Thursday, February 7, 2019

On Tuesday, 5 February 2019, President Trump gave his second State of The Union Address. As you may have heard, the SOTU was delayed this year by Nancy Pelosi due to Donald Trump's shutdown of a large percentage of the U.S. federal government. And via her body language, Nancy Pelosi very much continued to steal the show.

What follows is a partial nonverbal analysis of a brief but profoundly impactful portion of Pelosi's nonverbal exchange with the President during the 2019 SOTU.

DONALD TRUMP (continuing from 0:09 in the above video): But we must reject the politics of revenge, resistance, and retribution - and embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise, and the common good.

Throughout much of the SOTU (this image from 0:13), Nancy Pelosi repeatedly looked at her copy of the President's address. In so doing, she was showing to the world her deliberate disrespect toward Trump. Pelosi's lack of eye contact and diminished attention telegraphed her refusal to subordinate herself - and by extension, her refusal to subordinate the American people - to Donald Trump.

During 0:26, as he finishes his sentence and the audience begins to applause, Nancy Pelosi, just prior to standing up, displays a Tight Tongue Jut, indicating:

• Repulsion
• Disgust
• Disdain

Nancy Pelosi's clap is distinctive and important for several reasons (0:28). Note how her hands and fingers are flattened - fully extended (and even mildly hyper-extended - e.g., with her fingers bending a bit outward at their tips). The long axis of the hands are also close to parallel.

Typical enthusiastic and sincere clapping involves hands which meet each other at more of angle (e.g., as are Pence's hands in this same moment) - as well as with hands and fingers that are cupped. Such configurations engender significantly louder noise whilst clapping.

Pelosi's arms are also extended and elevated - and her shoulders are hunched as well. This cluster dynamic prevents the generation of power during clapping (ergo, it's quieter and projects less enthusiasm).

Moreover, the Speaker's torso is leaning away from Trump - thus distancing herself from a person whom she does not like.

• The Speaker's torso remains retracted, leaning away from the President
• Her hands are still extended, in a low-enthusiasm, insincere, clapping-pointing dynamic
• Pelosi's eyebrows and forehead are raised (signifying doubt and condescending emotional tones)
• Nancy's head and chin are tilted down and her head is rotated away from Donald (Thus, not looking directly at him - notice how her eyes are turned modestly to her right while her head rotated to her left. We don't full-body-point/look directly at people who we don't like, don't believe, and/or don't trust.)
• Pelosi's lips are pouting - indicating a sarcastic, "Donny's been a good little boy - let's all clap for him" message.

Less than a second later (still during 0:30), Donald Trump says something to Nancy Pelosi as she looks down and away from the President.

During 0:31, Donald Trump is rotating away - back toward his audience. As he does so, Nancy Pelosi looks at him again. The Speaker of the House has a Disgust-Pseudo Smile expression, while the President has a Disgust-Defiance facial amalgam.

Trump then turns briefly back toward Pelosi (0:34), speaks briefly once again - as we see another Tight Tongue Jut displayed by the Speaker.

From a body language perspective, it's surprising and ironic that both the Vice President and the Speaker of The House are traditionally placed above and behind the President during the State of the Union Address. Both of these positions temporarily give the two subordinate officers greater alpha status. Many alpha males, in particular, have great difficulty with others standing behind them. It intimidates them and makes them feel vulnerable. Donald Trump has a history of misogyny - and here, with his current chief political rival and the first woman who has ever enforced significant power over him - he finds himself out of his element.

SUMMARY: Donald Trump did not read this moment for what it was - a very public, sarcastic, condescending, and patronizing dissing. After
preventing President Trump from delivering his second SOTU address in
January - the Speaker of the House threw some major shade in February.
Without speaking - even speaking a single word - and armed with her wits and
nonverbal skills, Nancy Pelosi's classic Clap-back exacted a body language coup
d'état upon Donald Trump.

