MONDAY: Music critic in Amsterdam!

MONDAY, MARCH 2, 2026

Young music lover revealed: There was once a person who read a three-volume biographer of a famous composer and ended up writing this:

Everyone in the Annex except Mr. van Daan and Peter has read the Hungarian Rhapsody trilogy, a biography of the composer, piano virtuoso and child prodigy Franz Liszt. It's very interesting, though in my opinion there's a bit too much emphasis on women; Liszt was not only the greatest and most famous pianist of his time, he was also the biggest womanizer, even at the age of seventy. He had an affair with Countess Marie d' Agoult, Princess Carolyne Sayn-Wittgenstein, the dancer Lola Montez, the pianist Agnes Kingworth, the pianist Sophie Menter, the Circassian princess Olga Janina, Baroness Olga Meyen- dorff, actress Lilla what's-her-name, etc., etc., and there's no end to it. Those parts of the book dealing with music and the other arts are much more interesting... 

Yes, it's true! The writer was Anne Frank, then age 14, not long thereafter lost to the world thanks to the madness of that world, not long before the liberation of Bergen-Belsen. 

Anthony Tommasini, the former chief classical music critic of The New York Times, remembered this matter in a labor of love in yesterday's print editions of the Times. Dual headline included:

In the Secret Annex, Anne Frank’s Radio and a Love for Classical Music
Her diary overflows with her devotion to books and movies. But after rereading the entries, a critic was struck by how often she writes about music.

[...]

In June 1944, three days before she turned 15, and two months before the annex was raided and everyone arrested—of the group, Otto Frank, Anne’s father, would be the only survivor of the camps—Anne wrote enthusiastically about “Hungarian Rhapsody,” a three-volume biography of Franz Liszt that she had just finished reading. “Its very interesting, though in my opinion there’s a bit too much emphasis on women,” she says about Liszt’s prodigious womanizing. But she was captivated by the parts “dealing with music and the other arts,” stories of Schumann, Clara Wieck, Berlioz, Chopin, Victor Hugo, Anton Rubinstein, Rossini and Mendelssohn.

It's true! There was once a reader of that three-volume biography who preferred the parts about the music! Continuing directly, Tommasini offers this:

There is a poignant entry from April 1944 when Anne bonds over Mozart with Peter, the van Pels’s teenage son. Peter, almost three years older than Anne, did not make a good first impression on her. She found him “a shy, awkward boy whose company won’t amount to much.” Those feelings took root. Peter was lazy, obnoxious, “a dope” and “no one takes Peter seriously,” she wrote. Eighteen months of annex confinement changed her feelings; Peter’s too. They became smitten and, with grudging parental indulgence, spent private time together in the attic of the annex. Peter gave Anne her first kiss.

One day, they were in the attic listening to a Mozart concert on the “baby radio,” as Anne called a portable set. She was especially struck by the serenade for strings “Eine Kleine Nachtmusik.” “I can hardly bear to listen in the kitchen,” she wrote, “since beautiful music stirs me to the very depths of my soul.”

Lost the world at age 15, thanks to the surrounding madness, with Peter van Pels lost too. Tommasini's rumination about his recent trip to Amsterdam continues:

The adolescent Anne’s growing immersion in classical music amid unimaginable hardships and daily fears preoccupied me during this trip to Amsterdam. Besides fulfilling a lifelong wish to visit the Anne Frank House, I went to concerts by the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra and the Netherlands Philharmonic, both at the acoustically marvelous Concertgebouw hall, built in the late 19th century. Anne, I thought, would have loved these performances.

It’s unlikely, though, that she ever made it to an orchestra program at the Concertgebouw. By 1941, when she was 11, Jews were barred from theaters of all kinds, along with libraries, museums, parks and more. By 13, she was in hiding. 

If you missed Tommasini rumination, you might want to consult it today. Amazingly, there were people who risked their lives, not just to provide their neighbors with food, but also to bring them books:

"Our meals consist almost entirely of potatoes and imitation gravy,” Anne wrote in her diary one day in 1944. But even during periods when food has hard to procure, the people risking their lives to provide for and shelter these hidden Jews—all employees of Otto’s pectin, spice and jam business—were able to bring them books: used books, library books, their own books, which were eagerly passed around.

