Well this is one of the most bizarre historical analogies I've seen. I'm not a Donald Trump supporter--for one thing, I don't vote--but "Trump is bad because he's like Charlemagne," as if that would be a bad thing, is not an argument that is going to impress those of us who revere Charlemagne, who did far more for Western Civilisation than The Washington Post ever has. The writer, who claims to be a history professor, ignores Charlemagne's monumental positive contributions to European education and culture, which Mr. Trump is unlikely to be able to equal. But then, I love everything this liberal American writer decries: I admire "Altar & Throne" medieval Christendom, which would not have taken shape as we know it without Charlemagne, and believe in Christian Monarchy, not American "Liberty." While those of my American monarchist friends who do support Mr. Trump may feel vindicated by this odd analogy, I'm pretty sure that as Lloyd Bentsen said about Dan Quayle and Jack Kennedy, Donald Trump is no Charlemagne.