That’s just crazy!

I heard an interesting interview on the Mark Levin show a couple weeks ago on my way home from class. The interview involved Dr. Bandy X Lee.

Bandy Xenobia Lee (born 1970) is an American psychiatrist with Yale University and a specialist in violence prevention programs in prisons and in the community who initiated reforms at New York’s Rikers Island prison. Her scholarly work includes the writing of a comprehensive textbook on violence. In 2017 she organized a conference on the mental health of Donald Trump at Yale and was the editor of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, a book of essays that has contributed to the debate about Trump’s mental stability and within the psychiatric profession in the United States about the interpretation of the Goldwater rule.

It seems Bandy has co-written a book with Judith Lewis Herman.

Judith Lewis Herman (born 1942) is an American psychiatrist, researcher, teacher, and author who has focused on the understanding and treatment of incest and traumatic stress.

Herman is Professor of clinical psychiatry at Harvard University Medical School and Director of Training at the Victims of Violence Program in the Department of Psychiatry at the Cambridge Health Alliance in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and a founding member of the Women’s Mental Health Collective.

She was the recipient of the 1996 Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies and the 2000 Woman in Science Award from the American Medical Women’s Association. In 2003 she was named a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.

How distinguished! But it seems these two distinguished doctors are afraid. There is a huge problem. They along with 25 35 or 36 of their fellow psychiatrists realized the imminent danger our country is facing because we elected a seriously unstable Republican as President.

So Mark’s interview begins with asking Bandy about her political leanings. Is she a Demoncrat? She denies she is, though she did vote for Hillary. Is she a liberal? Yes, and a conservative. Has she ever voted for a Republican? Yes. Who? She’d rather not say. Then it really starts to get interesting. In what ways is she a conservative? She is a devout Christian, she believes in the founding principles of this nation, she’s a great patriot if you will, says she. By later in the interview I’m thinking she had to be a member of Jeremiah Wright’s church. Mark inquires if she believes in private property rights. Well, to an extent, she feels private property rights have gone too far. WTHeck? Does she believe in limited federal government? This made her nervous. Why was he asking her such things? She declares first and foremost she is a medical professional! She is not a very political person! She declares she has no conflicts of interest. Do you believe all the Bill of Rights? Ummmmm. Do you believe in the Second Amendment?

“Ummmmm…..I actually don’t really know the exact ummmm, meanings of the Bill of Rights. What I studied was enlightenment literature.”

So she and 36 other “mental health experts” have written this book. As many as thirty-six out of the, as she admits, hundreds of thousands of other mental health experts in this country, have written a book on the dangerous mind of President Trump.

Where did she get her information? Had she ever met the President? No. Had she ever spoken to the President? No. Did she watch TV, read newspapers, listen to the radio? No, she did a “fairly intimate analysis of him due to the information that was on him in the Mueller Report.” She said, well, its observations from outside the President’s head. As Mark points out, her book was written before the Mueller report came out. She says the alarm for herself started in early 2016. She was triggered by the interaction between the Presidential candidate DJT and his rally attendees. She said this is real time interaction, and response in real time, as recorded of course. She was disturbed by the things the Candidate said and that people were applauding and cheering. Mark points out she did no scientific diagnosis, as that’s not possible from a distance. She counters that is not true, she brought her scientific knowledge and psychiatric training as well as her experience in public health. So she was quite aware of what these signs represented, and they have born out to be true with time. A danger she says. That’s why it’s ok she wrote this book without a diagnosis. Mark points out you can’t have a diagnosis from afar. She says “that’s not true either”. With certain conditions, a diagnosis is more accurate from a distance, without a personal interview. And this is mainstream thought. Today diagnosis is based on no interaction, just on observing the person. But she insists she never diagnosed, she is only interested in the public health effects of DJT. Then she insists she can’t diagnose from afar. And she doesn’t want to, where upon Mark tells her the book is filled with speculation on such things. Mark asks if she analyzed Hillary Clinton? She insists dangerousness is about the situation, not the person. Huh? Ok, is she dangerous?

“Hillary Clinton never raised alarms for me”.

I guess she could do a internet search on the Clinton body count. She insists it’s not about political party, it’s about standards. Mark reiterates he’s read her book. On what page are the standards listed? They aren’t. He further points out, she only watched TV. She never actually went to any of his rallies, never talked to any of his people, never talked to any of his supporters.

Why does this outrage me so? Red Flag laws. Not only can a person accuse you without evidence it appears the medical profession, or at least the mental health profession (some of whom wanted nothing to do with Bandy or this book) are willing to make judgments affecting your property, your rights and your life based on some undocumented, unspecified standards. Will these be the same “professionals” helping to write legislation in an advisory capacity? Now I understand why Professor Quack thinks personal property rights have gone too far. Not that she can tell you about the Bill of Rights.

If you want to hear the whole interview, it’s available here

If you want the whole show, and the part about “medicare for all” is pretty darn interesting, as is the “wealth tax”, you can get that here.

https://omny.fm/shows/mark-levin-audio-rewind/mark-levin-audio-rewind-8-27-19

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

5 thoughts on “That’s just crazy!”

  1. I am not a psychiatrist, however, my diagnosis is Dr. Bandy X Lee is batshit crazy due to TDS (recently added to DSM-6).

    Based on just this review, and never having talked to this person, I am quite sure, and you must agree with me due to my expertise, she would have been at home in the USSR diagnosing those pesky political prisoners.

  2. EXACTLY! And that’s one of the things that is discussed in the first part of the clip. I can’t help but wonder how long before the desire to exercise is right is itself considered the “proof” of mental illness. Totally agree with your assessment of Dr. Lee, she needs to seek help at once! Suggest she talk to Jan Morgan or Anna Taylor of Dene Adams, or for a really good lesson, Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp.

  3. “DJT is mentally unstable,” is a diagnosis, from a medical professional.

    Diagnoses are covered under doctor-patient confidentiality.

    And yet, there is her book, laying out all the criteria she (not the DSM-V) believes supports that diagnosis.

    Willfully violating doctor-patient confidentiality for personal profit is highly-unethical, and shows she is anything but a medical “professional”.

    Therefore her “diagnosis” is worth exactly … nothing.

  4. The thing that shocked me is that she decided he was a danger, based on watching TV and seeing how the voters reacted to what he said. So now people can be assessed (or whatever they want to call it this week) without anyone speaking to them or finding out the circumstances behind actions. We already know “red flags” are confiscation without due process. But when the process comes, will the standards be set by some progressive who sat home and watched TV? And she didn’t have great things to say about Trump supporters. She seems to think they shouldn’t be let out on their own. They were misled, uninformed, etc etc.

  5. Excellent article!
    I never heard of this “psychobabbler” and her ‘claim to fame’ in writing a book about a bogus claim about our president.
    For her to profess to know ANYTHING about a man who has accomplished more good for many people in his life, than she and her cohorts will ever be able rise to the level of is laughable, at best, and ludicrous for sure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *