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.
Mar 20, 2023·edited Mar 20, 2023Liked by Robert B. Hubbell
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!"
Robert, you stated, "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."
My comments are not 'corrections' of, rather emphasis to the fact that we know as observer citizens, the courts know as released footage of January 6 makes clear, the legal profession knows as documents literally attest to the fact that Trump is a TRAITOR. I cite Cornell University Law, "Treason refers to the betrayal of one's own country by attempting to overthrow the government through waging war against the state or materially aiding its enemies." If I were able, I would underline "materially aiding its enemies". I do not use the term 'traitor' as an epithet, out of frustration or anger. Trump is a traitor by any definition. Why isn't he simply hauled off, thrown in jail and interrogated before he instigates the actions that would cement any doubt of who and what he is.
The act of treason - "the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war. specifically : the act of levying war against the United States or adhering to or giving aid and comfort to its enemies by one who owes it allegiance." - has been fully on display. "Russia if you are listening..." "We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." One, an appeal to our enemy. Second, a call to arms against the government to which he owes allegiance. Trump has materially aided and given comfort to the enemy...domestic and foreign. Technically, Russia is not our sworn enemy. However, they have done all they can to persuade us they are not our friends. I think we need to close the loop on that.
Admittedly, the narrowly defined wording of the law is intended "to guard against the historic use of treason prosecutions by repressive governments to silence otherwise legitimate political opposition." (from the National Constitution Center debate on Treason Clause) They continue, “A citizen intellectually or emotionally may favor the enemy and harbor sympathies or convictions disloyal to this country’s policy or interest, but, so long as he commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy, there is no treason. On the other hand, a citizen may take actions which do aid and comfort the enemy—making a speech critical of the government or opposing its measures, profiteering, striking in defense plants or essential work, and the hundred other things which impair our cohesion and diminish our strength—but if there is no adherence to the enemy in this, if there is no intent to betray, there is no treason.” So be it, the Constitution requires both concrete action and an intent to betray the nation before a citizen can be convicted of treason; expressing traitorous thoughts or intentions alone does not suffice.
Here is my question: At what point does a President (a la citizen) become an enemy of the State? At what point does our legal system allow for the government to protect itself from harm taking action against said perpetrator? It appears that either the violence or the breach of information or performance of lending comfort to the enemy must reach a point where there is actual, imminent harm or acts executed which threaten the fabric of the Democracy. And, what is the position of the military? Who then gives the orders? When is a coup a coup?
When is the supposition of Freedom lost to its own defense of the law?
Your last paragraph says it all, Robert. Sweating bullets is what the Cry Baby is doing and deservingly so. The Stop the Steal guy, Ali Alexander, made some comment that the Trumpettes would surround Mar-A-Lago and not let any law units come near the “moat”. In other words a big FU to the FBI, the police dept., the Secret Service, etc. PERFECT! After putting on the “Bundy” display I wonder how many will be alive.
"There are more of us than them. And we will win. The Lincoln Project
And
Once upon a time Bret Stephens of the NYT was for DeSantis. This is what he said today:
"But for DeSantis to call Russia’s invasion of Ukraine a “territorial dispute” in which the United States does not have a “vital interest” tells me that he’s totally unfit to be president. He’s pandering to the Tucker Carlson crowd. He is parroting Kremlin propaganda. He’s undermining NATO. He’s endangering America by emboldening other dictators with “territorial disputes,” starting with China’s Xi Jinping. He’s betraying the heroism and sacrifice of the Ukrainian people. He’s turning himself into a kind of Diet Pepsi to Trump’s Diet Coke. He’s showing he’s just another George Costanza Republican, whose idea of taking a foreign-policy stand is to “do the opposite” of whatever the Democrats do."
Eye-popping: "A November 2022 poll showed that Disney had a favorability of 55 percent compared to only 38 percent of respondents who approved of DeSantis."