Saturday, February 2, 2019

Anyone watching this Justice Department press conference on 28 January 2019, would have noticed Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker was sweating profusely throughout most of this presser. Although the etiology of such sweating may, of course, sometimes be secondary to an acute infection or other medical conditions, the first thought which will come to most peoples' minds is that Whitaker was experiencing extreme anxiety. They would be correct.

Is the Acting Attorney General of the United States just a little camera shy - or is there another inspiration for his perspiration? What follows is a partial nonverbal analysis of Matthew Whitaker's response to reporters' questions regarding Robert Mueller's investigation.

At 31:34, Acting AG Whittaker says, "Um, you know, we have, we take very seriously, ahum, lying to Congress (shaking his head side-to-side) and, if there were referrals made, by, by the 'ppropriate [sic] committees, ah, as is ordinary course (shakes head side-to-side), for, for matters like this - then we would (shaking head side-to-side)investigate that, ah, as we would anything else." (switches to shaking his head up-and-down).

On multiple occasions (31:38, 31:44 - 31:45, 31:48 - 31:50) during this response, the acting Attorney General shakes his head, (No) side-to-side. This horizontal head shaking dynamic simultaneous with these declarative statements indicates his cognitive-emotional dissonance. His nonverbal behavior is very much incongruous with his verbal behavior.

Then, upon finishing of this answer, Mr. Whitaker then switches his head dynamic - and momentarily shakes his head up-and-down (31:50 - 31:51) - indicating that at some level (most likely consciously or at the of his edge-of-consciousness), Matthew Whitaker realizes his earlier contradictory body language - thus altering his head shaking motion to the up-and-down affirmative.

Please watch the video several times - as the subtleties of these movements are impossible to capture with still images.

He then (31:52) displays a Loose Tongue Jut (not to be confused with a Tight Tongue Jut or a Wide-Open Tongue Jut), indicating the thought-emotions of:

• I've been bad
• I've been caught
• I've done a stupid thing

Notice also, Whitaker's right eyebrow mildly-moderately elevated, telling us he's in disbelief with his own statement. Whitaker's unilateral eyebrow raising/disbelief pattern we see displayed multiple times throughout this video.

He then turns his head to his left, and, as he prepares to answer another
question, Whitaker's eyelids open widely (31:53). While his forehead does not contract, his eyebrows and, particularly his eyelids do elevate. While not fully manifested, this is a classic Deer-in-the-Headlights response. Whitaker, in this moment, is feeling and displaying a heightened level of fear.

Scratching and/or rubbing higher on the forehead is a strong, nonspecific signal of anxiety (34:39). Note Whitaker's eyelids are still opened significantly here.

Immediately after a journalist, prefaces her question with, "Um, before you came into your current role ...", Matthew Whitaker's eyelids open even wider, with his right eye opened to an extreme degree (34:40). Also, notice that his nostrils are flaring. Whitaker is again experiencing a dramatic surge of Fear.

This same journalist continues her question, "... you were publicly very critical of the special counsel's investigation ...", Whitaker scratches above and in front of his left ear (left temple) with his left index finger (34:44).

Scratching or rubbing in front of and above the ear has a high correlation with deception, particularly in this confrontational context.

Although we can't see with absolute confidence (the camera doesn't capture it directly), it certainly appears, that just prior to - and just after this temple scratch/rub, Whitaker placed his left hand in and out of his left front pants pocket. Whitaker does so several other times in this video. This Limb Hiding is very much akin to a what a turtle does when it's frightened. He's in fear - he wants to leave (but can't) so he (partially) escapes into his shell (pants pocket). Placing hand(s) in one's pockets, when on stage is a profound red flag. And, although, in other settings, Whitaker may very well be an alpha male personality - in this scenario, he's a beta trying to disguise himself as alpha.

The journalist continues, asking, "... now since you have received your briefings, is there anything you've seen or read that gives you concern about the special counsel Robert Mueller or his investigation?"

