'Extraordinary escalation' as Trump deploys nuclear submarines after row with Russian officials
Image: Colombian National Navy / AFP
US President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of two nuclear submarines on Friday in an extraordinary escalation of what had been an online war of words with a Russian official over Ukraine and tariffs.
Trump and Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of Russia's security council, have been sparring on social media for days.
Trump's post on his Truth Social platform abruptly took that spat into the very real - and rarely publicised - sphere of nuclear forces.
"Based on the highly provocative statements," Trump said he had "ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that."
"Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances," the 79-year-old Republican posted.
Trump did not say in his post whether he meant nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed submarines. He also did not elaborate on the exact deployment locations, which are kept secret by the US military.
But in an interview with Newsmax that aired Friday night, Trump said the submarines were "closer to Russia."
"We always want to be ready. And so I have sent to the region two nuclear submarines," he said.
"I just want to make sure that his words are only words and nothing more than that."
Trump's remarks came hours after Russian President Vladimir Putin said Moscow had started mass producing its hypersonic nuclear-capable Oreshnik missile, and could deploy them to Belarus, a close Russian ally neighbouring Ukraine, by year-end.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Ad loading
The nuclear sabre-rattling came against the backdrop of a deadline set by Trump for the end of next week for Russia to take steps to ending the Ukraine war or face unspecified new sanctions.
Despite the pressure from Washington, Russia's onslaught against its pro-Western neighbor continues to unfold at full bore.
An AFP analysis on Friday showed that Russian forces had launched a record number of drones at Ukraine in July.
Russian attacks have killed hundreds of Ukrainian civilians since June. A combined missile and drone attack on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv early Thursday killed 31 people, rescuers said.
Putin, who has consistently rejected calls for a ceasefire, said Friday that he wants peace but that his demands for ending his nearly three-and-a-half-year invasion were "unchanged".
Those demands include that Ukraine abandon territory and end ambitions to join NATO.
Putin, speaking alongside Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, said Belarusian and Russian specialists "have chosen a place for future positions" of the Oreshnik missiles.
"Work is now underway to prepare these positions. So, most likely, we will close this issue by the end of the year," he added. Insults, nuclear rhetoric
The United States and Russia control the vast majority of the world's nuclear weaponry, and Washington keeps nuclear-armed submarines on permanent patrol as part of its so-called nuclear triad of land, sea and air-launched weapons.
Trump told Newsmax that Medvedev's "nuclear" reference prompted him to reposition US nuclear submarines.
"When you mention the word 'nuclear'... my eyes light up. And I say, we better be careful, because it's the ultimate threat," Trump said in the interview.
Medvedev had criticised Trump on his Telegram account Thursday and alluded to the "fabled 'Dead Hand'" -- a reference to a highly secret automated system put in place during the Cold War to control the country's nuclear weapons.
This came after Trump had lashed out at what he called the "dead economies" of Russia and India.
Medvedev had also harshly criticized Trump's threat of new sanctions against Russia over its war in Ukraine.
Accusing Trump of "playing the ultimatum game," he posted Monday on X that Trump "should remember" that Russia is a formidable force.
Trump responded by calling Medvedev "the failed former President of Russia, who thinks he's still President."
Medvedev should "watch his words," Trump posted at midnight in Washington on Wednesday. "He's entering very dangerous territory!"
Medvedev is a vocal proponent of Russia's war -- and generally antagonistic to relations with the West.
He served as president between 2008-2012, effectively acting as a placeholder for Putin, who was able to circumvent constitutional term limits and remain in de facto power.
The one-time reformer has rebranded over the years as an avid online troller, touting often extreme versions of official Kremlin nationalist messaging.
But his influence within the Russian political system remains limited.
In Kyiv on Friday, residents held a day of mourning for the 31 people, including five children, killed the day before, most of whom were in a nine-storey apartment block torn open by a missile.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said only Putin could end the war and renewed his call for a meeting between the two leaders.
"The United States has proposed this. Ukraine has supported it. What is needed is Russia's readiness," he wrote on X.
AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
41 minutes ago
- The South African
Why do the West want Burkina Faso's Ibrahim Traoré deposed - or dead?
