The Tests Trump Took Measure Cognitive Impairment - NOT INTELLIGENCE!

 

Trump has taken a mental test as part of his physical exams at least 4 times in the last few months. He is bragging that it shows his "extreme intelligence". It doesn't. It measures cognitive impairment, and it's worrying that he has taken it so many times. It's usually given more than once if some mental decline is noted.

Lewis Jacobson (at PolitiFact) tells us the truth about the tests:

We’ll have to take Trump’s word for it that he scored a 30 out of 30 on the test, which medical experts believe — based on Trump’s own descriptions — is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. (When we asked the White House whether that was the test Trump took, a spokesperson did not dispute it.) Trump reportedly also took the test in 2018 and twice in 2025.

But medical experts said Trump inaccurately described the test as measuring intelligence. Instead, it aims to detect signs of cognitive impairment; if the score is low enough, then further testing is recommended.

"The test measures cognition," including attention, concentration, language, memory, abstract thinking and calculation skills, said Ziad Nasreddine, a Quebec-based neurologist who created the 10-minute Montreal Cognitive Assessment in 2005. "Cognitive function is correlated with IQ. But the test was not designed to detect the genius level of cognitive performance. It's meant to reassure that cognitive functions are normal."

Patients might have to read a list of words and recall them; repeat a list of numbers forward and backward; subtract a one-digit number repeatedly starting from 100; repeat a sentence; draw comparisons between two objects; and know the time of day and their location.

Trump garnered attention in 2020 when he told Fox News, "It's like you'll go: Person, woman, man, camera, TV. So they say, ‘Could you repeat that?' So I said, ‘Yeah. So it's person, woman, man, camera, TV.’ ‘Okay, that's very good. If you get it in order, you get extra points.’" (Nasreddine has said that the test has never included that series of words, nor another example Trump has cited involving a giraffe, tiger and whale.)

Scores from 26 to 30 are considered normal. Scores below 26 are considered to reflect some form of cognitive impairment, with the degree of impairment increasing as the score drops.

This is not the first time Trump has boasted about having high scores on the test. He mentioned it in several speeches and interviews earlier this year. In December 2025, after he said he took the test for the third time, Trump posted, "I have been told that few people have been able to ‘ace’ this Examination and, in fact, most do very poorly, which is why many other Presidents have decided not to take it at all."

Neither Nasreddine nor Ishani Ganguli, a Harvard Medical School associate professor of medicine and a primary care physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, said they would describe the test as "high difficulty," as Trump did. 

"A 30/30 score would suggest normal cognitive function, meaning no evidence of cognitive impairment or dementia," Ganguli said. 

Neither expert offered specific data on whether a 30 out of 30 is "very rare," but from their own experience, the frequency of a 30-point score is somewhere between "relatively uncommon," as Nasreddine estimated, and "somewhat common," as Ganguli said.

"It has to be sufficiently hard to detect early-stage cognitive disorders, and not too hard to decrease the risk of false positives," Nasreddine said.

Rep. Raskin Asks Trump's Doctor For A Full Neuropsycholigical/Cognitive Test

This political cartoon is by Clay Bennett in the Chattanooga Times Free Press.

The following is part of a post by Heather Cox Richardson at Letters From An American:

 Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD), the top-ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, made a record of Trump’s recent bizarre behavior in a letter today to the president’s personal physician, Captain Sean P. Barbabella.

Raskin noted that “[e]xperts have repeatedly warned that the President has been exhibiting signs consistent with dementia and cognitive decline. And, in recent days, the country has watched President Trump’s public statements and outbursts turn increasingly incoherent, volatile, profane, deranged, and threatening.” Raskin recounted Trump’s wild social media posts and weird performance at the White House Easter egg roll, what the congressman called “a bizarre display that shocked tens of millions of Americans and astonished observers across the political spectrum.”

Raskin wrote that Trump’s “apparently deteriorating condition has caused tremendous alarm across the nation (and political spectrum) about the President’s cognitive function and continuing mental fitness for the office of President, and prompted concerns about the President’s well-being.”

Raskin asked the White House physician to “[c]onduct a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment of the President, including a formal cognitive screening instrument, and publicly release the results; [p]rovide a detailed report on the President’s current mental and physical health status, including any medications he is currently taking and their potential cognitive side effects; and [m]ake yourself available for a briefing, under oath, with Members of the Committee on the results of this assessment.”

