Conclusion
The Special Counsel's report offers an extraordinary level of high-quality information on the President's apparent lack of mental capacity: compromises in comprehension (inability to take in critical information and advice), faulty information processing (mendacity, rigidity, self- occupied notions of "fairness," and poor memory), interferences to sound decision making (loss of impulse control, recklessness, and inability to consider consequences), and proneness to placing himself and others in danger. Without the limitations on the President's dangerous decision making that the Report reveals on the part of his own surrounding staff, generally regarded as distinguished and formidable, the national interests of the United States and, indeed, the world would have been placed at much greater risk by the mental functioning of the current President. The President has now eliminated most of those staff.
Mental capacity does not relate primarily to a person's specific psychiatric diagnosis; in other words, the presence of a mental disorder does not render a person incapable of making rational and realistic decisions. It is also separate from criminal-mindedness, and is most cases does not exonerate from criminal wrongdoing (when the act is present). The combination of mental incapacity and criminal-mindedness, however, creates the most dangerous kind of leadership possible. Given the clear and pervasive, cumulative patterns we have summarized from the Special Counsel's report of the President's impaired capacity to make responsible decisions free of impulsivity, recklessness, suspiciousness that leads him to believe that he needs to defend himself against betrayal or persecution, absorption in self-interest that precludes attention to the national interest, inability to weigh consequences before taking action, detachment from reality, creation of chaos and danger, and cognitive and memory difficulties, there is compelling medical evidence that he lacks the capacity to serve as president.
In the interest of making a reasonable attempt to obtain a personal interview, we make a final recommendation that the president sit through a formal evaluation by a panel of independent, nongovernmental body of experts, which the President should be able to agree to if he believes he is fit to serve. We believe that, given the enormous high-quality data now available, and the extreme dangers implied in presidential incapacity, it is imperative that the president clarify the matter of incapacity for the good of the country. However, absent this examination, we believe that we have enough evidence to come to a conclusion if necessary.