Acting AG Whitaker then looks away from the journalist, and while looking down and to his left, he rather dramatically raises his right eyebrow (34:51). In this context, this Unilateral Eyebrow Raising indicates either that Matthew Whitaker:

• Cannot believe he was asked that question (highly unlikely)
• or he can't quite believe the Catch-22 situation in which he has placed himself
• or he does indeed have concerns regarding Robert Mueller's investigation
• or he does not believe he has been fully briefed on Mueller's investigation

Matthew Whitaker continues, "... and ah, you know I look forward to, ah, Director Mueller, ahum, delivering the final report ...". During 34:59 - 35:00, (as he says, "delivering the final report"), notice how he, once again, shakes his head side-to-side ("No") as he is making an affirmative statement. His nonverbal behavior very much contradicts what he's saying verbally.

Notice too, that his right eyebrow is, once again, elevated.

Just after Whitaker says, "only with publicly available information" ("... and, I, ah, really am not going to talk about, eh, open and ongoing investigation otherwise, but - you know, sorta the statements that I made as a private citizen - only with publicly available information, ..."), he displays a Microexpression of Regret (35:11). Watch this dynamic several times at full speed, 1/2 speed 1/4 speed, and once again at full speed, concentrating your attention on HIS left mouth corner.

Continuing, Whitaker says, "... ahum, and I, you know I'm, I'm comfortable that, ahum, that the decisions that were made [up-talking] are going to be, ahum, reviewed ..."

Note the uptalking, crescendoing/questioning sounding of the tone with his words, "made", "reviewed", and "have". Up-talking in this context signals low confidence. This is particularly telling given he's a middle-aged male in a senior, national leadership position. Such beta vocal tones are profoundly out of context with the behavior of an acting Attorney General.

During 35:19, as he says, "reviewed", Whitaker also displays a partially suppressed smile along with - once again - a questioning, raised right eyebrow. Smiling out of context, particularly with such a serious matter, indicates, with exceedingly high probability, that Whitaker does not believe what he just said.

You may have also noticed Whitaker's dramatic facial blushing which
progressed throughout this presser. Blushing, when accompanying a
suppressed smile, along with a declarative statement is highly
indicative of deception/ulterior motives.

Whitaker continues (from 34:19), ".... ah, a-, ya know, n-either [sic] through the various means we have - but right now, ya know, the investigation is ah, [inhale] I think, ah - close tal [sic], being completed and I hope that we can the report from Director Mor-r [sic] Mueller as soon we - as possible."

At 35:34, after the last word ("possible") of his sentence and the last word of this press conference - he, once again, displays a second example of a duping delight, duplicitous smile - along with extreme blushing. This behavior cluster screams of ulterior motives.

Throughout his answers, in obvious paralanguage displays of further anxiety, Matthew Whitaker repeatedly stutters, stammers, and mispronounces - including, most noticeably, Mueller's name.

SUMMARY: During his press conference on 28 January 2019, Matthew Whitaker was experiencing profound anxiety. More specifically, he feels tremendous pressure from the cognitive-emotional dissonance he's receiving from the two opposing forces of - and conflicting obligations he feels toward - both Donald Trump and Robert Mueller. During this presser, the Acting U.S. Attorney General also projected regret, fear, emotional pain, disbelief - and most notably, deception.

Monday, January 14, 2019

On Monday 14 January 2019, President Trump addressed a press gaggle on the South Lawn of the White House prior to his travel to New Orleans. What follows is a partial nonverbal, verbal, and paralanguage analysis of a crucial portion of this event.

KRISTEN WELKER (beginning at 3:15): Mr. President, yes or no, have you or are you now, have you ever worked for Russia? Yes or no?

DONALD TRUMP: I never worked for Russia. And you know that answer better than anybody. I never worked for Russia. Not only did I never work for Russia, I think it's a disgrace that you even asked that question - because it's a whole big fat hoax. It's just a hoax.

During 3:20, just as he says, "I" ("I never worked for Russia"), he closes both of his eyes. When people are denying an accusation - and they close their eyes while saying the pivotal word "I", it's highly correlative with deception. It's an attempt by the subconscious to distance itself from the lie.

