the notable exception of Ambassador Sondland) is unimpeachable.

We are living in an age of disinformation honed by the Russians and perfected by President Trump in his ability to gaslight a large sector of the population. How else to understand the defensive mantra by his supporters that the impeachment proceedings are nothing more than a 'witch hunt?' These hearings, reluctantly undertaken by Nancy Pelosi, pose serious political risks to Democrats. But not moving forward would have damaged the very foundation of our democracy.

Former Senator Moynihan famously said '"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." In my opinion we have a responsibility to pay close attention to these historic hearings and decide for ourselves as best we can - absent the commentary and spin of others - what the facts are.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S Sandberg

Trump and Shamelessness

Tot the editor:

Brett Stephens (Trump and the Annihilation of Shame, 4.12.19) painfully, albeit accurately, deconstructs a core cultural dynamic catalyzed by a Trump presidency – the annihilation of shame. But to describe the public response as acquiescence is incomplete.

President Trump flaunts those aspects of his personality for which he should feel ashamed. He has turned shame into shamelessness; the universal urge to hide in shame has been turned into exhibitionism. An essential aspect of being human has been undone and made its opposite.

But without a receptive audience – within congress and the public at large – he simply could not get away with this. He has brilliantly managed to infect his supporters with the very shamelessness he feels. President Trump’s behavior has blinded his supporters to the shamefulness of his behavior … and to their own shame.

Meanwhile the rest of the country feels ashamed of our President and judges his shameless supporters – rather than misguided - as bad people who should feel ashamed adding to the polarization in our country. 2020 cannot come too soon.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg MD

Republican Collusion and Wishful Thinking

11.24.19

To the editor:

Charles Blow argues that those who support Trump are devoted to his 'version of the truth and his version of reality.' But as suggested in his piece, like a life threatening virus, President Trump has infected the minds of many Republicans such that truth and reality no longer matter. This fact is what makes him so dangerous. If his political appointees were as reality based as the career civil servants who have courageously come forward to testify, we would not ... could not be in this mess.

President Trump is not going to change. Republicans in Congress are on trial figuratively if not literally. Or at least they should be. I would prefer to see an all out campaign by Democrats that is focused on the fact that the public is being lied to and manipulated by officials who are betraying their oaths of office. An ad campaign that juxtaposes the testimony of career civil servants with the bald lies of Republicans might impact some independent voters.

Respectfully

Larry S. Sandberg MD

Trump and the Impeachment Process

To the editor:

David Brooks (9.27.19, Yes, He's guilty. Impeachment is a mistake.) makes the outrageous claim that proceeding with the impeachment process is 'completely elitist,' will 'probably achieve nothing' while 'increas(ing) public cynicism' and 'distort(ing) the Democratic primary process.' He is wrong on all counts.

The impeachment inquiry is being carried out by our elected officials who are fulfilling their obligation to serve this country. Americans, through the ballot box have elected the ' 100 mostly millionaire senators' who may ultimately determine President Trump's fate. We hope, if not trust, they will do the right thing. Interpreting the impeachment inquiry as a statement of mistrusting the voting public is a Fox News talking point not reasoned argument.

Rather than increase public cynicism, this decision plainly asserts that the rule of law still matters in our country and that ideals, rather than political calculation, inform the conduct of our elected officials.

The public has reason to expect, if not demand, that our elected officials dispassionately examine the evidence as it becomes available. Facts matter. The truth matters. I have faith that enough moderate Republicans - elected officials and the public at large - realize the gravity of this historical moment and will not be deterred by cynicism or political self-interest.

Respectfully

Larry S Sandberg

Biden and Mental Competence

3.8.19

To the editor

Frank Bruni (Donald Trump’s Outrageous 2020 Advantage) laments the seemingly double standard at play comparing Joe Biden’s misstatements to those of Donald Trump. But the appropriate response is not that others should be given a pass as Bruni implies in describing Biden’s gaffes as ‘picayune’.

Mental fitness is essential to fulfill the responsibilities of being President. If objective criteria existed, as they should, to make such an assessment Donald Trump would not be in office.

It matters if Biden’s errors reflect a stable benign trait or signs of cognitive impairment that may worsen over time. Ideally, the American public would not be left in a position to ponder this question.