One of the reasons DeSantis won is because the Democratic Party itself in Florida has been struggling. Despite that, he barely beat Andrew Gillum in 2018 so that tells me there are a lot of Democrats in the state. "Orban Ron" has the support of approximately 50 billionaires and that means the only way we get back in the game in Fla. is through grassroots. Fortunately, I have seen a flurry of activity coming from the new party chair, Nikki Fried. If you are on social media, please follow her and share her press releases, etc.
Robert Hubbell, I cannot express how deeply I appreciate this timely conversation.
In my personal view, TFG is a mean-spirited malignant narcissist who does not deserve any oxygen to his inflammatory efforts to end democracy. As you so aptly remind us, we have already come through "many dangers, toils and snares" and the future is unwritten. We will "keep calm and carry on," and continue to "bend the arc of the moral universe towards justice."
When Robert (I feel like we’re on a first name basis 😬) refers to dark times we’ve lived through before, although I was born during this time- the Joe McCarthy and his “Committee on Un-american Activities” era is the analogy I turn to to seek context and comfort for our times. The country was in the grip of a tyrant, media was censored, people encouraged and almost forced to turn against neighbors and colleagues, lives and careers destroyed. Fear was endemic. And our country held. Joe McCarthy was suddenly revealed for what he was and his support evaporated. May we have our own “Have you no sense of decency” moment very, very soon.
One small correction (hope I am right). FOUR possible indictments in three jurisdictions. One from Bragg in NYC. One from Willis in GA. And perhaps TWO recommendations from Smith.
And then there is E. Jean Carroll. I suspect if she wins her lawsuit, she will inspire others.
I see a future where all Trump can do is try to dig out of mountains of legal assaults. He will play the victim and we will get back to cleaning up the mess he made.
History is filled with stories about people like Trump. Powerful demagogues who seemed invulnerable and had passionate followers. They all failed ultimately. They ended up in prison or dead.
Read about Boss Tweed who literally owned NYC during the 19th century. His world collapsed. He went from multi-millionaire to penniless prison inmate quickly. Al Capone killed many, but was busted for tax evasion. Joe McCarthy ruined the lives of many but died of alcoholism. Huey Long captivated the nation with his mixture of populism and hypnotic speeches. But upon his death, an FDR adviser said: ""When he was gone it seemed that a beneficent peace had fallen on the land...."
I am not always a fan of Steve Schmidt and his views but if you haven't seen his last post, I bring it into this discussion. I could have used the same words to describe DT and his impact on this nation yet Steve's point is well taken.
"We have arrived at an hour that is no cause for celebration. It is a tragedy.
Revenge is not justice anymore than is vengeance. This moment of tragedy and shame has been a long time coming, and now it is here. An American president will be handcuffed, fingerprinted and processed as an accused criminal.
We are a nation of laws, and the days ahead will test America. We live in a land where no person is above the law, including Donald Trump. Yet, we are also a nation where no person should be targeted by the law for the achievement of a political end, or the aggrandizement of a prosecutor’s ambitions.
The entire world will be watching. The American justice system must rise to the occasion in a way that our broken political system has failed to do over the last eight years. Putting the country first in this matter requires abandoning every preconception about what Trump did or didn’t do. A jury of his peers will decide his guilt or innocence. That’s the way it works."
While it is hard for me to trust any system right now in America, let's hope that justice is served and let's let all the incessant media regurgitation not sway us from what is at stake here.
Lying about a sizeable pay out to silence a prostitute appears to be the patriotic principle being defended by the MAGA outrage to "take back our country". The astounding disconnects between the moral turpitude of Trump's behavior and the savage MAGA righteousness to project Trump as the savior of American values is beyond any rational discussion.
The antonym for "wokeness" is "sleepness". MAGA political discourse has been reduced to a Pavlovian spinal cord reflex.