Huge Support For Competency Tests For Politicians Over 75

The chart above reflects the result of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between September 2nd and 5th of a nationwide sample of 1,500 adults (including 1,329 registered voters). The margin of error for adults is 3.3 points, and for registered voters is 3.1 points.

How Americans Did On International Test

 The charts above illustrate how U.S. adults did on a test of international questions by the Pew Research Center. About 3,581 adults participated in the test between March 21st and 27th, and the results had a margin of error of 2.3 points.

Trump Wants To Cut Testing/Tracing Funds Out Of New Bill

it is beyond doubt that Donald Trump has badly mishandled the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. He tried to claim it was a hoax and ignored it. That didn't work. Then he refused to provide the needed testing until forced to do so, and even then did not provide the amount of tests needed to control the virus.

As the virus continued to rage across the country, he then demanded the states reopen their economies. That just made things worse, because it gave the virus a new impetus. Now he's trying to blame the growing number of cases and deaths on the testing. He says if we didn't test so much, we wouldn't have so many cases.

Of course that's the height of stupidity. The virus doesn't care whether you test or not. It's going to spread. The testing doesn't create new cases. It's the only way to find out where the virus is, so it can be traced and controlled.

But Trump doesn't care about the health and lives of Americans. He is just worried that the spread of the virus makes him look bad, and hurts his chances of being re-elected. That's why he is now doubling-down on his stupid testing theory. He is trying to get all funding for testing and tracing cut out of the new stimulus bill being considered by Congress right now.

Here is part of how Erica Werner and Jeff Stein describe Trump's new stupidity in The Washington Post:

The Trump administration is trying to block billions of dollars for states to conduct testing and contact tracing in the upcoming coronavirus relief bill, people involved in the talks said Saturday.

The administration is also trying to block billions of dollars that GOP senators want to allocate for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and billions more for the Pentagon and State Department to address the pandemic at home and abroad, the people said.

The administration’s posture has angered some GOP senators, the officials said, and some lawmakers are trying to push back and ensure that the money stays in the bill. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to reveal confidential deliberations, cautioned that the talks were fluid and the numbers were in flux.

The negotiations center around a bill Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is preparing to unveil this coming week as part of negotiations with Democrats on what will likely be the last major coronavirus relief bill before the November election. . . .

The two political parties are far apart on a number of contentious issues, such as unemployment insurance, but the conflict between Trump administration officials and Senate Republicans on money for testing and other priorities is creating a major complication even before bipartisan negotiations get under way. Some lawmakers are trying to reach a deal quickly, as enhanced unemployment benefits for millions of Americans are set to expire in less than two weeks.

One person involved in the talks said Senate Republicans were seeking to allocate $25 billion for states to conduct testing and contact tracing, but that certain administration officials want to zero out the testing and tracing money entirely. . . .

President Trump has repeatedly questioned the value of conducting widespread coronavirus testing, arguing that if there were fewer tests conducted, the number of infections would be lower. Coronavirus infections and deaths are on the rise in many states.

The administration is also seeking to zero out $10 billion in new funding for the CDC in the upcoming bill, while slashing spending for the Pentagon and State Department related to foreign aid, the person said. Trump has been skeptical of State Department spending and foreign aid generally, but it was unclear why the Trump administration would seek to block money for the Pentagon for a variety of coronavirus-related expenses such as reimbursing contractors for providing paid leave to employees. . . .

At the same time they push cuts in testing and CDC funds, administration officials are trying to use the spending package to fund priorities that appear not directly related to the coronavirus — including a new FBI building, which has been a longtime priority for Trump, according to people involved.

Trump Continues To Lie About COVID-19 Testing

In his Monday press conference, Donald Trump tried to answer critics of his failure to do adequate testing of the Coronavirus in this country. He seems stung by the criticism, and spent several minutes bragging about the testing in the United States. Sadly though, he was once again lying.

He bragged about this country doing 8 million tests. What he didn't say was that means only a tiny percentage of the population has been tested -- about 2.4%. That's certainly nothing to brag about.