Burkina Faso's young revolutionary leader, Captain Ibrahim Traoré, has suddenly become one of the biggest political issues in the world, especially in Africa, trending regularly on social media and increasingly becoming a symbol of resistance on the continent. If the Western political establishment and their sockpuppet, echo-chamber media is to be believed, Traoré is a tyrannical, gold-thieving warlord clinging to power in Burkina Faso, and running that Western African country into the ground. Most Africans, however, particularly the youth on the continent, see the charismatic, intelligent, articulate and unapologetically African nationalist 37-year-old leader quite differently – more like an African David standing up to the old colonial Goliath. In 2022, Burkina Faso (formerly known as Upper Volta) underwent two military coups. Both were primarily driven by the country's deteriorating security situation and widespread dissatisfaction with the government's inability to address the jihadist insurgency. For years prior to the 2022 coups, Burkina Faso was plagued by jihadist terror groups (that largely formed after the US-backed overthrow of Libya's Gaddafi), with violent attacks on military personnel and civilians becoming increasingly frequent. The security crisis worsened significantly in the country, with over 1 500 violent events and 3 800 fatalities projected in 2022, forcing roughly 2 million people to flee their homes. In January 2022, Lieutenant Colonel Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba led a coup partly fueled by the government's inability to contain the growing jihadist threat. However, Damiba's rule was also marked by ineffectiveness in addressing the security crisis, leading to further instability and frustration among the military and population. Meanwhile, the people of Burkina Faso had grown tired of being poor in one of the most resource-rich regions on earth, tired of French and American influence, and tired of their corrupt leaders who dutifully took orders from Paris and Washington. The nationwide discontent led to a second coup in September that same year, this one led by Captain Ibrahim Traoré. Born in Bondokuy, western Burkina Faso, Ibrahim Traoré studied geology at the University of Ouagadougou before joining the army in 2010. He gained frontline experience fighting jihadist groups in the country's north and later served in the United Nations peacekeeping mission in Mali. By 2020, he had risen to Captain and led an artillery unit stationed in Kaya. His growing frustration with the ruling junta's inability to stem insurgent violence led to Traoré spearheading the coup against interim president Damiba. In October 2022, Traoré was sworn in as interim president, pledging to restore security and national sovereignty. The international community expressed concern over the coup, with the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union suspending Burkina Faso's membership and imposing sanctions. Since taking power, Captain Ibrahim Traoré has faced significant challenges, including a deteriorating security situation and economic instability. Despite this, Traoré's leadership in Burkina Faso has been marked by significant initiatives aimed at improving the lives of its citizens. While his rise to power was unconventional, his commitment and notable strides in providing free education and healthcare has resonated deeply with the Burkinabé people and contributed to the overall well-being of the population. The West, particularly France, has been vocal in its criticism of Captain Ibrahim Traoré's leadership. Burkina Faso is rich in natural resources, including gold, which has been a significant contributor to the country's economy. Some articles, analysts and commentators have pointed out that perhaps France's interests in the region's resources may be a factor in its criticism of Captain Traoré's leadership. But there are other possible reasons… In January 2023, Burkina Faso put France's military in the country on notice, giving them one month to vacate the African state. In September that year, the country expelled a French military attache for 'subversive activities'. In April 2024 they expelled another 3 French diplomats for the exact same thing. Traoré's decision to expel French troops from Burkina Faso and seek alternative security partnerships has been perceived as a challenge to France's ongoing influence in the region. At the same time, Captain Traoré's government has sought to strengthen ties with other nations, including Russia, which has been a significant player in the region. This has only further angered Western colonial, imperial powers who, for centuries, have laid claim to the resources of Burkina Faso – and other countries on the continent. The US, through AFRICOM General, Michael Langley, also recently accused Traoré and his Junta 'regime' of stealing the country's gold for personal gain – without providing proof. (Incidentally, if you need a reminder of exactly what AFRICOM and their sprawling network of military bases are doing on the African continent, watch this.) Since late 2022, the Western political establishment and their media stenographers have been pushing the narrative that the Traoré-led coup has resulted in further instability and uncertainty in Burkina Faso. The people of Burkina Faso, the entire Sahel region, and indeed most of the continent…beg to differ. Captain Traoré's anti-colonial sentiments, his commitment to social welfare and his overall defiant and refreshingly unorthodox leadership