There’s much fuss being made this morning about a Morning Joe segment in which Joe Scarborough, while interviewing former NSA & CIA head and 4-star General Michael Hayden, states that several months back, Donald Trump repeatedly asked an unknown (but presumably competent) national security advisor “why can’t we use nukes?”.
It’s worth noting that on the surface, this is nothing new. Way back in March, Trump was interviewed by Chris Matthews and spoke pretty casually about the possibility of using nuclear weapons:
Donald Trump has refused to rule out dropping a nuclear bomb on Europe, saying he is not willing to “take any cards off the table”.
In an MSNBC interview which has already made headline for Mr Trump’s comments on punishing women for having abortions, the presidential candidate said if the US wasn’t willing to use its nuclear weapons, “why are we making them?”
Mr Trump did say he “would be the last one to use the nuclear weapons” and added his now-familiar line that he was “against Iraq” – which is not strictly the case.
“I would be very, very slow to pull that trigger,” Mr Trump said. “[But] if someone hits us with a nuke, you wouldn’t fight back with a nuke?”
Donald Trump: “First of all, you don’t want to say take everything off the table because you would be a bad negotiator if you do that.
Chris Matthews: “Just nuclear?”
DT: “Look, nuclear should be off the table, but would there be a time that it could be used? Possibly.”
CM: “The problem is when you say that, the whole world heard that. David Cameron heard that in Britain, the Japanese where we bombed them in ’45 heard it. They are hearing a guy running for President of the United States talking about maybe using nuclear weapons. Nobody wants to hear that about an American president.”
DT: “Then why are we are making them? Why do we make them?”
CM: “Because of the old mutually assured destruction, which Reagan hated and tried to get rid of.”
DT: “I was against Iraq, I would be the last one to use the nuclear weapons because that’s sort of like the end of the ball game.”
CM: “Can you tell the Middle East we’re not using nuclear weapons?”
DT: “I would never say that. I would never take any of my cards off the table.”
CM: “How about Europe? We won’t use in Europe?”
DT: “I’m not going to take it off the table for anybody.”
CM: “You’re going to use it in Europe?”
DT: “No! I don’t think so. But…”
CM: “Just say it, say ‘I’m not going to use a nuclear weapon in Europe’.”
DT: “I am not taking cards off the table. I’m not going to use nukes – but I’m not taking any cards off the table.”
CM: “The trouble is, the sane people hear you, and the insane people are not affected by your threats. The real fanatics say good, keep it up.”
DT: “I think they are more affected than you think.”
One reason this exchange didn’t get much attention at the time is because this is the same interview where Trump said women should be “punished” for having an abortion; that ended up stealing the spotlight at the time. Another reason is that at the time, there was still a small chance that he might not be the nominee anyway.
OK, so why is this causing such a fuss today? As Jonathan Glick and I discussed on Twitter a little while ago, there are several reasons.
- First: He is the official Republican nominee now, and there’s only 3 months before the election. No more wishful thinking about “well, Cruz might pull off an upset” or “#DumpTrump will save the day at the convention!”
- Second: Publicly stating that he’d consider nukes is incredibly irresponsible, but many probably wrote it off as just bluster or hyperbole. As awful as that was of him to say, it’s still not the same as asking about the possibility three times in the same interview, in private, with a presumably serious national security advisor, when there aren’t any cameras on to mug for. This strongly suggests that he isn’t just flapping his gums; he’s seriously thinking about it.
- Third: Back in March, while it was already obvious that he’s an obnoxious, crude, disgusting moron, it wasn’t obvious (at least to some people) that he’s also clearly mentally unbalanced.
So, combine “deadly serious about using nukes” with “a dangerous lunatic” and you have the “Holy Fuckballs, he’s gonna get us all killed!” reaction you’re seeing this morning.