Of profound importance is Trump's vocal emphasis as he says the word, "work" (during 3:26, "Not only did I never WORK for Russia"). Listen to him speak. An innocent person would have put the emphasis on the word, "Not" as well as "never". And also, importantly, an innocent person would have first answered, "No" - after all, the question was, "Mr. President, yes or no, have you or are you now, have you ever worked for Russia? Yes or no?"

Trump's emphasis on the word "work" is an example of his rationalization - e.g., Trump is trying to rationalize that he was/is not working for Russia - but doing something else - perhaps partnering with or conducting business.

Trump also may very well believe that he was not at all working with Russia - but with one man only - Vladimir Putin. Thus, he can deny the accusation.

Moreover, another crucial statement analysis tell is the word "for" ("I never worked for Russia" [twice], and "Not only did I never work for Russia"). In his rationalizing mind, Trump is saying, "I worked with Russia (Putin), but not for Russia (Putin) - I don't work for anyone except myself".

When, in the act of refuting a lie, if the
accused gestures with a Finger-Point-Hand-Chop - it's a nonverbal signal
which is highly correlative with guilt. This body language is exactly what President Trump displayed when responding to Kristen Welker's question.

There's even further nuance embedded in Trump's gesturing. Note how his elbow, shoulder, and wrist all remain bent. During his finger-point-hand-chop at Ms. Welker, none of the joints achieve anywhere near full extension. If Trump had believed his own words, he would have straightened his arm much further in this moment. Instead, the President, lacking confidence in his retort, keeps his arm close to his torso. The President often exhibits such camouflaged acquiescing behavior.

(Did you notice his eyes were again closed at this key moment?)

Another telling nonverbal display (seen during 3:34) is what is known as a Lip Curl as Trump says, "hoax" ("It's just a hoax"). Note how his lips are flaring and curled outward in this instant (captured in the image above).

A lip curl is a signal of:

• Braggadocio
• False Bravado
• Over-extended Hubris

He then Thrusts his Jaw outward, tilts his head-neck back, while rotating his head away from Ms. Welker, to his left and then back again to his right while staring into the middle-distance (3:35).

Like any person who is guilty, but attempting to look strong and
in-control, Trump is oscillating back-and-forth between alpha and beta
emotions.

Jaw-Thrusting-Head-Tilting is a sign of an adrenaline surge and indicates the thought-emotion of defiance. Intriguingly, this dynamic is extremely common in mug shots (e.g., "I'm going to beat the rap").

Trump then looks back to Ms. Welker as he displays a Loose Tongue Jut (3:37). This microexpression/near-microexpression tongue movement signals Trump's thought-emotions of:

• I've been caught
• I've been bad
• I've done a stupid thing

A split-second later (also during 3:37), Trump's chin again extends outward, but this time his head does not tilt back. This is also associated with an adrenaline surge, however, this indicates Anger (Did you notice the increased tension in his lower eyelids?).

Mr. Trump then displays strong Contempt toward Ms. Welker as his right mid-face contracts dramatically - while his jaw is still jutting forward (still during 3:37).

Another key feature of this entire exchange, is that President Trump
never turns fully toward (he never Body Points) to Kristen Welker. While
his head and eyes are turned toward the journalist - his shoulders and torso do not (and by inference - neither do his hips or feet). This is another sign of his beta behavior - and that the President does NOT have the
confidence to fully confront this question/his accuser.

Moreover, two days earlier, during a phone interview on Fox News - when Jeanine Pirro asked Donald Trump, "Are you now or have you ever worked for Russia, Mr. President?", the President never answered the question. His failure to directly deny such accusations - even on a network that is extremely Trump-friendly, is particularly telling.

SUMMARY: Donald Trump's nonverbal, verbal, and paralanguage behavior displayed during this key moment earlier this week, all indicate that the President is lying - and that he did indeed "work for Russia" (Putin).