style – which emphasizes self-reliance and determination – has seen his popularity soar on the African continent, particularly the Sahel region. His government's decision to expel French troops and seek alternative security partnerships has been seen as a bold move towards asserting Burkina Faso's sovereignty. His introduction of free education and healthcare initiatives has resonated with many Africans. In an interview with analyst and commentator Kim Iversen in May, journalist-filmmaker-activist (and former campaign advisor to RFK Jr), Theo Wilson, discussed his recent trip to the Sahel where he saw, firsthand, the influence Traoré casts over the region. Wilson described how he met with locals and recorded testimonies directly from the people living under Traoré's leadership. Almost all of them appeared to adore the young Captain. 'I can tell you the man's shadow looms large over the continent', Wilson told Iversen. 'He is also beloved in countries that have nothing to do with Burkina Faso. To the young people specifically, he embodies the leadership they've been crying out for.' 'They love him', he added. 'In fact, people in the region are asking how come their leaders aren't more like him'. In a recent analytical video about Ibrahim Traoré, comedian and political/media commentator, Jimmy Dore reminded us of some of the other African leaders who were eventually overthrown or murdered by the West, for merely wanting their people – and not exclusively Western corporations – to benefit from their country's wealth and resources; Congo's Patrice Lumumba (1961): Murdered by Belgium and the CIA (under orders from then US President Dwight Eisenhower) and his body dissolved in sulfuric acid. Ghana's Kwame Nkrumah (1966): Overthrown in a US/CIA-backed coup staged by the Ghana Armed Forces and Police Service while Nkrumah was visiting China, which ushered in an era of military rule. Burkina Faso's Thomas Sankara (1987): Murdered in a bloody military coup organised by Captain Blaise Compaoré and, according to the Italian documentary African Shadows released in 2009, was backed by US and French Secret Service and the CIA. Libya's Muammar Gaddafi (2011): Tortured and murdered by a NATO-backed terrorist mob (NTC), leading to the collapse of Libya and the rise of jihadi terrorism in the region. What do all these leaders have in common? What are they guilty of? Wanting their people to benefit from their country's resources, ahead of Western corporate interests. After reviewing that list of African leaders overthrown or murdered by the West, Jimmy Dore pointed out, 'They've been doing this since forever. This isn't new.' He also said, 'The West, the WEF, NATO and the United States (government) do not want us coming together. Not in the US, and not the countries of Africa.' He added, 'They need to keep us fighting amongst each other…so they can control us.' As of April 2025, President Ibrahim Traoré has reportedly survived at least 19 assassination attempts since assuming power in 2022. Perhaps what the West fears the most about Traoré is not his actions, but his words. Because every time the young Captain stands up to give a speech, he stuns the room into reverent silence with hard, unvarnished truths about the West's centuries-old exploitation of Africa. Notable extracts from some of his speeches include; In late 2022, Traoré delivered a speech directed at the imperialist countries that have colonised Africa for decades. He said, 'I am Ibrahim Traoré, and today I'm pulling off your masks. Every day of my life, I grew up with your lies. As a child, I would watch Africa on television. Always the same images: children with flies, dry lands, weapons…death. This is Africa, they told us. And we believed it. We were ashamed of ourselves, of our own people. But then, I grew up. I read, I researched, I questioned. And I understood that the Africa you showed us wasn't real, it was a lie. A script you had written for years. And you still ask…why is Africa poor? No. The right question is how was Africa kept poor while being so rich? Here's your answer: Colonialism. It didn't end, it changed shape. You used to rule with the whip, now you rule with credit.' In June 2025, at the Koulouba Palace in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, Traoré addressed citizens and leaders of the AES (Alliance des États du Sahel), a Confederation formed between Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso. In his speech, Traoré emphasised the seriousness of the threat posed by imperial powers to the unity of the AES. 'Unity is hard, especially in Africa', he said. 'It is difficult to unite, but it is the solution. We must unite. If I were naive I would ask myself, 'Why do the imperialists not want this union?' But I am not naive. I know why. Because our country is rich – rich in its people, rich in moral values, but above all, rich in its land. And it is these riches that others desire. Addressing the UN General Assembly in May this year, Traoré said; 'Africa is not a beggar, not a battlefield, not your experiment, your puppet, your warehouse of raw materials. Africa is rising – not to kneel, but to stand. For decades, you sent us aid with one hand while extracting our lifeblood with the other. You build wells in our villages while your corporations drain our rivers. From now on, we will define development on our own terms. Development that puts children in classrooms, not minerals on cargo ships. Development that respects the land, the people and the soul of a nation. We are a spiritual people. Before your cathedrals, our ancestors sang to the sky. Before your missionaries, we knew the language of the rivers and the laws of the sacred forest.' Addressing the youth of Africa directly, Traoré said, 'You are the reason we fight. Be proud of your name, your land, your roots. The world may not applaud you now, but the future will speak your name in honour.' Turning back to the colonial imperialists, Traoré told them, 'Africa is not asking for a seat at your table, we are building our own table – where no child eats last, where no nation is silenced because it lacks nuclear arms, where justice is not filtered through the lens of race or history, but shared…as breath is shared.' 