Nukes! And a couple of fake Renoirs

A recent episode of Rachel Maddow's show included an interesting segment on Trump's statements about nuclear war. Long story short: In a couple of speeches, the president has indicated that America now possesses a nearly-foolproof missile defense system.

True, the precise meaning of his statement was a bit hard to discern, because -- as always -- he spoke with marbles in his mouth. But one got the gist. He really seems persuaded that nuclear war would be survivable for the United States.

Maddow spoke to an expert who offered a very contrary opinion. Our "shield," said this expert, is extremely porous.

Is it?

Here's the thing: If we did have the technology to protect us from incoming missiles, that tech would be the most highly-guarded of America's secrets. As long as that secret remains a secret, as long as other nations could not replicate the trick, we would have a first strike capability.

No-one "in the know" would be willing to reveal such a truth in public. There's only one exception to that rule: Donald Trump himself. As everyone knows, President Blabby has a phobic reaction to the unexpressed thought: Any idea that pops into his cranium must come shooting out of his mouth.

Let us speculate further. As I always say: Speculation is fine as long as it comes clearly marked as such.

Are you among those who couldn't shake the feeling that there was something awfully odd about the rapidity of the Soviet Union's decline? That's certainly how I felt at the time: There's a hidden story here. They're keeping something important from us.

In all the years since, the conventional explanations for the Great Red Fall never made complete sense to me. I've never discussed my unease in public before, because all I had were half-formed thoughts which never congealed into a theory. Although I didn't feel comfortable with the mainstream view of what happened, I couldn't come up with a reasonable alternative.

Instinct told me that the grand finale of the USSR had some relationship to Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, a.k.a. "Star Wars." SDI was directed against space-based weapons systems. Given the enormous amount of money that went into the program, it is fair to presume that the blackest part of that budget could have been spent on...well, anything.

Did the Soviet Union break apart with such brutal rapidity because we had come up with a national missile defense system -- one that actually worked well enough to give us a first strike capability? Is it possible that such a thing could have been kept secret -- by both sides -- for all of these years?

Here's an odd alternative idea: What if an intricate deception operation convinced the USSR that we possessed such a system, even though we did not?

For now, let us posit that a workable missile defense system was, or is, real, and that this ultimate secret was kept hidden from the public until the Orange Oaf started flapping his lips. That scenario goes a long ways toward explaining why Trump seems to desire a nuclear exchange with North Korea.

Also: It's fair to presume that this ultra-secret tech has been transported to Putin's Russia. Learning that secret would be one of the main purposes of putting Donald Trump in office.

One thing's for certain: Even if America survives a nuclear war with North Korea with all of our cities intact, our standing in the world would decrease substantially. We'd be hated by all.

And now, let us shift from weighty speculation to silly pretension.

Renoir. This Vanity Fair piece reveals that Donald Trump used to keep a copy of Renoir's Two Sisters in a private jet. (For all I know, the work is still there.) Astoundingly, Trump insisted to biographer Tim O'Brien that the painting in his possession was the genuine original by Renoir, even though the actual work hangs in the Art Institute of Chicago.

Trump's belief that he owns the original may, in fact, be sincere.

Curious, O’Brien asked Trump about the painting: was it an original Renoir? Trump replied in the affirmative. It was, he said. “No, it’s not Donald,” O’Brien responded. But, once again, Trump protested that it was.

“Donald, it’s not,” O’Brien said adamantly. “I grew up in Chicago, that Renoir is called Two Sisters on the Terrace, and it’s hanging on a wall at the Art Institute of Chicago.” He concluded emphatically: “That’s not an original.”

Trump, of course, did not agree, but O’Brien dropped the conversation topic and moved on with his interview. He thought that he had heard the last of the Renoir conversation. But the next day, when they boarded the plane to head back to New York City, Trump again pointed to the painting, and as if the conversation had never happened, he pointed to the fake and proclaimed, “You know, that’s an original Renoir.” O’Brien, chose not to engage, and dropped the conversation.

In a previous post, we discussed another ersatz Renoir hanging in Trump's pad in Trump Tower, as revealed by the photo to your right. It's called both At the Opera and La Loge. The actual painting is still hanging in the Courtauld Gallery in London.

In my post, I said that a man of Trump's wealth should invest in original art. Buying or commissioning a copy of a Renoir (or of anything else) is beneath a man of Trump's station -- both his actual station and his pretended station. There are many living artists of high quality whose works can be purchased for reasonable prices; for example, one can pick up a fine example of Odd Nerdrum's work for around $50,000. Trump should be able to afford that, even if he is worth far less than he claims.

Of course, investing in art requires the acquisition of taste. In Trumpworld, that commodity is elusive.

The Vanity Fair piece increases the probability that Donald Trump tells visitors that he owns the real version of At the Opera. Anyone who knows about art would immediately be onto him: That painting is one of Renoir's most famous works.

Apparently, Trump surrounds himself with people who refuse to burst his illusions -- or who know nothing about culture.