680

As I noted in the previous chapter (Y) the reaction of both Trump and his party to these coordinated mass assassination attempts on what is essentially his own enemies list is basically the final word on them-the prosecution rests. The only thing left to do is to #VoteBlueToEndThisNightmare.

This morning the news of two more packages of explosives being sent out-one more to John Brennan and another one to Cory Booker now makes it official the prosecution rests-see Chapter A.

This only underscores how reprehensible the failure of Trump and the GOP to take any responsibility for this is. The GOP has only been willing at most to say ‘all have done wrong or been intemperate’ that ‘both sides’ need to do better. But when it comes to specific examples none will even rhetorically admit that if ‘we all share the blame’ Trump is logically included, he’s part of this ‘we’-a big part. But like Trump himself, they’ll blame anyone but him.

But it’s even worse than this as it just happened: Trump has now officially blamed the Democrats for being the object of the biggest assassination attempt in American history.

Certainly their response in itself, their failure to take ANY responsibility in itself is damning and underscores quite clearly their deep responsibility-note I’m saying responsibility rather than blame.

There was interesting exchange between Jonathan Alter and Chuck Todd last night on MTP on sharp political rhetoric, incivility, and incitement to violence. Alter made the point in response to the ‘both sides need to do better in being civil to each other’ that there’s a difference between sharp political rhetoric or incivility on one hand and incitement to violence on the other.

What was so telling is Chuck Todd really didn’t like this distinction. He seemed to think that this would lead to many things that are legitimate political speech being called incitement to violence. This is clearly wrong: you can argue where the line should be drawn but I don’t see how you can deny that the line exists. Todd asked if simply calling someone a ‘radical leftist’ count as ‘incitement to violence?’

The answer is no. And Alter-and John Podhoretz- offered up two very clear examples of incitement to violence rather than political incivility: Trump’s praising Gianforte for bodyslamming a reporter and his ‘lock her up!’ chants-that were a total new breach of political norms. Tellingly his supporters led with ‘lock her up’ chants a few hours after there was an assassination attempt on Hillary’s life. Which is why Trump, his party-and honestly much of his supporters, stand condemned. Hillary wasn’t wrong when she called them deplorables.

As we saw in (Chapter E) the media was aghast when she used that term but in response to Trump’s regularly calling Democrats ‘a ruthless, crazy mob’ the media has blandly asked ‘but will it work?

Now that Trump has officially blamed Democrats for being the target of the biggest political assassination attempt in our history, some might say his ‘call to unify’ didn’t last.

FN: Further note that even if Trump took a day to blame the Democrats there were GOP co-conspirators in real time asserting it was false flag-with Stephanie Ruhle giving this-way too respectful-consideration-Chapter A.

But his call for unity was never actually-a call for unity. It was actually itself a further incitement for violence if you examine it closely.

Here was Greg Sargent on this ‘call to unity.’

“Or, let me amend that: It’s not even clear that Trump does want us to believe this. Yes, he’s making unifying noises in the wake of an apparent wave of attempted terrorist bombings directed at Democrats and the media. But he sometimes seems to be winking at his supporters — and, indeed, he has punctuated these remarks with more of the same old incitement directed at those very same targets.”

“At a rally in Wisconsin on Wednesday night, Trump addressed the news that homemade pipe bombs have been mailed to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, George Soros and CNN. Trump said this:

Any acts or threats of political violence are an attack on our democracy itself. … Those engaged in the political arena must stop treating political opponents as morally defective. … No one should carelessly compare political opponents to historical villains. … We should not mob people in public spaces or destroy public property.

There is one way to settle our disagreements. It’s called, “peacefully, at the ballot box.” As part of a larger national effort to bridge our divides and bring people together, the media also has a responsibility to set a civil tone and to stop the endless hostility and constant negative and oftentimes false attacks. … What we cannot do is let our differences about policy tear us apart as a country, can’t do that. We must accept the verdicts of elections.

“It’s good as far as it goes that Trump said some of these things. But here’s the problem with his declaration that our differences should be settled peacefully via elections, whose verdict we must accept: Trump himself has repeatedly told his supporters the opposite — that they should not accept the verdict of elections. And he continues to do so today.”

