In the Washington Monthly today, Joshua Douglas says:
The lengthy delay in deciding the Trump immunity case and the likely appeals that will follow the complicated ruling mean that Americans will not have the knowledge they need—whether Trump is guilty of election subversion—before they vote in four months.
I can't count the number of times I've read this. But is it really true? In the case of Trump's hush money trial, you could argue that the case was obscure and complicated, so the jury's verdict really had an impact.¹
The election interference case is just the opposite. "Stop the Steal" was a big deal for months. The January 6 insurrection received huge attention at the time it happened and Trump's role was endlessly dissected. A House committee spent months on public hearings. Hundreds of protesters were sent to prison. The press has continued to chew on it ever since.
Surely pretty much everyone in America has an opinion about this already. Is it really likely that a trial and a jury decision would do anything to change that? Technically I agree with Douglas's point, but in real life I doubt it really matters. We already know everything we're going to know.
¹Although even at that, it barely made a ripple in public opinion.
I was talking about this last night with a friend - what makes a movement respectable? MAGA has been skirting the line of respectability from the beginning. How have they avoided falling into complete discredit? After all, it is disreputable to literally call yourself a fascist. But so long as you keep denying that you are a fascist (wink, wink), then you can keep it going until you lose. The Nazis didn't become disreputable in Germany until the utterly and completely lost. It does not seem to matter what horrors you commit along the way. As long as you win, you are respectable.
There was the moment on and after January 6th, when MAGA fell into such disrepute, it would have been possible to finish it off. But Democrats and other establishment types held back and hesitated - even if only a little. And that was enough. MAGA is back and even more threatening than ever.
Democrats must be willing in future to act much more decisively to discredit MAGA. Then next time there's a January 6th event, if Democrats are in any sort of position of authority, they must finish the job. No hesitation. Immediately arrest, impeach, and imprison the perps.
And also the media needs to stop giving them the both-sides, benefit of the doubt treatment.
‘skirted the line’? Nope — the line was left behind on Day One, with the slander of the undocumented.
This is true from my perspective and a significant chunk of the electorate (like you), who will never support Trump or MAGA. I wouldn't want my daughter dating a Republican, for instance. (This is often compared to parents 100 years ago who would object to their daughter dating a Catholic or whatever). But for many Americans, it's all just both sides being crazy. Oh, those whacky Trump people and those angry Democrats, lol! January 6th was years ago! Get over it!
There's nothing to be done about that attitude for now, but if Biden and/or Harris wins the upcoming election and MAGA reacts with violence, they better have a plan to put those people in the slammer ASAP.
That Thing You're Worried About (Trump never, ever facing any kind of accountability for trying to overthrow the government)? It's not a big deal to Kevin Drum.
He didn’t address the issue of TFG’s evading a trial. He just made a claim of fact, that few minds would be changed by a verdict. It’s a reasonable claim.
I'm not so sure. There really are fence sitters, and it might change their minds or convince them to stay home instead of voting for Mango Mussolini.
There will be no more trials until after the election, and SCOTUS shit canned almost all charges for crimes committed when he was in office. If he is elected (far more likely after last Thursday), he will certainly have his flunkies at DOJ dismiss all Federal charges.
Yeah… no one cares. Let’s start coming to grips with the upcoming challenges.
There is a decent chance the 34 felony convictions get tossed out because inadmissible evidence was used. The evidence was admissible under any reasonable interpretation of the law, but it is not admissible under Trump v US. When people go to vote, Trump will not be a convicted felon.
The election interference case must be better known. Kevin's post gives the game away. He only writes about shouting MAGA-heads and the insurrection (which was a chaotic riot with no clear plot line).
"We already know everything we're going to know."
Incorrect. The interference case is about the bogus Electors, and that wasn't a bunch of Proud Boys waltzing through the Capitol in January. It was a weeks-long, carefully planned scheme, involving lawyers finding ways to circumvent the Electoral machinery, and which Trump was a party to. There is a narrative with a solid backbone. Cold and calculating, which in some ways can be more terrifying than one afternoon of mayhem.
I’m sure a lot of the fence-sitters don’t pay a lot of attention to politics, and may have never heard or read what TFG said to the crowd/mob on Jan. 6. But at least some must be aware that he did nothing for hours while the Capitol was being ransacked and police officers beaten. Incitement might be disputable, but the failure to act is beyond question. People need to be reminded of that.
Some people only see one headline a week. “Trump Convicted Again” will get through to them if anything will.
Can we please stop saying "election subversion?"
It was an attempted coup d'etat. And that makes it the constitutional definition of treason.
Sure, everybody may have an opinion but it doesn't mean they have the facts and THAT is the problem.