He said that the U.S. was leading the world in per capita of its population is testing. That was an obvious lie. Note the chart above, It shows the countries leading in per capita testing (in this case per 1,000,000 of population). Note that at least 8 countries have tested a bigger portion of their population.

And finally, he said that anyone in this country that wants a test can get one. That was a lie when he said it a month ago, and it's still a lie. There are not enough tests in circulation to give everyone a test that wants one, and tests continue to be reserved for those who are showing symptoms of Coronavirus.

The truth is that the Trump administration sat on its hands forever two months instead of establishing a real testing program, and they are still trying to play catch-up. They turned down tests offered early by the World Health Organization, and then did not get serious about testing until mid-March (even though they had been warned as early a late December that the virus was coming.

The Trump administration screwed up, and they did it because Trump refused to listen to his intelligence services or public health officials. Now he is trying to rehabilitate his image. But the loss of American lives due to his incompetence continues to rise sharply -- and that cannot be fixed by more lies.

Trump Wants To Reopen Economy - But Where Are The Tests?

Donald Trump wants to reopen the American economy, and he has set May 1st as the date he wants to begin doing that. Unfortunately, that is simply not feasible.

He has been talking to corporate executives in the last few days, hoping they can give him an idea of how he can reopen businesses across the country. I doubt that he likes what many of them have told him -- that the businesses cannot reopen without testing.

They are right. There must be a massive amount of testing done before businesses can reopen -- testing to protect both workers and customers. Without that testing, no one can be sure they are not putting themselves in danger, and recent polls have shown people will be reticent to return to working or shopping in person until they are sure they won't be endangering themselves.

Weeks ago, Trump promised that millions of tests were on the way -- and that soon anyone wanting to be tested could get tested. That has not happened. Currently, in spite of Trump's boasts about testing, only about 1% of the population has been tested. And no one can get a test without having symptoms of Coronavirus sickness. That's not going to work. Many millions more people, especially those without symptoms, must be tested before the economy can be reopened.

When asked about why more testing has not be done, Trump tried to shift the blame. He said it is the job of each state's governor to see that testing is done. Those governors are willing to initiate and oversee massive testing, but they can't do that without having enough tests. And it is the job of the president to make sure there are enough tests in every state -- even if he has to use the Defense Production Act to do it.

It's not the governors' fault that more testing has not been done. It is Trump's fault for not providing the massive number of tests that he promised. It's just one more broken promise from Trump, and demonstrates a failure of leadership.

Where are the tests? The economy cannot reopen without them. If Trump wants businesses to reopen, then he must keep his promises. Unfortunately, while Trump is good at making promises, he is terrible at keeping them.

The Coronavirus Statistics Are Just A Part Of The Reality

As I write this post, the official figures for Coronavirus in the United States are over 4,300 cases confirmed, with more than 80 deaths. But if you believe that is an accurate count, then you are a Trump supporter or a complete idiot. Trump loves to quote those numbers, because he wants to minimize the crisis.

Those keeping the numbers are not trying to be disingenuous. Those are just the only numbers they have. But the experts will tell us that those numbers do not accurately reflect the extent of Coronavirus in this country. There are far more people with the Coronavirus -- both sick and just carrying it without symptoms. The real number is likely thousands more -- maybe hundreds of thousands.

The truth is that no one really knows how bad the epidemic really is - not the CDC or any government entities. Why? Because our federal government was really late in starting testing, and the only way to know is to do massive testing. We are just now starting to have adequate testing available, even though we are a couple of months into the epidemic.

Donald Trump says he is not responsible for the delay in testing, but he is. He turned down tests offered by the World Health Organization, and minimized the crisis -- even calling it a hoax. And he is still lying to the American people. A couple of days ago, he said the government has "complete control" of the Coronavirus crisis. That is simply not true. The government actually is still trying to get control.

Donald Trump has shown a remarkable degree of incompetence in how he has (and is still) handled the crisis -- and his incompetence will undoubtably cause unnecessary loss of life for many.

Who"s The Most Knowledgeable About Religion In U.S.?

The Pew Research Center queried 10,971 Americans about religion in the first half of this year. They asked the respondents 32 questions about religion -- 14 about the Bible and christianity, 13 about other religions, and 5 about non belief, religious demography of the U.S., and religion in the U.S. Constitution. It may surprise you which groups turned out to have the most knowledge about religion.