Respectfully submitted
Larry S Sandberg

The Whistleblower and The Blowhard

To the editor:

President Trump defends himself against a whistle-blower complaint by calling the individual 'partisan' while admitting he does not know his/her identity. (Trump calls whistle-blower 'partisan' and defends conduct with other leaders, 9.20.19). How does someone level an ad hominen attack against an anonymous figure ? If that someone is Donald Trump it appears he can say or do pretty much whatever he wants and his supporters will shamelessly go along at great risk to our country.

Many mental health experts, like the canary in the coal mine, have suggested that President Trump is dangerous. The complete absence of self-reflection and any capacity to understand his own fallibility compels a world view whereby any complaint against him is an attack rather than potentially revealing a painful truth. His decision making is compromised as a result. Too many Republicans, fearing President Trump's wrath, have abdicated their responsibility by remaining silent.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S Sandberg

Trump & Learned Helplessness

6.21.19

To the editor:

While Michelle Goldberg (Trump bets we’ll stop caring about migrant kids, NYT, 6.21.19) writes persuasively about the various reasons public outrage to President Trump’s (mis)conduct repeatedly wanes, I think two psychological phenomena have come together in a toxic brew.

The first is ‘learned helplessness’ which occurs when one repeatedly fails to effect change to an aversive situation.  This can be a cause of clinical depression and is a useful way to understand the impact of constantly hitting a brick wall.  Looking to 2020 paradoxically worsens this problem as President Trump can be given a free pass until then.

But ‘learned helplessness’ could not happen without ‘Trump’s people’ supporting him every step of the way.  Those people who know better but turn a blind eye or whose self-interest leads to an abdication of responsibility cultivate the ‘malignant normalization’ of the abnormal – a term introduced by Robert Jay Lifton to describe the conduct of Nazi doctors. 

As one of many mental health professionals who has given voice to President Trump’s evident mental instability, the silence among those who know better is deafening. Or worse, we are deemed unethical for speaking out. Meanwhile millions of people laugh as late-night comedians are overflowing with material as if laughter is the only medicine we have. 

Respectfully submitted,

Larry S. Sandberg MD

The writer is Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical Center and psychoanalyst.

The State of Psychiatric Care in the U.S.

To the editor:

Kelli Maria Korducki (It's not just a chemical imbalance, 7.27.19) rightly laments the state of psychiatric care with its overemphasis on drug treatment for what are, inevitably, complex psychological problems.  As a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, I am unaware of any acute psychiatric condition for which drugs alone are adequate.  Excellent research now exists establishing the effectiveness of psychotherapy - alone or in combination with drugs - for most major psychiatric illnesses including personality disorders.  Other studies have shown distinct brain changes with talk therapy; i.e., psychotherapy is a biological treatment.

A major impediment, alluded to by the author, is an insurance industry governed by profits and a perverse misuse of 'medical necessity' criteria to deny patients needed psychotherapy - as evidenced by a finding in a recent class action suit against United Healthcare. Those of us who can work out-of-network do so in an effort to preserve the integrity of our work.  But that does not prevent insurers from aggressively auditing treatments, withholding payments or denying care once a patient is no longer in 'crisis.'  I would say, without exception, this euphemistic  'quality control' always pertains to talk therapy, not medication management.

As the 2020 Presidential election cycle is upon us, I hope candidates will address the for-profit insurance industry's role in intentionally under-insuring those in need of psychotherapy.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg

Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical College

Re: "Key evidence solidifies CIA assessment that Saudi Prince ordered Khashoggi killing"

To the editor:

(Key evidence solidifies CIA assessment that Saudi Prince ordered Khashoggi killing, 12.3.18): Most explanations of President Trump's refusal to accept the likely role of Mohammed bin Salman in the killing of a Washington Post journalist centers on the transactional nature of his relationships.  While this is no doubt true, I believe there is an additional and no less likely motivation - one that is not particularly subtle.

President Trump, in dismissing the CIA's findings as merely 'feeling' based, is arguing for the guilt of all those who surrounded the Saudi Prince while the Prince himself is exonerated from all wrongdoing.  As the Mueller investigation moves forward we see more and more evidence that President Trump's inner circle has been involved in various criminal activities. Depending upon the 'loyalty' of those accused, he will either attack (Michael Cohen) or defend  (Paul Manafort)  those who have been found guilty. Ultimately, inevitably I believe, President Trump will be left arguing his innocence surrounded by guilty parties just as he absurdly argues that the Saudi Prince is innocent.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg

Re: "Breaking With U.S. Intelligence, Appears to Accept Saudi Explanation of Journalist’s Death"

10.20.18

To the editor:

In what seems an eternity ago, then candidate Trump opined that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose a single vote. This boast will now be put to the test, figuratively if not literally, in the brutal killing of Jamal Khashoggi.