President Trump routinely retreats into beta mode while wearing an alpha facade. He's an ostrich pretending to be a T-Rex.

In July of 2017, during the G20 Summit in Hamburg, a particularly intriguing body language display was captured during one of the dinners. It's quite surprising that this display did not receive more press coverage at the time. It indeed deserves close examination.

What follows is a partial nonverbal analysis of the nonverbal exchange
between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on that night. The relevant video segment is
short and is looped several times within the news commentary video
included here (begin at 0:46).

Donald Trump turns his face and torso toward Vladimir Putin and then points at the Russian President with the index finger of his right hand.

He then gestures back - with the same finger pointing to himself -

And then Trump points again at Putin.

Next, President Trump pumps his fist, up-and-down, twice -

And yet again, Trump points at Putin (a third time) - this time with his left index finger.

Does it raise your internal alarms when a person - who doesn't know you very well - uses words such as: "We", "Our", "Us", "Let's", etc.? It should. This fits into a type of verbal behavior known as "Forced Teaming" (de Becker) and it's a common technique overused by manipulative individuals. In scenarios which are out of context to mutual familiarity and/or agreement, such verbal forced teaming is an attempt at making another person feel as if they belong to the same clan, team, etc. If you subscribe to any group/belief system, then you'll be significantly more likely to follow established rules/orders - and much more apt to be manipulated.

If you know what to look for, you'll also spot concomitant paralanguage and nonverbal forced teaming analogs.

Donald Trump frequently points to people in a crowd, a member of Congress, or his cabinet. When he does so, it's a body language form of forced teaming. It makes the other person feel as if the president temporarily raises them to the level of a peer - even if they literally and logically know it's not actually true. This makes it significantly more difficult to say, "no" to him - and much more likely that he'll be successful at winning others over to his way of thinking.

However, Trump has never pointed at another person - particularly a head-of-state - and THEN pointed back at himself - until he did so here, with Putin. He proceeded to point back to Putin - and did so a total of three times. And profoundly, sandwiched between his second and third Putin-point was Trump's enthusiastic fist-pumps.

SUMMARY: During the 2017 G20 Summit dinner in Hamburg, Germany - Donald Trump's repeated finger-pointing-fist-pumping gesturing toward Vladimir Putin indicates Trump's belief that he and Putin are on the same team - that they have solidarity - and that they are strong together.

Thursday, January 10, 2019

On Tuesday 8 January 2019, President Trump addressed the nation from the Oval Office regarding his proposed Wall at the US-Mexico border. What follows is a partial nonverbal analysis of this event.

As he began his Oval Office address, Donald Trump intertwined his fingers (0:06). For him, this hand/arm configuration is rare. He was probably following the advice of a speech coach. Some adopt this pose because they believe it looks strong and/or confident (which was Trump's intent in this moment).

However, depending on the other accompanying (simultaneous or nearly simultaneous) nonverbal signals - this hand configuration often transmits patronizing, condescending, and arrogant emotional tones - or it may signal frustration and/or anger.

Thus, it's no accident that Mr. Burns from The Simpsons also displays this same nonverbal behavior.

Donald Trump uses this Mid-level Steeple far too often (as well as the Low Steeple when he's sitting in a chair with no desk or table in front of him). When used this frequently, this (conventional) steeple strongly projects arrogance and an authoritarian emotional-tone (0:23).

Like all hyper-alpha nonverbal behaviors, anything more than a very little bit is far too much. Trump dramatically over-uses this body language. If he were well advised, the President would have been coached to display this signal for (at most) only about a half a second (if at all) - as he spoke (what he felt was) the most important word - of the most important sentence - of the entire address. Instead, this is very often the President's default hand position.

"While a pinch of garlic is just right, even a little bit more ruins the recipe." Piper Anne Twain

Trump displays an amalgam of Disgust and Anger is during 1:19 as he says, "Vietnam" ("... more Americans will die from drugs this year than were killed in the entire Vietnam War ...").

