Let's be clear about what we're talking about with the attempted coup on January 6, including the new info in the John Eastman memo.
We're not talking about "another term" with Trump as president.
If he would have pulled this off, he would effectively be a dictator. . .
1/
Because he would have (1) overthrown an election and (2) installed himself as president in place of the duly elected president.
It would mean all democratic institutions had broken down.
It would also mean that the population would either tolerate it or be subdued by force.
2/
When we say "he came close" the question is "close to what?"
I believe we came close to a major constitutional crisis and possibly a great deal of violence and bloodshed.
3/
"What if the Supreme Court allowed it?"
The courts had already made clear they were not going to hand Trump the election.
I believe, to succeed (meaning take over all parts of the government) he would have needed the military willing to participate in a military coup.
4/
The violence we would have experienced is whatever these guys would have been able to pull off.
It would have been them against law enforcement.
5/
Right-wing extremists would rather live in an autocracy than a liberal democracy.
I am using "liberal democracy" in this sense⤵️
Liberal democracies tend to expand (include more people) and they see this as illegitimate.
6/
The current right-wing extremism we are seeing today is a reaction to the civil rights movement and changes brought about since 1954 when the Supreme Court declared racial segregation illegal.
They can't and won't tolerate an inclusive government.
Scholar Hungarian scholar Balint Magyar offers a theory that explains why the US held out against the same tactics that caused other countries to collapse into autocracy.
His theory also explains why comparisons across nations don’t always work.
A key error here is that it assumes that the Electoral Count Act is illegal and assumes that states can set aside the laws they have on the books for allocating their electors.
In fact, rules governing the election have to be in place before the election.
The idea was to create chaos and give Trump's claim that he won the election more legitimacy.
He still wouldn't have stayed in the White House because this wouldn't have worked -- but it may have persuaded more people that Biden didn't win, which undermines the government.
By the way, some of left-leaning Twitter has a weird* idea of criminal law and the justice system. They want justice to be swift and brutal.
The problem: That can backfire. Right?
*authoritarian
2/
For someone to be prosecuted, there has to be a specific statute on the books, and the prosecutor has to prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. This is a high standard.
One question is whether Trump has violated Georgia Code § 21-2-604.
The latest attacks are in the Calfornia recall with a chorus of voices, including TFG, insisting that if Newsom wins, it will be because the election was rigged (CA went for Biden 63.5% to Trump 34.3)
The problem: A swatch of angry and militant Californians think it’s true.
3/
. . . for government actions that are (1) needed to protect public health and are (2) reasonable and limited in scope.
He said a school district’s decision to require student masking to prevent the spread of the virus falls within that exemption.
2/
I can't imagine such a debate. If Trump wants the nomination (and is in a position to be the nominee -- I am skeptical) I suspect everyone will step back.