Only three groups averaged answering a majority of the questions correctly -- Jewish people (18.7 correct), atheists (17.9 correct), and agnostics (17.0 correct). The evangelicals led others christian groups with 15.5 correct.

Evangelicals got the most correct in the Bible and christianity category with 9.3 correct out of 14 questions. They were followed by atheists with 8.6 correct and mormons with 8,5 correct.

When it came to the 13 question category on other religions, Jewish people again led with 7.7 correct average, followed by atheists with 6.1 correct and agnostics with 5.8 correct.

It doesn't surprise me that my fellow atheists did better than most christian groups. Before abandoning religion, most atheists studied religion in the vain hope of finding truth there. But many christians have just accepted what they've been told rather than actually study religion (especially other religions).

Most In U.S. Could Not Pass The Citizenship Test

The map above is from Axios.com.

The map shows the percentage of citizens in each state that would pass the citizenship test required of immigrants to get their citizenship. Between November 14th of 2018 and January 3rd of 2019, the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation questioned 41,000 adults nationwide, and the margin of error of their survey was 1 point.

They used 20 history-specific questions from practice tests given to immigrants to prepare for their citizenship test. The shocking results are in the chart above. Note that only one state (Vermont) had a majority of their residents receiving a passing grade (at least a D). The other 49 states had less than a majority receiving a passing grade.

That's very disappointing.

Here's some of what they found:

It suggests most Americans can't live up to the standards we set for people applying to be U.S. citizens — and we set those standards because we expect Americans to be informed and engaged. Only four out of 10 Americans would have passed the test, and just 27% of those under age 45.

By the numbers: A few highlights from the survey, conducted for the foundation by Lincoln Park Strategies:

• People did relatively well on the most basic questions. Seven out of 10 knew that Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence and that Franklin Roosevelt was president during World War II.
• But only 43% knew that Woodrow Wilson was president during World War I (nearly one out of four thought it was Roosevelt), and only 56% knew which countries we fought in World War II.
• Fewer than a third could correctly name three of the original states.
• More than six out of 10 incorrectly thought the Constitution was written in 1776. (It wasn't written until 1787.)
• Nearly four out of 10 thought Benjamin Franklin invented the light bulb.

Warren Provides Proof Of Ancestry (Trump Refuses To Pay)

Donald Trump is scared to death that he might have to face Senator Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 presidential campaign. That's why he has launched repeated attacks on her. And many of those attacks have included the racist remark of calling her "Pocahontas". He wants voters to think Senator Warren lied when claiming to have some Native American heritage.

In a rally in Montana last July, Trump repeated the racial slur, and went further -- he said he would donate $1 million to Warren's favorite charity if she took a DNA test and it showed she did have Native American heritage.

Well, Senator Warren took him up on that challenge. She took the DNA test. Here's what it showed:

In 2018, Elizabeth Warren submitted a DNA sample for analysis by Dr. Carlos Bustamante, a Professor of Biomedical Data Science, Genetics, and Biology at Stanford University who is “an internationally recognized leader in the application of data science and genomics technology” and was selected as a 2010 MacArthur “Genius” Fellow.

Dr. Bustamante issued a report summarizing his analysis.

• The report concludes that there is “strong evidence” that Elizabeth’s DNA sample “contains Native American ancestry.” Specifically, Dr. Bustamante concludes with 99% confidence that Elizabeth’s DNA sample contains five genetic segments, spanning 12,300,000 DNA bases, which are “Native American in origin.”
• The report also details the results of “several additional analyses to confirm the presence of Native American ancestry and to estimate the position” of an “unadmixed Native American Ancestor” (i.e., an ancestor with “100% ancestry assigned to a single population”) in Elizabeth’s family tree. It concludes that such an ancestor can be found “likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago.”
• In addition, Elizabeth’s DNA was compared to two non-Native reference sets from the 1000 Genomes Project – 99 Americans of predominantly European ancestry from Utah and 86 British individuals of European ancestry from Great Britan. The report concludes that the Native American segments observed in Elizabeth’s sample are 12.4 times higher than the average value for the British reference population. They are 10.5 times higher than the average value for the Utah reference population, which includes a few individuals who have “a small amount of Native American ancestry.”
• Dr. Bustamante further notes that Native American groups within the United States have chosen not to participate in recent population genetics studies. Because available samples do not provide complete coverage of all Native American groups, some segments with Native American ancestry may be missed. Nonetheless, an “ancestry specific analysis” concludes Warren’s Native American ancestry “falls between” Canadian and Mexican indigenous populations, “as would be expected for Native American ancestry deriving from the lower 48 states of the United States.”

