Teri Kanefield Profile picture
Aug 31, 2018 14 tweets 4 min read Read on X
(Trump) The final showdown

A friend said she’s worried about what terrible things Trump will do, now that he’s backed into a corner and desperate to hold on to power.

It seems to me we know what he’s going to do—because he’s already doing it.
1/ If you’re worried about a bloody revolution, don’t be.
Bloody revolutions are very 20th century.

Modern authoritarians have a better way: They undermine democratic institutions. They create a world in which facts don’t matter. They badger the institutions until they weaken.
2/ Trump thinks he will beat Mueller.
(He won't. But he thinks he will.)
@MaggieNYT has said repeatedly that Trump thinks he’s “got this.”

His plan:
Torpedo rule of law & undermine the results of any investigation (and trial).
3/ Persuade people that all politicians are corrupt, particularly opponents. If people believe this, indicting Trump becomes political persecution.👇

Dershowitz reinforced this when he said all campaigns violate finance laws.
thehill.com/homenews/media…

4/ This is a variation of the “Deep State” defense: The whole system is corrupt. All of our institutions are rotten and scary, so we can’t believe anything that comes out of them.👇

It's not the person on trial who is guilty. It's the court.

5/ Undermine factuality by telling outrageous lies. Keep changing your story while your press (Fox etc.) acts like its normal.

People who aren't paying close attention get confused.
His critics are kept busy playing Whack-a-Lie (like Whack-a-Mole).
6/ Replace Rule of Law with Cult of Leadership. 👇


From Paxton: The followers believe the Leader’s instincts are superior to the rational logic used by “elites”
Leaders don't follow laws. They embody the mythic destiny of the nation. They are the law.
7/ “Yeah but . . . when he gets indicted!”

We have a presumption of innocence: Innocent until proven guilty in court.
A Trump Trial would be a media circus.

Think of this tweet as part of an intensive effort to massively pollute the jury pool 👇
8/ “We’ll elect a House that will impeach him!” you say.

Impeachment requires a majority of the House.
But removal from office (basically a finding of guilt) requires 2/3 of the Senate.

Senate Trials are media circuses played out mostly in the Court of Public Opinion.
9/ I believe it entirely possible that 2/3 of the Senate will vote to remove— if the evidence and public opinion is strong enough.
Trump is focussed on the public opinion part by trying to hold his 40%.
(If 40% of the Senate holds out, he's safe)
10/ Last but not least: Move quickly to fascism.

For Trump, the lesson of the family separation debacle wasn’t that they went too far, in separating families, but rather: “we need to be smarter if we want to implement something on this scale” again.

11/ IOW, he sees himself in the early trial-and-error stage of implementing fascist-type cruelties on minority populations.

Now they’re revoking citizenship of Americans of Hispanic descent 👇
They want to get rid of birthright citizenship.
fortune.com/2018/08/30/tru…
12/ The Trump admin is moving much faster than the Nazis, who waited years before allowing the people to see cruelty like Trump’s border separation policy.

He's racing with Mueller: With the investigation finish before he institutes full on fascism?
13/ Will he win? Of course not. This isn’t Russia. Our institutions are much stronger.

But you can stop having anxiety wondering what terrible things Trump will do—because he’s already doing them.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Teri Kanefield

Teri Kanefield Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Teri_Kanefield

Apr 29
Everyone will have a different opinion of the strength of the Manhattan criminal case against Trump.

I am offering no opinions on the strength or who will prevail.

I am saying that people are working too hard to explain the case and figure out the legal theory.

1/
The prosecution has everyone confused because they are framing the case as "election fraud" and "election interference" so everyone is trying to connect the crimes we know about to "election fraud."

2/

terikanefield.com/wheres-the-bee…
The legal theory of the case should be clear.

This would be clear: "It is election fraud. Here is how the evidence will support a charge of election fraud." Then show how the behavior supports election fraud.

Does this mean the prosecution will lose? No.

3/
Read 10 tweets
Mar 11
Finished. (Whew)

As promised, all about Legal pundits and the Outrage Industry, with a few cherished conspiracy theories carefully debunked.

Click here to start:

For years, I was perplexed by what I saw on Twitter. . .

1/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
It seemed to me that the dynamics of social media were making people more authoritarian.

Then I started reading experts in political communication and it all started making sense.


2/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
I wrote parts 1 - 5 in November. I thought I was finished, but I wasn't.

There were still things I didn't understand.

Writers often write to understand, so I kept reading, thinking, and writing.



3/ terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Image
Read 5 tweets
Mar 9
Whew! I finished.



Everything I promised: How to listen (or not listen) to legal pundits.

It's also about what is dangerous about the entire industry of punditry, speculation, and cable talk shows.

1/terikanefield.com/invented-narra…

For years I was perplexed by what I was seeing on left-leaning Twitter, political blogs, and partisan reporting.

I had the feeling that, in its way, what I was seeing was comparable to Fox: Lots of bad information and even unhinged conspiracy theories.
2terikanefield.com/invented-narra…
Of course, if I suggested that, I was blasted for "both-sidesing."

Then I discovered an area of scholarship: Communications and the overlap between communications and political science.

I read these books and light bulbs went on.

3/ Image
Read 11 tweets
Mar 2
If Trump can win with everything we know about him, what make people think a finding of guilt would change that?

It makes no sense.
Also what if the jury acquits? It can happen.

I do recall the same people thought impeachment and indictment would cause Trump to crumble.
Another contradiction: when people demanded indictments RIGHT NOW (in 2021 and early 2022) the reason was, "Everyone knows he's guilty! Look at all the evidence!"

We saw the J6 committee findings.

Trump isn't saying "I didn't do it." He's saying, "I had the right to do it."

2
We all know what he did. The question is, "Do people want a president who acts like Trump?"

A lot of people do.

People show me polls that a guilty finding would change minds.

I say rubbish. Use common sense. He lost in 2020 and he lost the popular vote in 2016. . .

3/
Read 6 tweets
Feb 29
The news takes 2 minutes to convey.

"Here is what the court did." That is news.

Listening to people speculate about why the court did it and what it means is not news.

It is entertainment.

But it is a special kind of entertainment.

1/
. . . because it is designed to keep people hooked. People need to stay glued to the screen for hour after hour.

But to hook people, you need to scare them. The Facebook whistleblower testified that content that produces strong emotions like anger gets more engagement.

2/
Fox does the same thing. There is a few minutes of news, but the facts get lost as commentators and TV personalities speculate and scare their audiences.

Before you yell at me for comparing MSNBC to FOX, read all of this:

3/terikanefield.com/can-democracy-…
Read 5 tweets
Feb 29
If I write another blog post addressing the outrage cycle here on Twitter and in the MSNBC ecosystem, it will be to explore why so many people who believe they are liberal or progressive actually want a police state.

1/
Today alone, a handful of people who consider themselves liberal or progressive told me that the "traitors need to be arrested and prosecuted."

In 2019, back when I wore myself out tamping down misinformation, I explained the legal meaning of treason.

2/
Back then, I now realize, people asked politely: "Can Trump be prosecuted for treason (over the Russia election stuff).

I explained that wouldn't happen.

Now it's different. It's more like fascist chants.

3/
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(