President Trump (Breaking With U.S. Intelligence, Appears to Accept Saudi Explanation of Journalist’s Death, 11.20.18), unbelievably though unsurprisingly, finds credible (or pretends to find credible) the Saudi fabrication that Khashoggi died during a fight in the consulate putting Trump on the side of a government that killed a U.S. resident, journalist and father while visiting the embassy to get papers in order for his marriage.

President Trump’s absence of a moral compass and grasp of his responsibility to our country is revealed in his bizarre comment: “This one has caught the imagination of the world, unfortunately … It’s not a positive.” He sees the problem not as the murder itself but the world’s response to it. The video of Khasshoggi entering the embassy is haunting because we know – we do not need to imagine - what ensued. We experience moral outrage and the need for justice. For President Trump, always the self-serving businessman, the problem is the imagination of others rather than the misdeed.

I hope that Republicans in Congress and his base of supporters do not let him get away with this degradation of life and denigration of moral outrage as ‘imagination.’

Respectfully submitted,

Larry S. Sandberg

Re: "When a President believes he is entitled to his own facts"

To the editors:

Maggie Haberman (Re. When a President believes he is entitled to his own facts, 10.19.18) illustrates the profound threat posed by President Trump's idiosyncratic relationship with objective reality.  Young children make up things all the time; 'pretend play' is a normal aspect of childhood and a source of great pleasure precisely because one's imagination is given free range.  Most of us outgrow this phase and are capable of discerning when we are engaging our imaginations and when we are observing the external world. Yet the most powerful man in the world is perversely engaged in the acrobatic juggling of reality and facts to suit his inner emotional needs.

How can he get away with this?  It is only because he has others who are willing to play along with him.  This includes members of Congress who are complicit in their silence and, as Haberman points out, a Republican base that uncritically plays along infusing Trump with the power of a charismatic leader . Robert Jay Lifton, a psychiatrist and scholar on the effects of war and political violence, speaks of the danger of 'malignant normalization' when threats to the safety and fabric of society are no longer perceived as such.  It is unfolding before our eyes.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S Sandberg

Re: "Saudis now plan to say journalist was killed by mistake in inquiry"

To the editor:

(Saudis now plan to say journalist was killed by mistake in inquiry, 10.16.18): We are witnessing the creation of 'fake news' before our eyes between the President and Saudi Arabia. Rogue killing, seriously?  Is the world so beaten down and numbed by relentless attacks against reality that it is to be expected that we accept silently such deceit? Is this how little our 'pro-life' President values human life? How many more moral lines must President Trump cross before those who support him stand up and say no more?

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg

Re: "For Once I'm Grateful to Trump"

To the editor:

I read with dismay Bret Stephens (10.4.18, For once I'm grateful to Trump) lauding President Trump's unconscionable behavior mocking a victim of assault because 'he's one big bully willing to stand up to another.'  Since when do two wrongs make a right? And why does Stephens focus his attention on everyone but the victim?  He does not own or even recognize his implicit bias in his thinking.

Yes, Blassey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh cannot both be telling the truth.  As a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, the most likely explanation based on brain science and knowledge of how the mind works is that the episode became a memory for Blassey Ford because it was traumatic and a non-memory for Kavanaugh because he was drunk.  On this basis alone, the risk to the functioning and integrity of the Supreme Court is far greater if Kavanaugh is seated rather than replaced by another nominee. Erring on the side of caution is in the best interest of the country given the stakes.

There has also been much justification of Kavanaugh's conduct at the hearing; an angry man unfairly attacked fighting for his name and honor.  No doubt this has been a trying time for Kavanaugh and the hearing a difficult stress test.  For many of us, including legal scholars, he failed the test.  His strategy was using rage to show innocence -  Republicans were gleeful because they could embrace that narrative.  But for the rest of us it showed an ugly side of him that he will carry into the Supreme Court to the detriment of all Americans.

Respectfully

Larry S Sandberg

Re: "Cardiologists Should Care about our Love Lives"

To the editor:

Sandeep Jauhar (NYT, 9.16.18, Cardiologists should care about our love lives) powerfully illustrates the way negative emotions can damage heart functioning in the case of  'broken heart' syndrome and how stress reduction can improve cardiac health.  But he too quickly dismisses the heart as a 'source' for emotions and adopts a dualistic way of thinking when distinguishing our 'hearts' from our 'emotional system.'