While these results shed additional light on Elizabeth Warren’s family history, she has stated that she is not enrolled in a tribe and respects the distinction between ancestry and tribal citizenship, which is determined by tribes – and only tribes.

What is Trump's response? He's refusing to pay! In fact, he's denying that he ever said he would pay a million dollars to a charity -- in spite of the fact that every media organization has tape of him making the promise.

It's just more proof that Donald Trump  is a LIAR WHO DOES NOT KEEP HIS PROMISES!

But we already knew that, didn't we?

NOTE -- Senator Warren has asked that Trump make his check out to the National Indigenous Women's Resource Center.

There Must Be NO Litmus Test To Be A Democrat

I have been a Democrat for a long time now, and I'm proud of that. But there is an element in the party right now that wants to limit who can be a Democrat -- and what kind of candidate can run on the party's ticket. I think that's a big mistake.

The party has always been the "big tent" party. It encompasses progressives, liberals, moderates, and yes, even some conservatives. That makes for some lively discussions and arguments in party circles and conventions. But that is a good thing. Democrats are thinking people, and thinking people will disagree from time to time. It is through these discussions and arguments that the party develops its agenda -- hopefully one that a majority of Americans can agree with and support at the ballot box.

Like tha cartoon above, some today think there is only one way for the party to progress and win -- to agree with them. They say they won't support a Democratic candidate that doesn't agree with their views. I think that's a recipe for defeat.

I am a progressive, and I wish the public would agree with me on everything. But I am also a realist, and I know that's not going to happen. Most voters are moderates. They want progress, but they want to do it in small steps -- making sure this step works before taking another. Those, on both the left and right who want drastic change, are not going to appeal to most voters. That is just a fact of American politics. And a party that embraces extremism is going to chase away voters.

It is silly to say you can't support a Democrat who doesn't agree with you on everything. Frankly, I've never found a candidate who I agree with on everything. I supported Obama in 2008 and 2012, but there were things I disagreed with him about. I supported Clinton in 2016, but I disagreed with her about some things. There is no "perfect" candidate. But I do know this -- any Democrat on the ballot, whether liberal, moderate, or conservative is better for this country than any Republican on the ballot.

I will be voting for every Democrat on the ballot in 2018 and 2020, and I will apply no "purity test" on them. If we want to win (and I believe we must win in 2018 and 2020 for the good of this country), then we must be the big tent party -- the party that reaches out to all voters (and not just those who agree with us).

Over the years, I have argued with moderates and conservatives in the party. But I don't condemn them. That's because I know they will do as I do, and mark their ballot for Democrats (even those they don't completely agree with). Like me, they are good Democrats and the party is better for having them as members.

With Trump in the White House and Congress controlled by Republicans, it has never been more important for Democrats to stick together. Don't give up your views, but once candidates are chosen to represent the party, vote for them -- all of them.

Republicans Want To Destroy Your Genetic Privacy

(This illustration is from the website geneplanet.com.)

Privacy is an important concept to most Americans, and it has been placed in danger by the enormous advances in science and technology. In 2008, Congress recognized this, and they acted to protect the genetic privacy of Americans.

The passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (commonly called GINA). And the votes for that act were huge and nonpartisan (414 to 1 in the House and 95 to 0 in the Senate). This act protected an individual's genetic privacy by:

The Act prohibits group health plans and health insurers from denying coverage to a healthy individual or charging that person higher premiums based solely on a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future. The legislation also bars employers from using individuals' genetic information when making hiring, firing, job placement, or promotion decisions.

It was a good law, and an essential one in this technological age. It protected Americans from the greed of insurance companies and employers. But that was nine years ago, and a lot more Republicans have sold out to corporate interests since then.