Tommasini had "reread Anne Frank’s extraordinary diary before" his trip to Amsterdam. He "had somehow forgotten how regularly she brings up classical music."

We ourselves remain indebted to Francine Prose for her 2009 book, Anne Frank: The Book, the Life, the Afterlife, which vastly deepened our understanding of this remarkable episode in our human history.

As happenstance had it, Anne Frank happened to be a precocious child; Prose felt she had never received her due as a brilliant developing writer. Prose also tells the antique myth adjacent story of how Anne Frank's diary, and her other writings, escaped the fate of being lost at the time of her family's arrest. 

It's a story right out of antiquity, as Prose correctly notes.


SURROUNDINGS: The president made the fateful decision!

MONDAY, MARCH 2, 2026

But what were the surroundings? Last Friday night, we happened to sit up, awake, at roughly 1:30 a.m. On all three major "cable news" channels, the attack was already underway.

In Blue America, the decision to attack Iran has largely been challenged. In Red America, the assessments have generally been quite different. Indeed, consider this:

Twenty-four hours into this war, at 1:15 on Sunday morning, we saw a remarkably upbeat claim asserted once again.

Even at that late hour, the Fox News Channel was broadcasting live, with Jon Scott in the anchor chair. He spoke with Matt Terrill, introduced as former chief of staff to Marco Rubio's presidential campaign.

For the record, Secretary Rubio's presidential campaign ended in 2016. By way of contrast, Terrill's upbeat assessment of President Trump's decision was thoroughly up-to-date:

Here's what Terrill said:

SCOTT (3/1/26): [Secretary Rubio] was supposed to go to the Middle East this Tuesday. Do you think that that was a kind of a ruse? That the Iranians figured that they wouldn't havethat they wouldn't be seeing this kind of attack until at least after the secretary of state departed the region?

TERRILL: Well, Jon, is it possible that that was a head fake? Potentially! I'll let the administration speak to that. But this is a president, and Secretary Rubio, and an administration in general, that's playing four-dimensional chess...

The president's playing four-dimensional chess? So said the upbeat Terrill, on Red America's official news channel.

As you may recall, Joey Jones had offered a similar assessment, on the Fox News Channel's Big Weekend Show, just one week before:

JONES (2/21/26): You know, [the Democrats] play this game that's— They're not very good at it, I don't think.

President Trump is smarter than they are. He's playing checkers, they're playing— or, He's playing chess, they're playing checkers.

Jones had said that one week earlier. Now, the sitting president was said to be playing chess againand there's no way to prove that that's wrong.

Has President Trump been playing chess while others are playing checkers? It hasn't always looked that way to us! For starters, consider the banner headline across the top of the front page of this morning's New York Times:

U.S. TROOPS KILLED AS BLASTS JOLT MIDEAST; FEAR OF WIDER WAR AFTER IRAN’S RESPONSE
Trump Says He’s Willing to Talk to Tehran’s New Leadership

Say what? The president has said that he's willing to talk to Iran's new leaders?

Indeed, the president told The Atlantic, on Sunday night, that he's willing to return to negotiations! He had just killed forty of the Iranian regime's previous leadersand now he was willing to talk to whoever's left!

Rightly or wrongly, that almost seemed a bit odd to us. It didn't exactly seem to make sense, although we could always be wrong. 

Then too, Jonathan Karl has now tweeted this:

Jonathan Karl
@jonkarl

Pres Trump told me [on Sunday night] the US had identified possible candidates to take over Iran, but they were killed in the initial attack.

"The attack was so successful it knocked out most of the candidates," Trump told me. "It's not going to be anybody that we were thinking of because they are all dead. Second or third place is dead."

Just our luck! The president had replacements in mind for the post of Supreme Leader. But in the course of his first attack, he managed to kill the top three!

In fairness, things like that can happen. But even before the attack commenced, the president had oddly described the magic or secret words he was longing to hear.