'This is our vision, this is our vow', he added. 'Africa will not kneel.' Let us know by leaving a comment below or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
Daily Maverick
44 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
Global pressure forces Israel to allow aid into Gaza, but UN says it's not enough to prevent famine
After months of denying starvation and blaming Hamas, Israel is finally allowing some aid into Gaza. But the flow is limited, and aid groups say it barely scratches the surface of the unfolding famine. As the images from Gaza of skeletal, starving Palestinian babies – amid reports of rising deaths from starvation and growing cases of malnutrition – shock the world, international pressure has forced Israel to start allowing a trickle of aid into Gaza, amounts which the UN reports are insufficient to prevent the famine. Furthermore, an increasing number of reports from unexpected sources, including those involved in the questionable aid delivery on the ground, are disputing Israel's version of events, which has tried to cast the blame on Hamas and the UN. In addition to repeatedly denying that they deliberately target Palestinian civilians, the Israeli authorities have also systematically denied that there is either starvation in Gaza or any food shortages. Instead, they have blamed Hamas for looting aid convoys and the UN for refusing to cooperate with the much-discredited Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a private security contractor manned by former US soldiers and security personnel in close coordination with the Israeli government. The UN says the GHF is not delivering the limited amounts of food it distributes effectively and neither does the distribution meet minimum humanitarian levels. The GHF operates only four aid distribution centres in southern Gaza as opposed to the previous 400 centres run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which covered the entire coastal territory. Furthermore, the GHF, together with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) encircling the GHF distribution points, has killed more than 1,000 Gazans as they desperately tried to get aid – in highly disputed circumstances. UN World Food Programme executive director Cindy McCain, wife of the late Republican senator John McCain, has been working on the ground. She denied that Hamas has been looting aid convoys in Gaza. The New York Times, which has been accused of being biased towards Israel, interviewed several anonymous IDF officials who said in a recent article there was no systematic looting of Gaza aid by Hamas and the UN aid distribution system was the most effective. Israel stopped UNRWA from delivering aid to Gaza and the West Bank after claiming that it was involved in the Hamas attack on southern Israel in October 2023. After an investigation by the UN's Office of Internal Oversight Services, it was established that out of a Gaza UNRWA staff of 13,000, only a few were found to be possibly involved in the attack, but Israel had not provided sufficient evidence to pursue some of those possibly involved. Critics say the real reason Tel Aviv has cracked down on UNRWA is the organisation's support of Palestinian rights and its economic, educational and medical support for Palestinian refugees, thereby making it hard for Israel to bury the Palestinian cause. The US Agency for International Development (USAID) recently completed an investigation into the attacks on aid convoys in Gaza and came to a similar conclusion to the The New York Times report. The analysis found that at least 44 of the 156 incidents where aid supplies were reported stolen or lost were 'either directly or indirectly' the result of Israeli military actions. More damning, however, have been statements by US security personnel directly working with the GHF on the ground in Gaza. Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Aguilar, a former US special forces veteran, was recruited to work for the GHF. He told the BBC he witnessed the IDF shooting at crowds of Palestinians, firing a main tank round into a car carrying civilians and firing mortars at crowds of hungry people waiting for food. 'In my entire career I have never witnessed the level of brutality and use of indiscriminate and unnecessary force against a civilian population, an unarmed starving population. I've never witnessed that in all the places I've been deployed to war, until I was in Gaza at the hands of the IDF and US contractors,' said Aguilar. 'Without question I witnessed war crimes by the [IDF], without a doubt. Using artillery rounds, mortar rounds, tank rounds into unarmed civilians is a war crime.' Aguilar is not the first GHF employee to criticise its operations. Three weeks ago, another GHF employee, a security guard, told the BBC he witnessed colleagues opening fire on hungry Palestinian civilians who had posed no threat. There have been regular reports over the months of armed groups in Gaza opposed to Hamas operating under the watchful surveillance of the Israeli security forces, attacking and looting aid convoys. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently admitted to Israel arming and supporting criminal gangs accused of ties with Jihadist groups and involved in the looting of aid convoys in Gaza as a bulwark against Hamas, arguing that they were 'saving the lives of Israeli soldiers'. Over the past almost 22 months of the conflict, Israel has repeatedly targeted aid convoys and aid premises, killing more than 400 aid workers and more than 1,300 health workers. One of the more notorious incidents involving international staff was Israel's targeting of the World Central Kitchen (WCK) in April 2024, in which seven international and local staff members were killed. Although Israel claimed it was a mistake, WCK founder José Andrés said it was not a mistake, but a systematic targeting. Israel has also claimed not to target civilians and that those inadvertently killed were used by Hamas as human shields. However, videos and reports have come out of Israeli soldiers deliberately using Palestinian civilians as human shields systematically not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank over the years. British surgeon Dr Nick Maynard said that while working in Gaza he noticed a pattern of Israeli snipers not only targeting Palestinian civilians deliberately but also targeting different parts of teenage boys over different days. This followed earlier reports by other foreign doctors in Gaza, who said Israeli quadcopter drones targeted injured children lying on the ground. Other doctors said snipers had shot at the heads and hearts of children. US surgeon Dr Mark Perlmutter spent several weeks in Gaza in 2024. He said the people he treated were civilians and he hadn't seen one combatant in the Nasser Hospital where he worked. The doctor went on to claim that Israeli snipers were deliberately shooting children in Gaza, France 24 reported. 'No child gets shot twice by mistake,' he said. 'Metadata proves it was real,' Perlmutter added, referencing a recent article in the The New York Times detailing the harrowing experiences of 65 doctors in Gaza such as himself, who commented on the precise shots aimed at hearts and heads. In the interim two leading Israeli rights groups have concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, joining other . DM
Daily Maverick
44 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
The Epstein files — truth, alternative facts, conspiracies and the further degradation of US politics
The Epstein scandal and Donald Trump's place in it — whichever way it is ultimately adjudicated — will have a further corrosive effect on US political life. To prepare properly for braving the swamp of rumour, speculation and all the bog-standard conspiracy thinking swirling around the actions of the late Jeffrey Epstein and the still breathing Donald Trump, I've donned a hazmat suit, strapped on some fisherman's waders and added a diver's closed oxygen breathing apparatus to explore safely this very bigly dismal swamp. In thinking about this piece, I realise I am not specifically looking for the ugly truths about Epstein's behaviour in his messy affairs. Rather, regardless of how all the pieces fit together in their sleaziness, what I want to explore here is what this epic scandal and typical Trump-style crisis says about the contemporary US political fever swamp. Trump already has, after all, had a lifetime of sex-related scandals trailing behind him, rather like an unrolled strip of toilet tissue stuck to his shoe as he walks along. This Epstein/Trump scandal reminds me of one of my favourite novels, 'All the King's Men' by Robert Penn Warren. The book describes the epic rise and vertiginous fall of a politician from the Deep South who attains great political power but is brought down by the brother of a woman he has taken as his mistress. The story reveals the overlapping influences of political power, money, and sex, much like a real-life Venn diagram — and how it almost inevitably ends in tragedy. This novel has spawned two film adaptations, featuring an extraordinary speech in which the protagonist, Willie Stark, first reveals his political genius. (Watch Broderick Crawford's Oscar-winning portrayal of Stark here.) To return directly to the Epstein/Trump scandal, even without digging into its moral depths, our question here is: What is it about this most recent conspiracy of silence that resonates with many Americans, and how does it fit into the larger tapestry of 'conspiracism'? (A neologism first used in the 1980s, which fits perfectly with what we are dealing with here.) In defining this particular madness, we start, beyond the late Epstein, with the willingness and even eagerness by some to embrace and even preach the gospel about scandals like this one, and all the tendrils that extend outward from it. Unlike some societies that may still cling to a more respectful approach towards politicians and leaders, there is and has long been a deep-seated presumption among many Americans that politicians lie. All of them; every single one of them. It is their genetic predisposition. But that idea is simultaneously held in conjunction with another idea: that the real truth is out there, somewhere, hidden, but just barely discernible. There are courageous souls (QAnon, anyone?) who manage to uncover