Sargent goes on to point out that in 2016 Trump said he’d accept the results only if I win. And, indeed, there are reports that if the Dems win in 11 days he will contest the results and file lawsuits, etc. He will certainly try to claim it’s not he himself who’s repudiated.

But it’s even worse than that. Actually I would contest that what Trump said was even good as far as it goes 

It sounds like unifying noises as long as you don’t look too closely. Let’s take it line by line.

1. “Any acts or threats of political violence are an attack on our democracy itself. …”

Ok that, I agree is good as far as it goes-who could disagree?

2. “Those engaged in the political arena must stop treating political opponents as morally defective. … ”

If you squint that might seem good as far as it goes. At first I thought it was ok-you can argue that he and his Deplorables have treated Hillary like a moral defective. But then who has been treating opponents as morally defective? I mean do you think Trump isn’t morally defective? Many of us do-so this is not really about the pipebombs sent to his political opponents due to his own incitement but rather the fact that rightly treat him as morally defective-as he is.

The trouble with treating Hillary Clinton like a moral defective is she isn’t one. OTOH everything we know about Trump screams moral defectiveness. So it’s only wrong to treat someone as a moral defective if they aren’t one. I mean would you protest calling Hitler a moral defective? I know I’d be keeping my powder dry.

3.  “No one should carelessly compare political opponents to historical villains. …”

Of course, who has been comparing political opponents to historical villains? A lot of Democrats and others in the #Resistance. I for one certainly have compared him to Hitler, Mussolini, and Berlusconi many times. I see him as Hitler in the American context. That’s certainly uncivil. But there’s an old African American saying: only the truth hurts.

UPDATE: But Pelosi is proving herself to be Neville Chamberlain in the American contest.

Actually Bruce Bartlett does a good job in making the distinction between Trump and Hitler.

So by Trump’s light me and Bruce Bartlett are to blame for the biggest political assassination attempt in our history against the Democratic party-a party that I fervently support. I mean the targets were the people I admire most in public life-Obama, Hillary, Biden, Eric Holder, Cory Booker, Maxine Waters. But I and Bartlett and all who see Trump as a great threat are responsible. But at this point in his speech he hasn’t indicated any way he himself is responsible for an attack on what amounted to his enemy’s list.

4. “We should not mob people in public spaces or destroy public property.”

Again, he’s pointing the finger at the Democrats, at regular voters who have protested GOPers at dinner or criticized them. He’s saying criticizing Mitch McConnell at dinner is what’s responsible for the biggest political assassination attempt in our history. So far those responsible are those who compare him to Hitler and who criticize McConnell while he’s eating dinner after a tough day of plowing through credibly accused sexual assaulters to the Supreme Court and planning to take away the healthcare of 30 million Americans post election.

In no way has anything Trump done contributed to it-not even having lock her up chants hours after an attempt on Hillary’s life. Note too that he at no point mentioned the victims by name-in any way humanized them, etc.

5. “There is one way to settle our disagreements. It’s called, “peacefully, at the ballot box.”

Sargent pointed out that he himself doesn’t really respect that as he tries to delegitimize results if he loses.

But I read it more as: these Democrats who want to impeach me are responsible. He’s saying that he was legitimately elected-but many of us-rightly-don’t believe he was legitimately elected. So we are responsible.

6. “As part of a larger national effort to bridge our divides and bring people together, the media also has a responsibility to set a civil tone and to stop the endless hostility and constant negative and oftentimes false attacks. …”

So he also blames the media for being too critical of him. So those of us who are critical of him and oppose him politically and critical media coverage are responsible for the the biggest political assassination attempt in our history against Trump’s own personal political enemies list. Basically the victim itself is the guilty party.

Note that the media tends only to focus on 6-they are-rightly-very upset about him blaming them-but fail to see he’s also outrageously blaming the Democrats-who were the primary target of these assassination attempts.

What his message actually is is-you people better stop criticizing and opposing me or there will be more such actions,

Or no one should ever oppose him politically.

Trump and the GOP stand condemned. The prosecution rests.

UPDATE: But 10 months later we may have the wrong judge.

License

October 28, 2016: a Day That Will Live in Infamy Copyright © by . All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book