Unanswered questions can breed presumptuous answers or theories. We humans abhor the chaos of unanswered or, worse, unanswerable questions. Like gas in a vacuum, chaos fills a closed space without shape or purpose. But our science explains how gas enclosed in a vacuum adheres to predictable laws. There is an explanation. It turns out that even chaos can be understood in nature. Unfortunately, it works differently in politics. A political leader can create chaos for no other reason than to fabricate an explanation that suits his/her political fortunes. The most effective fabrications are often conspiracy theories. They suit our need for explanations, without taxing our ability to understand—that is, to discriminate fact from fiction, truth from falsehood, a scientific hypothesis from a tested theory, or a theory from an established law of science. Conspiracy theories have no need to replicate science. They are just assertions, willful and likely biased. Often, they do not even pass the test of common sense. But they do provide answers that can satisfy our unquenchable need to explain what escapes our knowledge. And they excuse our responsibility to search for the truth. Consequently, they are effective tools in manipulating public opinion without the need to prove their predicates.

Let us review a few of the more prevalent conspiracy theories perpetrated against the American public during this time of chaos and confusion.
(1) The FBI investigation of foreign influence in the 2016 election was a hoax created by the Democratic Party to unseat a duly elected President. But no Democrats were involved. There was prima facie evidence that the ongoing foreign interference investigation was warranted. The known foreign contacts with Republican campaign operatives in the 2016 election gave the appearance of collusion. And the firing of a lifelong Republican FBI Director appeared to co-op any potential investigation into campaign collusion. The acting FBI Director then made the reasonable decision to include the Trump campaign into the ongoing Russian investigation. His job required as much. No hoax or bias appeared to be operative in his decision. He had no Party affiliation, having never registered as either a Democrat or a Republican. (Note: The Chris Steel report, funded by Republicans initially, then by Democrats, had no impact on the foreign interference investigation that had been started months earlier.)
(2) The Special Prosecutor appointed to investigate foreign interference in the 2016 election was a stooge of the Democratic Party. But former Attorney General Robert Mueller was a lifelong Republican who served under both Republican and Democratic Presidencies.
(3) The final Mueller Report was a complete exoneration of President Trump: there was no collusion and no obstruction of justice. But over a thousand prosecutors signed a letter stating that Donald Trump, were he not protected by the office of the Presidency, would have been found guilty of obstruction of justice on several counts (at least six and potentially as many as 10). Or, in Mueller’s conclusion, “this report . . . does not exonerate him.” Regarding the matter of collusion, Mueller concluded that the Special Prosecutor’s “Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on” the investigation. That “unavailable information” included encrypted or deleted communications, documents stored in other countries or destroyed, witnesses living abroad, and proven lies committed by many Trump associates (some of whom were imprisoned for lying to authorities).
(4) The Mueller Report is based upon fabrications created by Democrats. But the Report only records the testimonies of foreign agents and Trump campaign operatives. No Democrat is quoted or referenced anywhere in the document. (Note: the Steele report is not referenced to support any finding in the Mueller Report.)
(5) The transcript of President Trump’s conversation with President Zelensky was a perfect call. Really? The House impeachment team proved otherwise, as even Republican Senators admitted. But they also argued that the President’s transgressions did not merit his removal from office. Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 65 would not agree, for he defines an impeachable offense as “an abuse or violation of some public trust.” Nor would signers of the Constitution who concurred with the arguments of Gerry, Madison, Mason, and Franklin. The President was guilty of what the Constitution defines as “bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors.” Over a thousand Constitutional scholars, judges, and lawyers signed a letter to that affect. Even as early as November of last year, the details of the President’s violation of the public trust was obvious (reference “Q for Q or Bribery and Extortion”).
(6) The President saved millions of lives with his Chinese travel ban . . . if only this were true. We cannot know whether the President believes it was so at the time or not. But the fact that he still advances this belief now qualifies as another conspiracy theory because he uses it to blame the Chinese. We now know that COVID-19 had been community spread in Santa Clara County, California, before the travel ban was enacted. And we now know that thousands of lives would have been saved if the President had listened to his advisors and declared a national emergency at the same time as the World Health Organization alerted the world of a global pandemic.
These conspiracy theories are just a few highlights. There are many more created by Donald Trump, like “birtherism,” the Kurds’ culpable absence at Dunkirk, NATO’s lack of support for American interests (disregarding NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan after 911), Ukraine’s interference in the 2016 election, the allegedly baseless prosecutions of Trump allies—like Manafort, Cohen, and Stone, all of whom were provided due process in a court of law, found guilty, and sentenced to multiple years in prison—and so on. What is noteworthy about all these conspiracy theories is not their substance, but their purpose. That purpose is to dupe the public and vindicate bad or harmful behavior. The President uses Twitter and his “bully pulpit” to assure a wide audience for his conspiracy theories. And there are always people inclined to believe a good story that supports a specific bias, prejudice, or point of view.

