On one hand, I believe that direct evidence will come out making it hard to deny that Trump committed crimes.
On the other hand, the Republicans have long seen lawbreaking as a badge of honor.
They glorify lawbreaking . . .
2/
There is a fantasy that indictments will create a huge change in how people vote. I don't think that.
Can you imagine these guys saying, "Trump got indicted! Oh no! He's in big trouble! We should fold up shop and learn to love liberal democracy."
I don't think so.
3/
I've talked elsewhere about why Republicans glorify lawbreaking: They don't think the laws should exist. They want to go back to the days before the New Deal and before the Civil Rights movement when there were very few limitations on what white men could do.
4/
On the frontier, they could grab land.
Before sexual harassment and other laws, they could grab women. For much of our history, rape was a property crime. Rape laws were intended to protect [white] men from false accusations. They weren't there to protect women from attack.
5/
Women were expected to guard the goods. Don't get me started on the history of rape laws (even though I already sort of got started 🤣)
Before the new deal and regulatory agencies, white men could fix prices, manipulate markets, launder money, etc.
6/
Trump and pals will spin any indictments or convictions as political prosecution and their followers will believe it.
Another way to see it is that things that seem obvious to us are not obvious to others.
7/
Susan B. Anthony had a difficult time persuading people, including women, that women should have equal rights.
It should be obvious that the party responsible for the insurrection and who is now shielding the insurrectionists should be driven to power.
8/
So how do we make the public understand?
It's hard. It was hard for abolitionists to get rid of slavery. It was hard for women to get the right to vote.
I think there is a strong pull toward autocracy (slavery and Jim Crow were forms of autocracy).
I've never lived in an autocracy, but my husband and his family experienced the Pinochet dictatorship, so I can report second hand:
Your life goes on basically. You get up, have your coffee, go to work.
But, If you get into trouble, you get no help from the government.
14/
In an autocracy, the government isn't there to help you.
But today in the US, most people don't understand how much help they get from the government and how much they rely on public agencies designed to promote the public interest.
15/
Agree ⤵️ In an autocracy, you have to be careful with what you say. You can't offend those in power.
But a lot of these things, non-political people don't notice in their daily lives.
And there was rampant corruption throughout a lot of US history.
. . .corruption in the sense that in the 19th century, the wealthiest people were slaveowners who controlled all three branches of government and passed laws to benefit themselves.
Corruption in the sense that fixing prices wasn't illegal.
Consumer protection laws are new.
17/
Begin rant.
The criminal justice system doesn't exist to give people "faith."
Punishment is pain inflicted by the state.
It's serious and somber. Treat it respectfully. It's not a circus.
Nobody should need to see people punished to give them "faith."
Rant over.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's just easier to destroy rule of law than to preserve it.
It's easier to dismantle a government than to use government to improve the lives of the people, particularly when another party is trying to dismantle the government.
That's why Republicans have the easier task.
Huge advantage: Right-wing authoritarians fall in line. They prefer to move in lockstep.
On the other hand, if you want to move forward and improve people's lives, there are lots of different paths and people disagree on how to best move forward.
I would have been shocked if they took it. This is a blow to all the Trump allies saying they don't have to comply with the select committee because of executive privilege.
Trump can try again with future tranches of docs -- if he enjoys losing 🤣.
This should matter. Trump came to power on two lies
🔹"I'm a successful businessman" positioning him as a strongman and winner, and
🔹Birtherism, signaling that he was a white supremacist tapping into white grievance.
1/
Back when I was naive (2015) I thought it would matter if his base had to grapple with the fact that he wasn't successful: He inherited wealth and then cheated and swindled.
Now I'm afraid lie #2 Birtherism matters more and brazen lying and cheating is part of his appeal.
2/
But . . but . . . I was absolutely assured that the DOJ is not investigating Trump.
My position has been: I'll take Merrick Garland at his word because I have no reason not to, and Garland said the DOJ is working its way up and following the facts.
But under the insurrection act, the military would still have to be willing to keep Trump in power beyond January 20, the date, under the constitution, his presidency ends . . .
People have the idea that indictments of political figures will save democracy.
I've written about what's wrong with that idea. See, for example⤵️ (there is a transcript on my blog).
The idea that there is a magic bullet is also sort of lazy.
I live in a blue town in a blue state (in a sea of pink). The right-wing is very energetically vying for control over the local school board and local government.
Meanwhile, other people have the idea that if Trump gets indicted the right-wing will crumble . . . so they wait.