The Republicans have now introduced a rather nasty bill in the House (HR 1313) that would gut GINA. It would allow businesses to require employees to be genetically tested, and the results of those tests would be made available to the businesses. And any employee that refused to be tested could be fined thousands of dollars.

The bill doesn't specifically overturn GINA, but it effectively guts its provisions. It says the employers could require the genetic testing as part of a "wellness program" (which many businesses automatically enroll their employees in). Once they have the genetic information of an employee, the business could not be kept from using that information in firing, job placement, or promotion. They could easily get around the GINA provisions outlawing that by inventing another reason for their actions.

And this terrible bill seems to have solid support from congressional Republicans, which means it has a very good chance of passing in the House of Representatives. The bill passed a House committee on a strict party-line vote -- with all 22 Republicans voting for it and all 17 Democrats voting against it. It is now expected to be tucked in a second health care bill by Republicans to give it cover -- a bill making changes to Obamacare that could not be done in the budget reconciliation measure.

The only saving grace is that this bill could be filibustered in the Senate, and citizens need to make it clear to Senate Democrats that this MUST be done.

Donald Trump Has Failed His First Foreign Policy Test

The chart above is from a recent Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between December 10th and 13th of a random national sample of 1,465 adults, with a margin of error of 3.1 points.

It shows that most Americans think Donald Trump is out-of-step with public opinion on Russia. Only 21% of Americans (and 28% of Trump's own voters) say Russia is a friend or ally of the United States -- while 58% (and 56% of Trump voters) say Russia is unfriendly or an enemy of the United States.

But those same respondents think Trump has a very different view of Russia. About 54% of Americans (and 47% of Trump voters) think Trump views Russia as a friend or ally -- while 21% (and 29% of Trump voters) think Trump views Russia as unfriendly or an enemy. There are reasons why they believe this -- namely Trump calling Putin a great leader, refusing to believe Russia interfered with the U.S. election by hacking and releasing the hacked information, and choosing a Secretary of State a man who signed a $500 billion dollar deal with Russia and received Russia's highest commendation.

This certainly does not inspire confidence in how Trump will handle foreign policy, and in fact, Dan Balz (in The Washington Post) says Trump has failed his first foreign policy test. Mr. Balz has written:

Presidents often are tested early, by unexpected crises or provocations by foreign adversaries. President-elect Donald Trump’s first test has come even before he is sworn in, and so far, he has responded with denial, equivocation and deflection.

The test has come over Russia’s brazen intrusion into the U.S. election process through its hacking of the servers at the Democratic National Committee and the email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager.

Contrary to what Trump said last week, the Russian intrusion was known long before the election. The Washington Post’s Ellen Nakashima reported in June that the Russians had penetrated the DNC network. Then on Oct. 7, intelligence officials publicly stated that the hacking had occurred, that the Russians were behind it and that “only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.” That was an obvious reference to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump may have missed the October announcement. He was preoccupied with the infamous “Access Hollywood” video, which The Post had released the same afternoon. At the time, the video captured most of the media attention. It seemed to present a dire threat to Trump’s chances of winning the election. Trump weathered that storm and is a month away from being sworn in as president. Now he has a bigger problem awaiting him when he takes office, one he seems resistant to addressing.

In the past week, intelligence officials have added to their findings, concluding that the motivation behind Russia’s hacking was to help Trump win.

The findings about Russian interference and the motive behind their actions will not change the outcome of the election. On Monday, the electoral college’s electors will cast their votes in the states, and no doubt Trump will have his comfortable majority secured.

Throughout the campaign, Trump described his philosophy as one of “America first.” He drew an enthusiastic response from his supporters for signaling that he would refocus U.S. foreign policy away from the course pursued for the past eight years by President Obama and seemingly abandoning a broader consensus that has guided presidents of both parties for decades.

But if standing up to Russian attempts to interfere with American democracy isn’t a foundational principle of an “America first” policy, what is? Trump’s response has suggested a different focus and different philosophy, one that might be described as “Trump first,” rather than “America first.” His instincts appear to be aimed at shielding himself.

The hacking has become the elephant in the room since the election. It is a significant national security threat that Trump will have to deal with and also a roiling political debate that has threatened to complicate the transfer of power.