Once again, we offer Jonathan Karl, reporting what the president said to a group of network news anchors during a preview of last Tuesday's State of the Union address. You can see Karl make his report at this report by The Wrap:

KARL (2/24/26): One notable thing, we did talk about Iran. He said that "Iran wants a deal more than I do," but they just can’t say the magic words, which he said was that they won’t build a bomb.

They just can’t say the magic words! But was that a direct quote?

We aren't completely sure about that. But that evening, in the address itself, the president used a slightly different term of art:

PRESIDENT TRUMP (2/24/26): They’ve already developed missiles that can threaten Europe and our bases overseas, and they’re working to build missiles that will soon reach the United States of America. After Midnight Hammer, they were warned to make no future attempts to rebuild their weapons program, in particular nuclear weapons, yet they continue. They’re starting it all over.

We wiped it out, and they want to start over again, and are at this moment again pursuing their sinister ambitions. We are in negotiations with them. They want to make a deal but we haven’t heard those secret words: “We will never have a nuclear weapon.”

Again, the president said he'd never heard those magic or secret words. But did that seem to make sense?

Hasn't the regime in Iran always said that it doesn't seek to have nuclear weapons? And since no one believes what the regime's leaders say, what difference would it have made if he had heard those secret or magic wordsif the Iranians had made that pledge?

For ourselves, we don't hear four-dimensional chess being played by this president. In fairness, that doesn't prove that he has made the wrong decision with respect to this war. It doesn't tell us what history will say about this war, if history as we've always known it will continue to exist.

For ourselves, we don't have confidence in this president's judgment, which doesn't mean that his judgment was wrong in this case. In part, we lack confidence in his judgment because we find it easy to believe what his niece said, on CNN, just last Thursday night.

In Saturday's report, we showed you what she said. We know of no obvious reason to assume that her assessment is wrong, which doesn't prove that it's right:

ERIN BURNETT (2/26/26): You've known him your whole life. Do you actually see a [cognitive] decline?

MARY L. TRUMP: I do, but I think it's important to remember that Donald has never been fit in any capacity. Obviously, what we're dealing with now are age-related cognitive declines. We're dealing with physical issues that the White House tries to cover over.

But this is somebody who for decades now has had serious, undiagnosed and untreated psychiatric disorders, which are only going to worsen, especially given the pressure he's under and given the cognitive and physical declines.

The fact that she said it doesn't mean that it's true. But his niece, the doctorate-wielding clinical therapist, said she sees a cognitive decline layered on top of life-long "psychiatric disorders."

Within this political context, we vastly prefer the term "medical." But a sitting president was making a very important decision even as that was being said. 

We don't know how the president's decision will turn out. We do know certain things about the decision's surroundings.

What do we mean when we refer to the decision's "surroundings?" We're speaking about the rapidly crashing national culture within which that perilous decision was finally made:

We're thinking of his niece's statement last Thursday night. We're thinking of a speech President Biden made, in South Carolina, on that very same evening.

We're thinking of the moral and intellectual squalor which suffused the Fox News Channel in the weeks leading to that decision. We're thinking of the refusal of Blue America's major news organs to report and discus that astonishing level of journalistic disorder.

We're thinking of the ludicrous state into which the State of the Union had fallen as of last Tuesday night. We're thinking of the need to builds a culture war out of a (very good) hockey game.

We're thinking of this opinion piece by Alex Griffing of Mediatean opinion piece in which Griffing examines the type of serious policy issue we Americans no longer discuss. We're thinking of the way CNN and the Fox News Channel spent the weeks leading up to this war talking about almost nothing except a (tragic) missing person case concerning which nothing was known.

We're thinking of the crazy claims this president won't stop making. We're thinking of the crazy things he routinely posts on his Truth Social site, very late at night.

We're thinking of his birther years. We're thinking of the southern border during the Biden years, and of what was said about itincluding by President Biden himself, just this past Thursday night.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but our rapidly failing American culture is an embarrassment and a danger. The decision emerged from these gruesome surroundings. We Blues are a part of that too!

Tomorrow: We'll probably have to start right there


SATURDAY: Mary Trump joins David Brooks!

