I acknowledge that the motto used by the British government to sustain public morale before the German blitz in 1940 has been overused. But the sentiment is appropriate for this moment in American history. In the next several months, a former president will likely face three indictments in three jurisdictions for three separate sets of crimes—all of which relate to his effort to gain or retain the presidency. That's a lot! To say the indictments will dominate American politics for years to come would be an understatement.
A "once-in-the-life-of-a-nation" event will be made more trying because Trump has signaled his defense strategy—threatening violence to intimidate the participants in the judicial process, to disrupt the proceedings, and to undermine the legitimacy of the verdicts. Although we do not have confirmation that Trump will be indicted, he and his legal team have begun leaking information to the press and mounting attacks from Trump's vanity social media platform. Based on those statements, Trump expects to be indicted, to surrender, and to enter a plea this week.
In language eerily reminiscent of Trump's incitement on January 6th, Trump posted a statement calling on his supporters to "PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!" That was the only encouragement Trump's followers needed to set social media aflame with calls to violence to protect Trump. Basement-dwelling trolls and miscreants called for MAGA extremists to create a "patriot moat" around Mar-a-Lago and to commence a "civil war." See Rolling Stone, MAGA Forum Suggests 'Patriot Moat' at Mar-a-Lago to Stop Trump Arrest.
Marjorie Taylor Greene echoed those calls with a tweet urging Republicans to adopt a "scorched earth" strategy and claimed that "feds" would turn the MAGA protests into "violence." (FYI: a common conspiracy theory about January 6th asserts that "feds" provoked the protestors to violence.)
The most disgraceful reaction came from Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who should have condemned Trump's oblique call for violence. Instead, McCarthy legitimized Trump's call to "take back our nation" by tweeting that he is
directing relevant committees to immediately investigate if federal funds are being used to subvert our democracy by interfering in elections with politically motivated prosecutions.
Huh? Someone needs to do a wellness check on McCarthy to see if he is okay. His statement was so monumentally stupid that he might be feigning illness to distract from the fact he did not immediately rebuke Trump's implied call for violence. His failure to condemn Trump makes McCarthy an accessory to any violence that follows. He has disgraced the Speaker's office in a way seldom seen in our nation's history.
[Update: Late Sunday evening, McCarthy tried to walk back the implications of Trump's post and McCarthy's tweet. McCarthy called for "calmness," saying,
"I think the thing that you may misinterpret when President Trump talks and someone says that they can protest, he's probably referring to my tweet: educate people about what's going on. He's not talking in a harmful way, and nobody should."
As I said above: "Huh?"]
After January 6th, it would be irresponsible to dismiss the potential for violence. Indeed, it seems inevitable that there will be isolated incidents during proceedings that will span years. Trump will use his campaign rallies to inflame passions and foment unrest.
But . . . we should keep calm and carry on. Whatever happens, our system of justice is bigger and more durable than Trump. He is using the threat of violence to instill fear and raise anxiety in those who seek justice. We cannot surrender to the second-rate tactics of a third-rate demagogue.
Remaining calm will require discipline and perspective, especially because any violence will be amplified and distorted by the media beyond all recognition. The media expects violence and is prepared to deliver round-the-clock replays of every incident without respite or perspective.
If violence occurs, we need only reflect on the vastness of America, on its size and heft, on its immensity and scale to place the incidents in perspective. If several dozen protestors disrupt traffic in four blocks of Manhattan, that leaves 332 million Americans peacefully going about their lives in nearly four million square miles of a land that remains effectively boundless more than two centuries after its founding.
Perspective will not diminish the significance or depravity of any violence, but it will help us remain focused and committed to ensuring that justice prevails—come what may. In this, we cannot fail. We must not. If we retreat or relent because of threats of violence, the rule of law is no more.
While we should not underestimate the danger posed by Trump, America's strength is rooted in justice and fortified by righteousness. That strength will allow America to hold Trump accountable for his crimes and endure for generations to come. Future generations will know Trump as a faithless servant and traitor—and as a convicted felon.
Keep calm and carry on. We have elections to win in 2024 and cannot be distracted by the slow wheels of justice.
This explains a lot.