Trump’s posture toward Putin and to the hacking long has puzzled and alarmed current and former government officials who have experience in these areas. His friendly attitude toward Putin is contrary to the views of officials in both parties about the man behind Russian aggression in various parts of the world.

His invitation to Russia to try to hack Clinton’s emails, issued last summer during the Democratic National Convention, was inexcusable, even if in jest. He has long resisted embracing the evidence that the Russians were behind the hacking. He said it could have been done by other countries or by “somebody sitting on their bed who weighs 400 pounds.”

When it was reported about a week ago that the CIA had concluded that the Russians were trying to help him win the election, he responded with a tweet slamming the intelligence community for claiming that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq War. The CIA was tragically wrong in that case, but was it necessary for the incoming president to publicly rebuke and provoke the agency?

All of this has put Trump at odds with the intelligence community he will soon oversee as commander in chief. That should be as worrisome to the incoming president as it is to the intelligence professionals. It has also put him at odds with many Republicans in Congress who are joining Democrats in their call for a thorough investigation and who already question whether Rex Tillerson, the ExxonMobil chief executive nominated by Trump to become secretary of state, is too friendly toward Putin.

Meanwhile, the political implications of the hacking have added to the raw emotions left behind by an election outcome that surprised people in both parties. Clinton is on record as believing that the combination of the Russian hacking and especially the interference of FBI Director James B. Comey over her emails cost her the election.

Caught in the middle is Obama, who is obviously loyal to Clinton and disappointed that Trump will be his successor. During his Friday news conference, he skirted some direct questions, showing the degree to which he is trying to maintain a working relationship with Trump during the transition while still trying to highlight the findings of the intelligence community. As he put it, “not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin.”

Since the election, Trump has rejected what would seem to be the obvious course to follow in light of the conclusions of the intelligence community. The simpler reaction would have been to respond the way many in Congress did, which was to express outrage at the interference and call for an investigation to examine exactly how the cyber-intrusion happened and how similar activities can be prevented in the future. Instead, he has continued to question the intelligence community and to suggest partisan motivations of those who accept the findings.

Perhaps his fear is that the more legitimacy is given to the conclusions that the Russians were motivated by their desire to help him or hurt Clinton, the less his victory will be seen as legitimate.

Or perhaps all of his tweets and statements are a prelude to Monday’s electoral college vote, after which he will feel freer to reverse course and join others in calling for a congressional investigation to go along with the review and report ordered by Obama.

In recent days, some of his advisers appeared to be preparing for that kind of shift. But the American people — and Trump advisers — have learned that no one safely speaks for Trump other than Trump himself. And they have learned how difficult it is for Trump to admit error.

On top of all this is the president-elect’s apparent lack of interest in receiving daily intelligence briefings, a standard procedure for presidents. That raises questions about how he plans to conduct foreign policy. Will he seek all available evidence as he weighs decisions? Whom will he listen to and trust? And will he ever have a trusting relationship with the vast intelligence-gathering resources at his command?

Trump is still a month away from occupying the Oval Office. But he is already caught up in a controversy that will define the opening of his presidency and is struggling to find his way.

Public Wants Congress To Get Random Drug Testing

Many employers, including state and federal governments, require a drug test before an employee can be hired -- and some even require random drug testing after a person is hired and goes to work. And some states have even required those receiving help from government social service organizations to be drug-tested. In fact, I would submit that most Americans have been required to take a drug test for one reason or another.

But there is one group that has always been exempt from drug-testing -- the members of the United States Congress. But the American public thinks that should change. A whopping 78% of Americans (nearly 4 out of every 5 people) think members of Congress should have to submit to random drug testing. And that view holds regardless of gender, race, age, income level, or political persuasion.

Personally, I don't think anyone should be drug-tested -- unless they hold a position where drug use could put others in danger, or their is evidence that drug use may be affecting their job performance. Drug use, especially marijuana use, that is done off-duty and at home should not be either an employer or the government's concern.

However, as long as the federal government requires drug-testing of anyone (employee, prospective employee, or social service recipient), then it should also be required of our elected officials. It makes no sense for them to be exempt of things they require of others.

The chart above was made from a Huffington Post / YouGov Poll -- done between November 25th and 27th of last year of a random national sample of 1,000 adults (with a 5.2 point margin of error).