As he is saying, "... assaults, thirty thousand sex crimes, and four thousand violent ...", note the President is clasping his hands while he's rubbing his right thumb against his left thumb (1:34 - 1:40). This is another nonverbal dynamic rarely used by Trump - and indicates significantly elevated anxiety.

At numerous times during this address, the President raised one eyebrow (his left) indicating his disbelief in his own words. A particularly telling example is shown here (4:12) as he says the word, "request" ("... at the request of Democrats, it will be a steel barrier ...").

During 6:16, just after he says, "Hopefully we can rise above partisan politics in order to support national security", Donald Trump displays a classic Loose Tongue Jut indicating the thought-emotions of:

• I've been bad
• I've been caught
• I've done a stupid thing

Many people noted (and Tweeted) about The President's Dilated Pupils during his Oval Office address (image above was a screenshot from 6:08). Everyone who has been monitoring Donald Trump's pupils closely would have observed these to be Dilated:

• Intermittently
• Equally (or very nearly so)
• Often Extremely (at other times they have been dilated even larger than shown here)
• In a pattern repeated many times over years

Of course, with bright camera lights (or even routine, ambient, indoor lighting), we would expect anyone's pupils to be much smaller.

Note how dilated Trump's pupils are in this image from 2017.

At numerous times the President also exhibited deep nasal inhalations (e.g., 9:15).

SUMMARY: Simple fact-checking of Tuesday's Oval Office address reveals numerous examples of deception. In addition, President Trump's nonverbal behavior indicates he was experiencing the thought-emotions of frustration, anger, disgust, and a high level of anxiety.

Moreover, the President's pupils were significantly dilated. From a medical standpoint, his long-term pattern of bilateral, intermittent pupillary dilation is profound. It's not at all subtle or to be easily dismissed - on the contrary, it is glaring. Sirens Blaring. Red flashing lights.

While there are rare diseases/conditions which may cause such an intermittent, extreme, pupillary dilation, and I have not examined the President directly, any qualified ophthalmologist will tell you that a patient exemplifying these characteristics would be highly suspected of illicit drug abuse (I invite everyone to refute or confirm these medical findings - particularly those physicians with neuro-ophthalmology expertise). This medical principle stands on its own, however when coexisting with the President's prevalent and repeated deep inhalations, Occam's razor leads us - and the safety of the world necessitates us - to demand immediate action. A full and public medical evaluation of the President must be undertaken.

Here's the Rub: when someone we like and/or trust - exhibits similar
nonverbal behavior (e.g., in everyday scenarios) - if we fall victim to
our confirmation bias - would most people then be able to spot the lie?
His insincerity? Her manipulation? The Answer: Most of the time, No - we would be blind to it. Objectivity matters. Critical thinking
matters. Beware of confirmation bias - when evaluating your own, your
adversaries', or your friends' actions, proposals, and opinions.

Thursday, December 27, 2018

Donald Trump and Melania visited the Al Asad Air Base in Iraq on Wednesday, Dec. 26, 2018. It was the President's first visit to a military base in a war zone. While there, the President and First Lady shared a rare public kiss. What follows is a nonverbal analysis of that kiss as captured in the accompanying photograph (and the cropped close-up below).

Most children can probably tell you that Donald's and Melania's kiss-embrace does not look to be at all affectionate.

Note how Donald Trump is leaning quite far into the kiss. He is leaning forward 20º - 25º, while Melania is leaning in only about 5º.

Whenever affection is lacking or diminished - and one still feels socially obligated to kiss or hug another person - one or both people will virtually always lean forward. The President is a fair amount taller than his wife (His true height is about 6' 0.5" [add another 1" with his shoes], while Melania's actual height is about 5' 6" [and with about 2.5 inches more in her boot heels]). Thus, although both can lean-into a kiss, with all other factors being equal (which may or may not be), the taller person typically leans further into a kiss or hug.