The current wave of retrograde extremism and mean-spirited divisiveness is sometimes difficult to comprehend. One partial explanation is that an entire generation of white Christian evangelicals see their ranks and power slipping away, and they are angry and fearful about the future. That is the thesis of Jennifer Rubin's op-ed in the Washington Post, Why white Christian nationalists are in such a panic.
Rubin writes about the newly released PRRI 2022 Census of American Religion— based on over 40,000 interviews conducted last year. In short, the census confirms a decades-long decline in the absolute and relative portion of Americans who identify as white Christians. The percentage decline of white Christians has been dramatic: 2008 (54%), 2014 (47%), and 2022 (42%).
Per the report, the MAGA subset of white Christians has been particularly hard hit by the decline:
The group that has declined the most is at the core of the MAGA movement, the group most devoted to Christian nationalism. "White evangelical Protestants have experienced the steepest decline. As recently as 2006, white evangelical Protestants comprised nearly one-quarter of Americans (23%). By the time of Trump's rise to power, their numbers had dipped to 16.8%," Jones explains. "Today, white evangelical Protestants comprise only 13.6% of Americans."
In a closely divided electorate, a dedicated group representing 13.6% of the population can nonetheless have an outsized impact on elections decided by a few hundred or a few thousand votes. That, in turn, explains the unholy dedication of white Christians to the suppression of votes.
The shrinking number of Americans who identify as Christians should be a cause for reflection and introspection. It is not—at least not for MAGA Christians. Per Rubin:
With those kind of numbers, the responsible thing to do would be to think about "fixing" what's wrong by adapting to a changing market. Instead, many in this cohort have doubled down, becoming the foot soldiers in the red-hatted MAGA movement. The decline isn't going to be reversed by angry, gray-haired folks demanding abortion bans and "don't say gay" bills.
While we can never count on Republicans to defeat themselves, neither should we overestimate the strength of our opponent. The current wave of anti-choice, anti-LGBTQ legislation across the nation is being driven by a shrinking minority of religious extremists who appear to be driving people away from their church with their politics. That fact should help us maintain perspective about our prospects for success in reversing the wave of hate-based legislation sweeping the nation.
Has DeSantis peaked?
Last week, there was a spate of reporting on Ron DeSantis's lack of charisma, warmth, friendliness, table manners, and social skills. The articles were likely based on a coordinated attack on DeSantis by Trump loyalists, but they achieved their intended effect—raising media awareness about DeSantis's goofy awkwardness. See the Daily Beast, Ron DeSantis Is Completely Out of Touch With Ordinary Americans, and the Orlando Sentinel, Why Ron DeSantis won't be president | Steve Bousquet.
The point is not that Ron DeSantis is stiff and unnatural around people, it is that his opponents are portraying him as awkward and unlikeable. If someone says that enough times about you in the media, people begin to believe it.
But DeSantis is also on the wrong side of the culture war. Per the Daily Beast article above, DeSantis needs to be more woke about how Americans feel about being woke:
And yet, according to a recent Ipsos/USA Today poll, 56 percent of Americans have a positive association with the term "woke" and understand it to mean being "informed, educated on, and aware of social injustices." Only 39 percent have a negative connotation with the word. For hardcore conservatives, "woke" is a four-letter word. But not for the rest of the country.
And for all of DeSantis' attacks on Disney, the company is actually more popular than the Florida governor in his own state. A November 2022 poll showed that Disney had a favorability of 55 percent compared to only 38 percent of respondents who approved of DeSantis.
And life just got more complicated for DeSantis. Trump has been rallying Republicans to condemn the forthcoming Manhattan indictment. Per media reports, Trump's operatives have been portraying opposition to the indictments as a "litmus test" for loyalty to Trump and the GOP.
Most Republicans have fallen into lockstep in condemning the Manhattan prosecution—but not DeSantis, who has remained silent. His silence is leading to mounting criticism of the Florida governor. See Daily Beast, Trumpworld Attacks DeSantis Over Not Condemning Looming Trump Indictment.
Or course, the point is not to criticize DeSantis for failing to come to Trump's defense. It is to note that the indictment(s) will scramble GOP presidential politics—to the benefit of Democrats. The effort to indict Trump is not political, but the indictments will hurt Trump and his Republican competitors. We should remember that fact as we navigate the choppy waters caused by Trump's indictment.