As a progressive white Christian, it's very painful to be lumped in with evangelical, MAGA, nationalist Christians. When you don't modify your statements about white Christians with one of the right-wing identifiers, it feels like you're maligning the rest of us who have worked consistently for racial/gender/reproductive justice and inclusion. You'll notice that Ms. Rubin was in fact very careful to specify which brand of Christian she was writing about. Robert I LOVE your column AND I'm a white Christian. The good kind.
McCarthy gives every indication that he's in the bag for Trump. That violence, if inspired by calls from Trump, must be tolerated. Just like he did with the 1/6 insurrection and that awful day's remarkable violence. I think and hope that there must be Republicans out there who don't love Trump and McCarthy more than they love their country. But I wish they were more visible. Instead, it seems like McConnell, Romney and their fellow "normal Republican's" are hiding in their duck blinds waiting to see who will emerge victorious. Not a "Profile in Courage".
Regardless of party a large percentage of voters know Trump lies and has committed multiple criminal offenses both Federal and civil. He will be indicted and tried for these crimes and will be convicted based on the evidence presented to a jury of his peers. Those same people who chanted “ lock her up” now believe the legitimate conviction of Trump is politically motivated which of course it’s not. What is important is reviewing the evidence and testimony being presented and the conclusions reached by a jury and the execution of the rule of law and our legal process. What will be most telling is what Republicans will blindly support Trump regardless of the evidence and the impact it could have on their re-election. We all need to be watching closely and taking notes.
Thanks for writing such a positive forward looking and optimistic summary every day. I look forward to it. I'd love to see your take on Matthew Desmond's new book, Poverty, By America. He has an op-ed in the NYT today on the subject of "abolishing" poverty in America.
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!"
Robert, you stated, "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."
My comments are not 'corrections' of, rather emphasis to the fact that we know as observer citizens, the courts know as released footage of January 6 makes clear, the legal profession knows as documents literally attest to the fact that Trump is a TRAITOR. I cite Cornell University Law, "Treason refers to the betrayal of one's own country by attempting to overthrow the government through waging war against the state or materially aiding its enemies." If I were able, I would underline "materially aiding its enemies". I do not use the term 'traitor' as an epithet, out of frustration or anger. Trump is a traitor by any definition. Why isn't he simply hauled off, thrown in jail and interrogated before he instigates the actions that would cement any doubt of who and what he is.
The act of treason - "the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war. specifically : the act of levying war against the United States or adhering to or giving aid and comfort to its enemies by one who owes it allegiance." - has been fully on display. "Russia if you are listening..." "We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." One, an appeal to our enemy. Second, a call to arms against the government to which he owes allegiance. Trump has materially aided and given comfort to the enemy...domestic and foreign. Technically, Russia is not our sworn enemy. However, they have done all they can to persuade us they are not our friends. I think we need to close the loop on that.
Admittedly, the narrowly defined wording of the law is intended "to guard against the historic use of treason prosecutions by repressive governments to silence otherwise legitimate political opposition." (from the National Constitution Center debate on Treason Clause) They continue, “A citizen intellectually or emotionally may favor the enemy and harbor sympathies or convictions disloyal to this country’s policy or interest, but, so long as he commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy, there is no treason. On the other hand, a citizen may take actions which do aid and comfort the enemy—making a speech critical of the government or opposing its measures, profiteering, striking in defense plants or essential work, and the hundred other things which impair our cohesion and diminish our strength—but if there is no adherence to the enemy in this, if there is no intent to betray, there is no treason.” So be it, the Constitution requires both concrete action and an intent to betray the nation before a citizen can be convicted of treason; expressing traitorous thoughts or intentions alone does not suffice.
Here is my question: At what point does a President (a la citizen) become an enemy of the State? At what point does our legal system allow for the government to protect itself from harm taking action against said perpetrator? It appears that either the violence or the breach of information or performance of lending comfort to the enemy must reach a point where there is actual, imminent harm or acts executed which threaten the fabric of the Democracy. And, what is the position of the military? Who then gives the orders? When is a coup a coup?