The seminal research by affective neuroscientists like Antonio Damasio and others supports the view that our metaphoric use of language to describe our emotions (heart break, gut wrenching, pain in the neck, pissed off  - among others) has a literal, concrete basis. We rely on our bodies, not only our hearts, to 'tell us' how we feel. This takes place automatically and largely unconsciously in the way we carry ourselves and the state of our viscera. An anxious patient with a racing heart feels his tachycardia as his anxiety regardless of the mental trigger.  In other words, our emotions are embodied.

The takotsubo cardiomyopathy is an extraordinary example of a coming together of the concrete and metaphoric broken heart.  But the healthy heart, however silently, is itself, expressing a state of emotion whether it be peace, calm or love.  I applaud Dr. Jauhar for emphasizing the critical importance of taking emotional factors into consideration when treating the physical body.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg

Re: "The Big Myth About Teenage Anxiety"

To the editor

Richard Friedman (NYT, 9.9.18 The big myth about teenage anxiety) is right to point out that there is no available research to prove - or disprove - the notion that an epidemic of anxiety exists among teenagers and that some academic research - correlating brain regions that are active in individuals who are 'addicted' to technology - is uninformative in this regard.  I believe, though, that it is highly problematic to argue that some parents,teens and young adults simply worry too much and should recognize that our brains are 'resilient and more resistant to change than we think.'

It concerns me when I see a young mother strolling down the street with her infant while looking down at her phone rather than engaged with her newborn.  The technology has co-opted a deeply biological and psychologically driven motivation to attach and engage the newborn. It concerns me when people walk down the street glued to their phones rather than engaged with their environment - one that can include a visually impaired individual on a collision course.  It concerns me when teachers lament their inability to get their students to pay attention in the classroom. The list goes on.  I do not see this as an epidemic of anxiety - rather an incursion of technology in the relational realm in ways that are (objectively in my mind) deeply problematic. 

People develop powerful relationships with their cellphones and the technology it provides. Like any transformative tool, it has its risks.  I think we do well to realize that the technology industry is fueled by for profit businesses invested not in the emotional or intellectual well-being of the public but in maximizing profits by getting people to stay connected to their devices.  For this reason alone, a healthy skepticism is warranted in evaluating the impact of technology on mental health.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg MD

Re:

To the editor:

I did not realize that job security was a consideration in deciding whether to publish the name of an opinion piece contributor.  It is one thing to grant anonymity in the service of protecting a contributor's safety; quite another to protect his/her job.  However well intended, I believe the NY Times has allowed itself to be played and used as a pawn by the author to destabilize an already unstable President.  I do not think President Trump is mentally fit and believe it would be in the best interest of our country for him to step down or be removed.  But I do not think it is the NY Times proper role to publish a piece that knowingly, by virtue of the anonymous authorship, would feed a paranoid man's paranoia. Given the President's repeated attacks on reality the public has a right to know the contributor's name. Ultimately our President and country are best served by taking a courageous stand and speaking truth to power.

Respectfully submitted,

Larry S. Sandberg MD

Re: "Donald Trump, Mesmerist"

To the editor:

 Emily Ogden (Donald Trump, Mesmerist; NYT 8.5.18) likens President Trump’s appeal to that of the mesmerists who used hypnotic suggestion to lull their subjects into ‘credulous obedience’ and further argues that efforts to expose his lies backfire because he is ‘selling anti-mesmerism’ turning accusations against him into strengths. But President Trump’s popularity exists only because of a deeply engrained mistrust, borne of marginalization among his supporters, that he has masterfully stoked with the blunt force of lies rather than sleight of hand.

I attended a magic show last night where I was mesmerized when my wedding band was put in a locked box on a stage next to me and ended up on the stem of a wine glass where I had been seated. I have no idea how that happened and not knowing and not needing to know made it entertaining. It was a great performance.

There is no subtlety, no effort of orchestrated illusion, in President Trump’s conduct. He is a manipulator whose dangerous skill is to get a large part of the electorate to believe demonstrable falsehoods; to collectively close their eyes to rational thought and to stoke fear and hatred. If the mesmerist seduces his audience by encouraging them to trust their own perceptions, President Trump, using demagoguery, reinforces his supporters’ mistrust of our most basic democratic institutions.

Respectfully submitted

Larry S. Sandberg MD