Notice too, the angle of their heads and necks - each of their heads are
tilted backward, away from each other. Moreover, affectionate embraces
will have very frequently exhibit contact of the forehead, temple,
and/or region around the eye with these same regions on the other
person's face/head.

You may have also noticed that Donald Trump's torso is twisted a bit
toward the audience. While Melania's torso and stomach are pointed directly at her
husband, his are rotated to his left. Full body pointing is a signal of
affection and/or respect - while not doing so indicates a lack of
thereof.

Full body pointing (eyes, face, chest, stomach, pelvis, etc.), of course, also includes the
feet. And, while we can't see them directly (and therefore, cannot
discern where they're pointed), we can infer with fairly high accuracy,
that her feet are directly beneath her center of mass - while his left foot
is considerably further back compared with his body.

Leaning into a hug or kiss allows the lower body to be further away from the other person - insulating them from intimacy. In such pseudo displays of affection - the further two people's feet are from their hugger, the less affection is present.

Note that Donald's and Melania's pelvic regions and chests are far apart. Holding each other's upper arms, as they each are doing, ensures such body distancing.

It's interesting to notice that both of their hands are not relaxed. His grip appears to be relatively tight - and this is, in part, due to his center-of-mass being considerably forward (he's a bit off-balance). Sometimes gripping another person's arm in the midst of a hug or kiss is not at all affectionate and can be even a signal the presence of objectifying and/or narcissistic personality traits. There is not enough information in this one image to draw those conclusions, however.

The First Lady's fingers and thumb are all quite widely splayed. This finger position signals a high adrenaline state - and while, kissing on camera with all the world watching (albeit, tape-delayed) is not the perfect environment for intimacy, the First Lady's fingers are not what we would, at all, expect to see amidst even a mild affection display. Her fingers betray her anxiety.

Thus, while his hand-fingers are contracted - hers are
widely extended
and splayed. Neither of their hands are relaxed - but configured oppositely.
Fascinatingly, when one's hands are tense, the face - particularly the
mouth - is almost always tense too.

Kissing styles (whether a peck, a longer lips-only kiss, a French kiss, etc.), vary from person to person, but it's also quite true that, like the leaning-in of the body, the further the lips protrude forward, the less affection exists.

Another obvious (nay, glaring) characteristic of this kiss's lack of affection is Melania's turned cheek. This kiss is not even a lip peck. Between spouses, this simply screams. This nonverbal signal is so overt and ingrained in our culture that this dynamic is a millennia-old metaphor for dissing, distancing, disrespect - signaling an absence of affection.

The President's eyes (eyelids) appear to be slightly open - his lower eyelids are relaxed which strongly suggests such lack of closure. Melania's right eye may also be a bit open, although given her head rotation, this is impossible to tell. When affection is present, there is a strong tendency toward eyelid closure - although, in such public settings, many will also keep their peepers partially open.

SUMMARY: Donald Trump's and Melania's recent kiss-embrace in Iraq is profoundly lacking in affection. And although very few us will ever kiss with the world watching, this display was light-years away from what one would expect of loving and affectionate spouses.

Subscribe To Body Language Success

As a Body Language Expert & Physician, I've benefited dramatically from the Art and Science of Nonverbal Communication for more than 20 years.

______________________________

This website serves as a reference source for the art and science of Body Language/Nonverbal Communication. The views and opinions expressed on this website are those of the author. In an effort to be both practical and academic, many examples from/of varied cultures, politicians, professional athletes, legal cases, public figures, etc., are cited in order to teach and illustrate both the interpretation of others’ body language as well as the projection of one’s own nonverbal skills in many different contexts – not to advance any political, religious or other agenda.

This website serves as a reference source for the art and science of Body Language/Nonverbal Communication. The views and opinions expressed on this website are those of the author. In an effort to be both practical and academic, many examples from/of varied cultures, politicians, professional athletes, legal cases, public figures, etc., are cited in order to teach and illustrate both the interpretation of others’ body language as well as the projection of one’s own nonverbal skills in many different contexts – not to advance any political, religious or other agenda.