Absolutely killer read. If you’ve been thinking about toning it down on calling out the dangers of a Trump win, read this first.
That was an awesome piece. And like Wittes said, Lawfare really has been on top of this issue for longer than most. This part in particular drove it home for me:
it is possible to be at the same time a threat to democracy and a victim of a horrible crime. The fact that Trump has been shot emphatically does not mean that his behavior does *not *threaten American democracy—just as the fact that Huey Long, the populist governor of Louisiana in the 1930s, was assassinated did not acquit him of being a corrupt authoritarian. That Trump is also a corrupt authoritarian surely cannot justify his attempted assassination or any political violence, but just as surely, the fact that a person attempted his assassination does not nullify the threat he poses. The two facts must be allowed to coexist.
As much as I agree political violence doesn’t have a place in modern society, authoritarian governments literally make it the only option.
We aren’t there yet but there’s little doubt in my mind that if Trump wins, he will make what is essentially a rigged game right now into nothing but a formality.
100% agree with you. I posted this yesterday, but to me, I really see a parallel on what happens with violence in illegal drug trades. When you remove legal solutions to hold people accountable, violence becomes increasingly likely. A drug dealer can’t go to the police if someone robs them, infringes on their turf, or messes with their supply chain. Violence is their only form of recourse.
We saw it to some extent on January 6th. People - very wrongly - were led to believe that their votes didn’t matter and attempted to storm the capital as a result. While these people were manipulated by Trump, it still shows the point: if people think the system isn’t working, they will turn to violence as their last resort.
When you look at the attempt to shoot Trump, I don’t condone it, but I certainly understand it. We’ve had a fundamental breakdown in our system of checks and balances. Just to name a few:
- Trump’s attorney general neutered the results of the Mueller investigation, allowing Trump to escape accountability.
- The Republican Senate refused to hold him accountable in two separate impeachment trials: one for blackmailing Ukraine for aid in exchange for fake dirt on Biden, and the other for attempting to overthrow our government.
- The Supreme Court, which was packed by Trump judges against political norms, has said that presidents have effective immunity from all crimes.
- While Trump was supposed to be sentenced for his 34 felonies on July 11, sentencing was delayed due to the Supreme Court ruling.
When you look at Trump blatantly committing crimes and not being held accountable over and over again, it’s easy to think that the system is broken. And when people think the system isn’t working, they see violence as the only remaining option.
A perpetrator of crime and a threat to democracy.
A victim AND committer of crimes.
Also a practicer of crime
He’s a victim of his own violent rhetoric, no democrats were running around encouraging “second amendment people” to “take care” of their political opponents. I hope his brush with death has taught him that violence is not a joke or something to encourage, but I doubt it.
Great piece. Too bad so many nowadays seem unable to hold more than one idea at a time in their head.
Solid points all around. I do doubt Trump would be concerned if Biden was shot beyond platitudes to cover his own ass.
He’d probably say there are good people on boths sides again.
…in a polarized environment in which some people are unstable, evil, or for whatever other reason prone to take the law into their own hands…
I insist that violence has no legitimate place in our political system and condemn both this act specifically and any physical attacks on politicians or anyone else for their political expression.
I sincerely hope the system has all of the tools and mechanisms necessary to prevent the rise of fascism in the US, because if it doesn’t, and it turns out that stopping fascism will require stepping outside the bounds of the law, then fascism will rise, as it seems most people are unwilling to break the law under any circumstances.
It’s a good thing Trump can’t read good. Or he might take umbrage at that article.