and then reveal this truth to the rest of us. Such people are real-life versions of those fictional characters Scully and Mulder from the long-running television series 'The X-Files'. Beyond that, there is also a view, similarly reflected in novels and films, along with 'The X-Files', that there really are conspiracies — deep, devastating ones — that truth-seekers and truth-tellers are determined to uncover and then reveal to the rest of us sheeple. The complication, of course, is that while much of this is just fevered nonsense, sometimes there really are conspiracies. Back in the 1920s in the US there really was a Teapot Dome scandal that intertwined money and political influence and could have brought down a president, save for the fact that he conveniently died of food poisoning (or perhaps at the hand of a wife tired of his extramarital affair). Earlier, there really was a plot to kill Abraham Lincoln and other senior officials at the end of the Civil War. And, yes, there really was a conspiracy to assassinate the heir to the Habsburg dynasty in 1914, thus provoking the collapse of the tottering Austro-Hungarian Empire. Watergate Then, of course, there really was an organised conspiracy among senior officials to cover up their original crime of perpetuating the break-in of the Democratic Party campaign headquarters — and then subsequent, follow-on conspiracies to obscure their initial cover-up. Of course, in South Africa, what we call Guptagate (every scandal now gets the suffix 'gate', after the Watergate Hotel and offices where the Nixon-era break-in took place) was certainly real as well. Events such as these make for fertile ground to nurture beliefs that conspiracies are real and commonplace, and that those who carry them out are secretly manipulating what we think we know about our world. We don't even need The Matrix film franchise to convince us that secret manipulations of reality mask deeper truths. In recent years, especially with the ascendancy of social media, alternative news channels and independent podcasters, the content is often about noxious conspiracies and cover-ups. Millions of people eagerly consume this faux information, precisely because they are preconditioned to suspend their critical faculties and embrace such ideas. That is tied together with an innate scepticism about government more generally that has become prevalent. The historian Richard Hofstadter, back in 1964, wrote one of the most incisive essays on US political life in the then mighty Harpers magazine, defining 'The Paranoid Style in American Politics', saying: 'American politics has often been an arena for angry minds. In recent years, we have seen angry minds at work mainly among extreme right-wingers, who have now demonstrated in the Goldwater movement how much political leverage can be got out of the animosities and passions of a small minority. But, behind this, I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wing. I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind … [but] the idea of the paranoid style as a force in politics would have little contemporary relevance or historical value if it were applied only to men with profoundly disturbed minds. It is the use of paranoid modes of expression by more or less normal people that makes the phenomenon significant.' Hofstadter concludes: 'In American experience ethnic and religious conflict have plainly been a major focus for militant and suspicious minds of this sort, but class conflicts also can mobilise such energies…. The situation becomes worse when the representatives of a particular social interest—perhaps because of the very unrealistic and unrealizable nature of its demands—are shut out of the political process. Having no access to political bargaining or the making of decisions, they find their original conception that the world of power is sinister and malicious fully confirmed.' Operating concurrently with these phenomena, Trump and those associated with him have, for decades, practised making use of such ideas and techniques — and the purveying of those so-called alternative facts. Back in the 1980s, echoing the tutelage by his mentor, that 'junkyard dog' of a lawyer, Roy Cohn, Trump campaigned for the prosecution of the 'Central Park Five', young men falsely accused of the gang rape of a young woman in a municipal swimming pool. His campaign played off the racial animosities of an angry, divided city. Years later, as he prepped to campaign for election to the presidency, he hammered away at the lie that Barack Hussein Obama (the Hussein was always in there for obvious reasons) was born in Africa (and thus ineligible to serve as president); that Obama's academic background was purposely obscured; and that there was a 'deep state' trying to bring him down — that it was all a 'witch hunt'. Later, when he lost his 2016 re-election bid, the result, according to Trump, was a hoax stemming from a fraudulent election. In the process, these constantly repeated charges further undermined support for any national understanding about governance. Pizzagate While Trump did not, himself, specifically purvey the truly mad notion that there was a gigantic conspiracy to kidnap young children and stash them in the basement of a well-known pizzeria in Washington, DC, for orgies and cannibalistic rites, his breaking down of the normal boundaries allowed this conspiracy theory to flourish like black mould in a damp basement. The ground has become very fertile for this kind of nonsense as the mechanisms and techniques have