ewrxroads: First, I normally don’t respond to someone who won’t use their real name, offer a picture, and/or produce their own original work. I’m sure you can understand this is the M.O. of most trolls. But since you’re here as Austin’s honorable defender (he has yet to answer the questions I posed to him), I’ll give you a respectful response.
You’ve assumed others will read Austin’s article as a prompt to discuss the validity (or not) of a psychiatrist attempting to psychoanalyze a person without meeting them and performing some clinical testing. This reader saw a rant — set-off by the story about a psychiatrist who thinks Trump is losing it — but a rant blasting anyone and everyone Austin considers a “leftist” in the classic manner of “it’s us versus them”. This is what someone does when they forget that groups are made-up of individual humans who don’t necessarily feel the same way about everything. Not helpful!
Austin stated at the outset he was not going to defend Trump’s sanity, which he implied he could do if so inclined — and similarly, I saw no point in arguing one way or the other. Turns out, I don’t agree with a remote psychological diagnosis being given credence in this case. That said, there is a well-regarded profession called Criminal Profiler — a criminologist who studies a criminal’s behavior for psychological clues that may aid in capturing them. By definition, the criminal is not available to be tested, and some criminal profilers are known to be quite excellent at what they do. (Note: As an ex-KGB agent, Putin is also in the profiling business; so this is nothing new.)
Austin’s opening assertion, “Russia Collusion is dead”, might have obligated him to offer his reasons for believing so, but he begged-off on that point, too. In other words, 2 assertions (Russian collusion is dead and remote psychoanalysis is invalid) with no thoughtful, factual rebuttal, followed by a near-hysterical rant: “whore-out”, “mendacious, bloodthirsty Democratic politicians”, “delusional leftist”, “miserable ratfucks”, etc.)
My “diatribe”, as you called it, was intended to give Austin some facts (not “grievances”) he may not have. Look again, and you’ll see his rant read like the hateful, factless people he railed against. Even though you say you knew (and think others already knew) what I laid out; I can assure you this isn’t the case. Many Trump supporters get their information about Trump only from Trump, his spokespeople, Fox News, etc. and those sources are not in the habit of highlighting his lies and fraudulent resume. Despite your cynical position that this is normal for politicians, Trump has set new records in these areas, and I believe we can do much, much better — Republican or Democrat.
Lastly, you won’t find the word “impeach” in my response to Austin. If Trump is impeached, it will be for an impeachable offense and not because of his mental state. If the 25th Amendment comes into play, that would mean Trump has been judged to be incompetent to perform his duties by many people in both parties — notably, Trump’s Cabinet.
That’s my contribution, and you can take it or leave it. Let me know if you’re ready to tell me who you really are — or why you feel the need to kibitz from the shadows.