In fact, anybody can create a conspiracy theory that might go viral on the internet. Suppose we imagined that Donald Trump wanted to be part of an alliance of strong male leaders who could dominate the world. Then we could explain his actions to that purpose. It would become obvious why he would allow Erdogan to invade Syria, satisfy Kim Jung Un’s wish to eliminate allied military exercises near North Korea, agree with Putin’s long held desire to eliminate the short range nuclear missile ban, leverage Ukraine to exonerate Putin for interfering in the 2016 election, and support Putin’s proposed treaty that would concede Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine to Russia. His “summit” meetings with the North Korean leader and his frequent secret phone calls with Putin and Erdogan would imply a hidden diplomacy apart from the State Department and absent any national agenda. Also, his distain for globalism and international organizations would be seen in a new light as justification for weakening any efforts to respect borders, to defuse potential conflicts, and to discourage universal adherence to human rights. Effectively, his actions would be understood as attempts to use America’s influence worldwide in favor of a few like-minded dictators. After all, Dictators generally resent any strictures on their power. Would not this construct make a doozy of a conspiracy theory?

And, as President of the United States, he would be able to remove the one obstacle to this grand conspiracy—that is, American democracy. He could persuade the American electorate to view his policies in a new light, as merely an exercise of his executive power. His constant and persistent message to his constituents would be that he was the state, the very embodiment of America. Therefore, Americans should accept his defiance of congressional oversight and desire to pack the courts with judges he hoped would support his interests. As President, his claim of total power should therefore be unquestioned when he crippled democratic institutions by defunding, by appointing incompetents and sycophants, and by aligning them with the interests of corporate and powerful interests made solely beholden to him. In this manner, he would have consolidated his power and assured his spoken word was the law of the land. His Republican majority in the Senate would be compelled to become complicit in his stranglehold on power or face a campaign funding drought and Presidential belittling in Republican primaries. Within his Administration his punitive actions against subordinates would be readily accepted as consistent with the absolute authority of his Presidency. Specifically, those truly dedicated to public service he would either fire, remove from positions where they could not hinder execution of his orders, or be silenced by his political appointees. Donald Trump, then, would be intent on just one goal, that is, becoming the most powerful President since Franklin Roosevelt. The difference, of course, is that Roosevelt was ceded power by Congress (not so much by the courts) in order to save the country from the Great Depression and to win a world war. President Trump, according to this conspiracy theory, demands power not to serve his country, but to bolster his self-image as one of the most powerful men in the world.

The other part of this imagined conspiracy theory is its portent for the future. Obviously, any plan for Trump to join the club of dictatorial leaders must require that he hold power indefinitely. But first, he must win reelection. Since he has never won the majority in any national poll or even in his initial election, it behooves him to suppress a free election. In the middle of a pandemic, he could veto any legislation that might fund enhanced mail-in voting. He could urge Republican controlled State legislators to reduce early voting, to limit voter registration, to cull official voter records, to limit voting locations, and to block registered voters without selectively issued voter ID cards. And, perhaps somewhat perversely, he could continue to limit the development of a national COVID-19 testing strategy that could make voting safer. Who would want to risk infection at crowded polling locations? Even more perverse would be a limited national pandemic response that proliferated contagion to reduce the African American and Hispanic population who are 2 to 3 times more likely to succumb to the virus. That objective would be met simply by the President urging Governors to remove home isolation orders without reference to the CDC guidelines. He could say “I’m deferring to the Governors” or “we have to open our economy.” This apocryphal scenario would be a bizarre enactment of a possible conspiracy theory. But some people might believe it.

This imagined conspiracy theory is only convincing to those already inclined to believe its truth . . . unless it is supported by facts. Then, it becomes America’s worst nightmare.