When is the supposition of Freedom lost to its own defense of the law?
Your last paragraph says it all, Robert. Sweating bullets is what the Cry Baby is doing and deservingly so. The Stop the Steal guy, Ali Alexander, made some comment that the Trumpettes would surround Mar-A-Lago and not let any law units come near the “moat”. In other words a big FU to the FBI, the police dept., the Secret Service, etc. PERFECT! After putting on the “Bundy” display I wonder how many will be alive.
Many thanks, Robert, for your newsletter today. I offer Steve Schmidt's "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" newsletter to anchor your thoughts:
https://steveschmidt.substack.com/p/donald-trump-innocent-until-proven
Democrats
48,375,045
Republicans
36,910,987
Independent
42,267,160
World Population Review
2023
"There are more of us than them. And we will win. The Lincoln Project
And
Once upon a time Bret Stephens of the NYT was for DeSantis. This is what he said today:
"But for DeSantis to call Russia’s invasion of Ukraine a “territorial dispute” in which the United States does not have a “vital interest” tells me that he’s totally unfit to be president. He’s pandering to the Tucker Carlson crowd. He is parroting Kremlin propaganda. He’s undermining NATO. He’s endangering America by emboldening other dictators with “territorial disputes,” starting with China’s Xi Jinping. He’s betraying the heroism and sacrifice of the Ukrainian people. He’s turning himself into a kind of Diet Pepsi to Trump’s Diet Coke. He’s showing he’s just another George Costanza Republican, whose idea of taking a foreign-policy stand is to “do the opposite” of whatever the Democrats do."
Eye-popping: "A November 2022 poll showed that Disney had a favorability of 55 percent compared to only 38 percent of respondents who approved of DeSantis."
One of the reasons DeSantis won is because the Democratic Party itself in Florida has been struggling. Despite that, he barely beat Andrew Gillum in 2018 so that tells me there are a lot of Democrats in the state. "Orban Ron" has the support of approximately 50 billionaires and that means the only way we get back in the game in Fla. is through grassroots. Fortunately, I have seen a flurry of activity coming from the new party chair, Nikki Fried. If you are on social media, please follow her and share her press releases, etc.
https://twitter.com/NikkiFried
https://www.instagram.com/nikkifriedfl/?hl=en
https://www.tiktok.com/@nikkifriedfl?lang=en
https://www.facebook.com/NikkiForFL/
Robert Hubbell, I cannot express how deeply I appreciate this timely conversation.
In my personal view, TFG is a mean-spirited malignant narcissist who does not deserve any oxygen to his inflammatory efforts to end democracy. As you so aptly remind us, we have already come through "many dangers, toils and snares" and the future is unwritten. We will "keep calm and carry on," and continue to "bend the arc of the moral universe towards justice."
When Robert (I feel like we’re on a first name basis 😬) refers to dark times we’ve lived through before, although I was born during this time- the Joe McCarthy and his “Committee on Un-american Activities” era is the analogy I turn to to seek context and comfort for our times. The country was in the grip of a tyrant, media was censored, people encouraged and almost forced to turn against neighbors and colleagues, lives and careers destroyed. Fear was endemic. And our country held. Joe McCarthy was suddenly revealed for what he was and his support evaporated. May we have our own “Have you no sense of decency” moment very, very soon.
One small correction (hope I am right). FOUR possible indictments in three jurisdictions. One from Bragg in NYC. One from Willis in GA. And perhaps TWO recommendations from Smith.
And then there is E. Jean Carroll. I suspect if she wins her lawsuit, she will inspire others.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3906213-trump-carroll-agree-to-combine-defamation-lawsuits-into-single-case/
I see a future where all Trump can do is try to dig out of mountains of legal assaults. He will play the victim and we will get back to cleaning up the mess he made.
