The latest kerfuffle spawned by Donald Trump’s loose lips ensnared Keith Olbermann. In an interview with Newsmax’s Greg Kelly last week, Trump blathered about persecuted Presidents, “I was always told that Andrew Jackson was treated the absolute worst. I heard Abraham Lincoln was second. I don’t care,” Trump said. “Andrew Jackson or anybody else. Nobody, when you think of the fake things, nobody’s been treated like Trump in terms of badly.”
Olbermann, being the jerk that he is, re-tweeted the Biden Campaign’s “Trump says he has been treated worse than Abraham Lincoln, who was assassinated,” with the comment, “There’s always the hope.” This isn’t the point of this post, but 1) Trump was referring to Lincoln’s vilification in both the South and much of the North when he spoke of bad treatment, and 2) Olbermann’s snark was inevitable, in character, and obviously not a “true threat.”
But then people, including some Fox talking heads, started calling for him to be kicked off Twitter/”X,” and Keith pulled his tweet. Then he lied about what he meant, tweeting, “I know nobody with an IQ greater than a halibut’s has believed @FoxNews since 1996 but even from their whores this is idiotic The RT clearly shows I’m hoping Trump’s right, that he IS treated worse than Lincoln. As I’ve said for 9 years: THAT HE’S CONVICTED, THEN DIES IN PRISON ”
Sure Keith. Do you really believe anyone but a few halibut, Fox News, and the nearly million idiots who follow you on Twitter give a fig what you tweet, ever?
But I digress. What I want to point out is that neither Lincoln nor Andrew Jackson top the list of mistreated Presidents. It’s an especially dumb thing to say about Jackson. Jackson was the most popular President since George Washington, cruised to re-election, and left office an icon. I assume what Trump is alluding to is the scandal over Jackson’s wife Rachel, because of her inadvertent bigamy when she eloped with Andy. Jackson didn’t take any criticism well, but he was still mostly worshiped as President, though roundly hated by his political foes for consistently besting them.
Trump has a slightly stronger case with Lincoln, but Abe still was re-elected, and almost immediately deified after he was killed. The following Presidents were treated much worse than Jackson; whether they were treated worse than Lincoln is a matter of perspective: John Adams, Martin Van Buren, John Tyler, Andrew Johnson, Rutherford B. Hayes, Herbert Hoover, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon. I could even make an argument for Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
Trump has a strong case that he was the most unfairly and viciously treated of all, but the two Johnsons, Hoover and Nixon have strong cases as well. I do give Trump the award for knowing less about American Presidential history than any other POTUS.
That’s something.
Ethics Alarms 
I would be hard pressed to assess whether other presidents have a greater or lesser knowledge of prior presidents.
I suppose the question is at what point were these presidents treated horribly; during or well after their presidency.
I suppose if I were interested in learning all there is to know about the presidencies of all of its office holders I might be able to make such an assessment but until now I know of no other president whose opponents seek to destroy him financially and criminally; not even Lincoln.
I’d say my assessment is a good bet, though. All of the Presidents except a very few were avid readers and educated at elite institutions at a time when history was taught relatively competently. The military types like Ike knew their history, and almost all of them came from politically-minded families. Trump’s the sole businessman
I wasn’t arguing with your assessment. I am not sure though if this is a failure on Trump’s part. Each president has their own strengths and weaknesses. Carter was a nuclear physicist if I recall but that would not necessarily make him have more understanding of presidential history than you or Trump
” I do give Trump the award for knowing less about American Presidential history than any other POTUS.”
Which is why I doubt he even knows about the messiness behind Rachel Donelson’s marriage to Andrew Jackson which created the scandal that Andy blamed for her premature death before he took office.
Of course, the Left would just attribute his belief that Jackson was treated the worst of all to mean that he agrees with the slavery and Native American expulsion policies of his predecessor.
Oh, I’m sure he knows nothing about Rachel: I was just trying to put the best spin on his ignorant statement. Trump identifies more with Jackson that any other POTUS because Andy was a badass, didn’t fear anyone, and was the ultimate Washington outsider.
Bingo
“ I do give Trump the award for knowing less about American Presidential history than any other POTUS.”
that is kind of unfair as he has so much more to learn than, say, Washington or Andrew Jackson. Arguably, Washington weighs in at 100% and everyone else is at least a little bit less.
the sad thing is that he might know less about American Presidential history than, say, Keith Olberman (though that is debatable).
-Jut
Yeah, I was thinking about George, John,James, James and John Quincy—they had an easy job, since they all knew each other.
But don’t you think if you’re going to run for President and, more important, get elected, learning all you can about the office and its history, precedents, etc. would be responsible and competent? It’s still not that many—not like having to learn about all the kings and queens, as Charles probably did. I maintain that learning al the POTUSes in order and about what they did should be mandatory for every US citizen, but if you are joining the club, it should be automatic.