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2026

The history of the era: History is moving quickly today, as you already know. We wish this was a more appropriate time for this morning's task, but if we might borrow from Donald Rumsfeld:

You report the intellectual history of your era within the time frame you have:

In last Saturday morning's report, we reported what David Brooks said.  Had we always known that David Brooks would be the one to break the rule about medical language? 

Possibly yes and possibly nobut right there on the previous night's PBS NewsHour, this was what he had said:

GEOFF BENNETT (2/20/26): Is there a point at which the president's rhetoric—maybe we're already there—becomes corrosive to the institution itself?

BROOKS: Well, Donald Trump has never had an honest disagreement with somebody. And where you say, "Oh, I disagree with you," and without him going ad hominem.

And that is just his nature. It is the nature of somebody with a narcissistic personality disorder to think, "I am the center, and everything that's an assault on me cannot be anything but a shameful attack on all that is right and good." 

Is the sitting president afflicted with the medical condition known as "narcissistic personality disorder?" Might that be a reasonable clinical diagnosis? 

We can't answer that question, but Brooks, a major mainstream journalist, was advancing that assessment. By using that technical medical language, he was also breaking every rule in the journalistic book.

At long last, Brooks had decided to abandon a basic rule of the guildand dear God! This past Thursday night, Mary Trump, the president's niece, broke that same rule during an interview on CNN. 

Mary Trump joined David Brooks! When she spoke with CNN's Erin Burnett, this exchange occurred:

BURNETT (2/26/26): A number of polls are now showing that Americans are increasingly questioning [the president's\ mental state. ... 

We're talking about a possible war about to happen, right? So, people are thinking about it. 

Reuters/Ipsos has a poll saying 61 percent of Americans agree that Trump has become erratic with age61 percent. Thirty percent of Republicans agreed with that. ABC/Washington Post/Ipsos poll last week had 56 percent saying Trump doesn't have the mental sharpness to serve effectively. That's up thirteen points since May 2023.

I mean, that's an incredible jump. ...You've known him your whole life. Do you actually see a decline?

M. TRUMP: I do, but I think it's important to remember that Donald has never been fit in any capacity. Obviously, what we're dealing with now are age-related cognitive declines. We're dealing with physical issues that the White House tries to cover over.

But this is somebody who for decades now has had serious, undiagnosed and untreated psychiatric disorders, which are only going to worsen, especially given the pressure he's under and given the cognitive and physical declines. So it's great that the majority of the American people are starting to wake up to this. But I have to say, it's a long time coming.

BURNETT: All right. Well, Mary, I appreciate you, and it's good to see you again. 

The fact that she said it doesn't mean that it's right. But that's what Mary Trump said, right there on CNN.

For ourselves, we never use the word "psychiatric." We use the word "medical" instead. Here's why:

Psychiatry is a (conceptually complex) branch of modern medical science. The leading authority on the topic puts it like this: "Psychiatry is the medical specialty devoted to the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of deleterious mental conditions. These include matters related to cognition, perceptions, mood, emotion, and behavior."

The (accurate) term which Mary Trump chose to use tends to shut down further discussion. The kinder/gentler term "medical" doesn't have that same effect. 

That said, it had been a long time since we saw Mary Trump, on cable TV, following the trail she blazed in her 2020 best-selling family memoir, Too Much and Never Enough

Mary Trump holds a Ph.D. in clinical psychology. She's an experienced clinical therapist. 

That doesn't mean that her assessments concerning her uncle just have to be correct. But in that best-selling book, she had offered far-reaching diagnostic assessments of her uncleassessments we have reposted many times

Specifically, she had said he met every criterion for a clinical diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder. She said he also seemed to meet the criteria for antisocial personality disorder, "which in its most severe form is generally considered sociopathy." 

As she continued, she seemed to say that her uncle was likely afflicted by quite a few other "pathologies." 

The fact that she said it didn't make it correctbut the American press corps has long observed a rule which forbids such medical assessments with respect to political figures. After Mary Trump's book appeared, cable news host avoided discussing those diagnostic assessments in her many cable interviews. 

This past Thursday, those technical assessments were back! Burnett didn't seem to be surprised by what her guest said, and she didn't offer any disclaimers.

Is the sitting president afflicted by conditions which are still often referred to as "mental illnesses?" We would guess that the answer is yes, but we have no training and no experience in this area. 

Given the president's erratic behavior, we do think that Mary Trump was right when she made these remarks:

It's great that the majority of the American people are starting to wake up to this. But I have to say, it's a long time coming.

We think it's the American press corps, not the American electorate, which may be "starting to wake up to" the deeply unfortunate possibilities in question here. That said, it has been "a long time coming." 

For better or worse, these possibilities have been disappeared dating back to Dr. Bandy X. Lee's 2017 best-seller. And as Burnett said to Mary Trump:

We're talking about a possible war about to happen, right?

We've long advised you to "pity the child" with respect to such unfortunate matters. It's also true that a person afflicted with a diagnosable "personality disorder" may make perfectly reasonable decisions in particular circumstances.

Of course, some such state of affairs may also be quite dangerous. And tragically but unmistakably, the sitting president has been quite erratic in thought, word and deed.

The president has seemed to be quite erratic. First with Brooks, then with Mary Trump's exchange with Burnett, we may be seeing the upper-end press corps struggling to break away from a self-imposed conceptual straitjacket.

This is part of the unimpressive intellectual history of this deeply troubled era. Even on this difficult day, we think it should be recorded. 

("Somewhere ages and ages hence," someone may find this of value.)


STATE OF THE (DIS)UNION: This tilts toward what we've been talking about!

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2026

How far will they go, we've asked: On this somewhat disturbing day, we'll be away from our sprawling campus until mid-afternoon. That said:

How far will this administration be willing to go with respect to November's elections? We asked that question at the start of the week, and now this report has arrived in the Washington Post:

Trump, seeking executive power over elections, is urged to declare emergency

Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly previewed a plan to mandate voter ID and ban mail ballots in November’s midterm elections, and the activists expect their draft will figure into Trump’s promised executive order on the issue. The White House declined to elaborate on Trump’s plans.

“Under the Constitution, it’s the legislatures and states that really control how a state conducts its elections, and the president doesn’t have any power to do that,” said Peter Ticktin, a Florida lawyer who is advocating for the draft executive order. Ticktin attended the New York Military Academy with Trump and was part of his legal team that filed an unsuccessful 2022 lawsuit accusing Democrats of conspiring to damage him with allegations that his 2016 campaign colluded with Russia.

“But here we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes,” Ticktin went on. “That causes a national emergency where the president has to be able to deal with it.”

The emergency would empower the president to ban mail ballots and voting machines as the vectors of foreign interference, Ticktin argued.

The idea of claiming emergency executive powers based on allegations of foreign interference attaches new significance to the administration’s actions to reinvestigate the 2020 election. Trump has never accepted defeat, while never finding evidence of widespread fraud. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is leading a review of election security that officials said focuses on foreign influence.

And so on from there. 

How serious is this proposal? Does it represent something resembling an actual White House inclination? Is Pete Ticktin the real deal? Is he possibly just a flake?

We can't answer those questions. The Post's Isaac Arnsdorf goes on at some length, offering background information, but he doesn't seem to know at this point.

That said, we regard this as a deeply dangerous time. Ticklin may just be floating a dreamor then again, possibly not.

We ourselves are heading off to the medical mission today. We may resume these ruminations by mid-afternoon.

For those lacking access to the full report in the Washington Post, here's the overview from Mediaite, written by Isaac Schorr:

Trump Reportedly Mulling Plan to Declare ‘National Emergency’ Paving Way for Major Power Grab

The Washington Post reported that activists are working with the White House on an executive order to declare a “national emergency” over America’s elections and pave the way for a power grab.

“Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting,” reported the Post‘s Isaac Arnsdorf. “President Donald Trump has repeatedly previewed a plan to mandate voter ID and ban mail ballots in November’s midterm elections, and the activists expect their draft will figure into Trump’s promised executive order on the issue.”

Peter Ticktin, a MAGA activist in favor of the executive order, told the Post that “we have a situation where the president is aware that there are foreign interests that are interfering in our election processes,” and that “the president has to be able to deal with it,” including by banning mail-in ballots and certain voting machines.

That headline and lede seem a bit overstated. At any rate, the report continues from there.