Concluding Thoughts.
Most readers of this newsletter have lived through turbulent times that make the turmoil of the present moment pale in comparison: Governors who defied desegregation orders of the Supreme Court, civil rights boycotts that shut-down bus routes throughout the South, anti-war protests that effectively canceled all classes at many universities for a year, the simultaneous terrorist attacks on 9-11, and the shut-down of the economy due to the Covid pandemic.
Indicting Trump will be challenging and difficult for the nation. The only thing worse for the nation than indicting Trump would be not indicting him. We owe it to the Constitution and to future generations of Americans to seek justice. We cannot let them down.
Talk to you tomorrow!
I am pinning my comment to the top:
Thanks for including the link to Schmidt's excellent essay, which I recommend to others for their consideration. The link is here: https://steveschmidt.substack.com/p/donald-trump-innocent-until-proven
I excerpt below Steve Schmidt's thesis, with which I DISAGREE.
"Donald Trump is innocent. Though he disgusts me — and you — he has rights guaranteed under the Constitution of the United States. Trump’s attempt to burn the US Constitution to ashes does not exempt him from its protections. Revenge is not justice anymore than is vengeance."
To be clear, Trump is entitled to due process and equal protection under law. He is entitled to a fair and impartial trial by a jury of his peers who consider only relevant and admissible evidence. Those jurors should not presume his guilt, but should instead render a verdict based on the evidence. And it would be wrong for others to attempt to inflame or prejudice the jurors against him in considering the evidence. That is all he is entitled to under the law.
But Donald Trump is not innocent--and wer are not jurors called to make an evidentiary determination in rendering a verdict. Granting someone a fair trial does not require us to enter a metaphysical realm of feigned ignorance where we suspend our senses, intellect, and powers of reasoning and inference.
I saw Donald Trump commit the crime of insurrection. So did tens of millions of Americans. We watched it live, on TV on January 6th. I witnessed him--with my own eyes--tell the Vice President to disregard the Constitution. I watched him threaten Pence with the subtlety of a Mob boss telling his henchmen to "take care of" a witness. I watched Trump say, "We are going to the Capitol" because "If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore." The crowd knew what he meant and acted accordingly. Insurrectionists have testified to Trump's role in their incitement in their own trials.
Don't tell me that Donal Trump is innocent. He is not.
I witnessed a violent assault on our Capitol while Trump encouraged the insurrectionists by telling them not to harm the Police, but failing to tell them to leave so that Congress could resume its constitutional duty of counting the electoral votes. I watched as Trump did nothing while his supporters interfered with a constitutional duty of Congress to confirm the results of a free and fair election.
I witnessed Trump telling the rioters to go home only after the Capitol police had restored order, telling them "Go home. We love you. You're very special."
Do not tell me Donald Trump is innocent. Do not tell me that seeking to protect the rule of law is vengeance and that seeking justice is "revenge." We are past fooling ourselves. Trump is engaged in a second coup attempt--and this time, his target is the system of justice rather than Congress.
We are right to raise the alarm in plain language that does not obscure the truth: Donald Trump is guilty. He must be held to account in a court of law. If we fail to do that, we will fail the Constitution and future generations.
Donald Trump is entitled to a fair trial. He may be convicted, he may be acquitted. But do not tell me he is innocent. Do not conflate an evidentiary presumption binding on jurors required to render a verdict with what I am entitled to believe and how I am entitled to act.
No, Steve Schmidt. Donald Trump is not innocent. That is an instruction given to jurors considering an evidentiary burden that must be met by the prosecution. Do not confuse Trump's right to a fair trial with his guilt. They are two different things--and we ignore that difference at our peril.
Please keep reminding us about "Perspective," Robert. The impact of adverse microscopic events will be magnified by both the proponents (tfg's "echolytes" and "sickophants") and the media as they seek attention to sustain their respective livelihoods.
Trump is but one man, certainly undeserving of special favor. He consumes far more oxygen than anyone is entitled to, and must be brought to justice. As he is a master at projection, we should be the ones to "TAKE OUR NATION BACK!"