History is filled with stories about people like Trump. Powerful demagogues who seemed invulnerable and had passionate followers. They all failed ultimately. They ended up in prison or dead.
Read about Boss Tweed who literally owned NYC during the 19th century. His world collapsed. He went from multi-millionaire to penniless prison inmate quickly. Al Capone killed many, but was busted for tax evasion. Joe McCarthy ruined the lives of many but died of alcoholism. Huey Long captivated the nation with his mixture of populism and hypnotic speeches. But upon his death, an FDR adviser said: ""When he was gone it seemed that a beneficent peace had fallen on the land...."
I am not always a fan of Steve Schmidt and his views but if you haven't seen his last post, I bring it into this discussion. I could have used the same words to describe DT and his impact on this nation yet Steve's point is well taken.
"We have arrived at an hour that is no cause for celebration. It is a tragedy.
Revenge is not justice anymore than is vengeance. This moment of tragedy and shame has been a long time coming, and now it is here. An American president will be handcuffed, fingerprinted and processed as an accused criminal.
We are a nation of laws, and the days ahead will test America. We live in a land where no person is above the law, including Donald Trump. Yet, we are also a nation where no person should be targeted by the law for the achievement of a political end, or the aggrandizement of a prosecutor’s ambitions.
The entire world will be watching. The American justice system must rise to the occasion in a way that our broken political system has failed to do over the last eight years. Putting the country first in this matter requires abandoning every preconception about what Trump did or didn’t do. A jury of his peers will decide his guilt or innocence. That’s the way it works."
While it is hard for me to trust any system right now in America, let's hope that justice is served and let's let all the incessant media regurgitation not sway us from what is at stake here.
Below is the link to Steve's post:
https://steveschmidt.substack.com/p/donald-trump-innocent-until-proven?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=836444&post_id=109345311&isFreemail=false&utm_medium=email
Lying about a sizeable pay out to silence a prostitute appears to be the patriotic principle being defended by the MAGA outrage to "take back our country". The astounding disconnects between the moral turpitude of Trump's behavior and the savage MAGA righteousness to project Trump as the savior of American values is beyond any rational discussion.
The antonym for "wokeness" is "sleepness". MAGA political discourse has been reduced to a Pavlovian spinal cord reflex.
As a progressive white Christian, it's very painful to be lumped in with evangelical, MAGA, nationalist Christians. When you don't modify your statements about white Christians with one of the right-wing identifiers, it feels like you're maligning the rest of us who have worked consistently for racial/gender/reproductive justice and inclusion. You'll notice that Ms. Rubin was in fact very careful to specify which brand of Christian she was writing about. Robert I LOVE your column AND I'm a white Christian. The good kind.
McCarthy gives every indication that he's in the bag for Trump. That violence, if inspired by calls from Trump, must be tolerated. Just like he did with the 1/6 insurrection and that awful day's remarkable violence. I think and hope that there must be Republicans out there who don't love Trump and McCarthy more than they love their country. But I wish they were more visible. Instead, it seems like McConnell, Romney and their fellow "normal Republican's" are hiding in their duck blinds waiting to see who will emerge victorious. Not a "Profile in Courage".
Regardless of party a large percentage of voters know Trump lies and has committed multiple criminal offenses both Federal and civil. He will be indicted and tried for these crimes and will be convicted based on the evidence presented to a jury of his peers. Those same people who chanted “ lock her up” now believe the legitimate conviction of Trump is politically motivated which of course it’s not. What is important is reviewing the evidence and testimony being presented and the conclusions reached by a jury and the execution of the rule of law and our legal process. What will be most telling is what Republicans will blindly support Trump regardless of the evidence and the impact it could have on their re-election. We all need to be watching closely and taking notes.
Thanks for writing such a positive forward looking and optimistic summary every day. I look forward to it. I'd love to see your take on Matthew Desmond's new book, Poverty, By America. He has an op-ed in the NYT today on the subject of "abolishing" poverty in America.