now been refined to reach millions and have become mutually reinforcing. With the current Epstein tangle, Trump remains enmeshed in the scandal precisely because some of the facts of their long-term relationship are true — and are not alternative facts — and are not being denied. Trump and Epstein were buddies trawling the clubs in the 1980s, partying together, and embracing their public status as rich-as-Croesus young masters of the universe, as Tom Wolfe would have described them. And then there were the women. The darker side of Epstein's financial success was almost a Ponzi scheme reliant upon onward recommendations by those in the know to others who wanted to participate in the fountain of wealth Epstein was presumably generating. And the women were always there — and in Epstein's case, in particular — his pursuit of women 'on the younger side', as Trump himself had said. In this, Epstein was abetted by his one-time girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, heir to the troubled publisher Robert Maxwell. Ghislaine is now serving a 20-year sentence for those efforts. That Epstein died in prison in a highly monitored cell, apparently by his own hand, has fed the belief there is much more to the story — and there must be a mountain of evidence of his crimes and all those who participated in his devilish parties at his Manhattan townhouse or his private Caribbean island. The Trump administration's attorney-general, Pam Bondi, has only fuelled the frenzy, announcing she had a mountain of Epstein material on her desk, including an elusive Epstein client list (clients of both his brokerage and his parties), and then awkwardly backtracking from such claims, only asking that judges release transcripts of the grand jury hearing into Epstein's activities. That client list has become a holy grail at the centre of a conspiracy keeping Epstein's depredations under wraps and all his tainted friends (presumably mostly Democratic Party elites?) safe from suspicion and infamy. Reshaping But then, every time Trump has tried to extricate himself from the shadowy aspects of Epstein's life, Trump has managed to muddy the waters. Most recently this came through reshaping the reason for the end of their relationship. First, it had been smirking that Epstein had had the poor taste to pursue women who were under the age of consent; now he has alleged the real reason for their breakup was because Epstein 'stole' some of the young women working at Trump's Mar-a-Lago spa. Several things are immediately wrong with this newest picture. First of all, does Trump really want us to believe he knew the work histories of all of the hundreds of people working at that club? But there is also the astonishing argument that the young women concerned were somehow Trump's property to be stolen. Involuntary servitude has been illegal in the country since 1865, even in Florida. We are left with the complex response to the Trump/Epstein saga on the part of those who would otherwise take on board all of the conspiratorial thinking that helps underpin support for Trump from among his Maga followers. As the Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson wrote in The New York Times, just the other day, 'The Epstein story is so sad, so sordid and so completely off the traditional ideological spectrum that it has escaped the bonds of our usual right-left divides. Instead, it seems to be bringing together unconventional allies who share only a distaste for the establishment and a heartfelt belief that elites get to play by a different set of rules in our society today. It is this through line, a skepticism of elites and institutions, more than anything ideological that ties the fans of someone like Mr. [Joe] Rogan to the political project of Mr. Trump, and I believe this is why the Epstein case is called out as a 'line in the sand' — as Mr. Rogan termed it — when Iran and immigration policies are not. 'As right and left converge in their skepticism and with institutions of all kinds experiencing high levels of bipartisan distrust, 'nothing to see here; move along' simply doesn't cut it. Voters are hungry for transparency and accountability. Efforts to silence the calls to release the Epstein files have only focused more attention on the issue.' Will voters and supporters come to decide that Trump himself was a willing part of the sordid enterprise of female exploitation by Epstein (and finally deserves the infamy that comes from that)? Or, will they accept the idea that Trump is being ensnared by that hoary old devil, the deep state, to protect the crimes of others who disagree with the incumbent president? Or, will they ultimately fall back on the idea that, well, okay, all politicians lie, all politicians behave badly and presume to be above the law, and that Trump misbehaved, but what can you do with men? Whichever way the Epstein affair and Trump's part in it comes to be embraced will inevitably come to degrade yet further any public respect for the country's political process. If everyone is corrupt, then there are no real limits for behaviour. If only some people are held to account, then the privileged can get away with almost anything. And if every form of despicable behaviour must be punished, who will carry out such judgments? That ancient Roman question, Who will guard the guardians?, takes on a new and yet more complex life in a world of instantaneous social media, niche broadcasting and public speech that is delivered without restraint by its speakers. Nihilism will run free. DM
