If recent political developments in the U.S. are any indication, the answer could appear to be yes.
Last week, the former president of the United States, Donald Trump, was indicted by the U.S. Department of Justice on 37 felony counts for illegal retention of classified national defense documents and obstruction of justice. The first 31 charges assert violations of the federal Espionage Act.
This week he was arraigned in the federal district court in Miami for the charges. His taking of very sensitive national security documents when he left the White House in January 2021, and his attempts to hide many of them from the federal government’s efforts to retrieve them, constitute the most blatant political crimes against the nation’s security in American history.
œœœœœœœœ
This is also the first time an American president–sitting or former–has been indicted for federal crimes of any sort. It is an extraordinary occasion in the nation’s history, and the world’s. And it has been treated as such by Special Counsel Jack Smith and the U.S. Department of Justice. Smith and his staff spent many months collecting and pouring over the evidence in the case, even months after much of the most incriminating evidence had been described in media reports. Even legal experts wondered what may be taking him so long to issue an indictment of the former president.
When it was unsealed last week, the indictment ran to 49 pages. Known in legal circles as a “speaking indictment,” it contains much more than the minimal information necessary to explain the felony charges. It is replete with evidence of the criminal behavior, including text messages, audio recordings, photographs, and a Trump defense attorney’s recorded notes about relevant events.
Trump’s former attorney general, the formerly obsequious Trump loyalist William Barr, was impressed with the indictment. In a television interview after the indictment was made public, Barr called it “very, very damning,” and said that, “If even half of it is true, (Trump’s) toast.”
This is the same attorney general who in 2019 badly misrepresented to the public the results of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Report on the investigation into ties between the Trump 2016 campaign and Russia, and into obstruction of justice by Trump. In reviewing the matter, U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton wrote in 2020 that the misrepresentations “cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump.”
œœœœœœœœ
The Republican leadership in Congress and beyond has not been similarly impressed by the indictment. The reactions predominantly range from silence to criticisms of the U.S. Department of Justice for unfairness to apparently portraying the indictment as an act of war. Kevin McCarthy, speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, assailed the indictment as a “brazen weaponization of power” by the Biden Administration and the Department of Justice. The number two GOP leader in the House, Steve Scalise, said, “Let’s be clear about what’s happening: Joe Biden is weaponizing his Department of Justice against his own political rival. This sham indictment is the continuation of the endless political persecution of Donald Trump.”
The Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, declined to comment at all on the indictment. But GOP Senator Lindsey Graham declared that, “Most Republicans believe that the law now is now a political tool.”
Other Republicans have been less diplomatic. Much like Trump did on January 6, 2021, they chose the rhetoric of violence, taking a step beyond the language of “weaponization.” After Trump was indicted, Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs tweeted, “We have now reached a war phase. An eye for an eye.” In a speech to Georgia Republicans, Kari Lake, former candidate for governor in Arizona, reacted this way: “If you want to get to President Trump, you’re going to have to go through me, and you’re going to have to go through 75 million Americans just like me.”
She continued: “And I’m going to tell you, most of us are card-carrying members of the NRA [National Rifle Association]. That’s not a threat – that’s a public service announcement. We will not let you lay a finger on President Trump. Frankly, now is the time to cling to our guns and our religion.”
Right-wing media sites have also contributed to this violent rhetoric. For example, conservative talk show host Peter Santilli said that were he the commandant of the Marine Corps, he would order “every single Marine assigned to the Marine Corps barracks” to grab President Biden, “throw him in freakin’ zip ties in the back of a freakin’ pickup truck,” and “get him out of the White House.”
As in the past, this warlike language mirrors that of the former president himself. In March, days before he was indicted in Manhattan for alleged hush-money payments to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels, Trump warned that, “potential death & destruction in such a false charge could be catastrophic for our Country.”
œœœœœœœœ
Instead of the Democrats weaponizing the Justice Department to “attack” Trump for political reasons, the GOP is aiming to weaponize the former president’s ill-informed and cult-like base for violence against democracy and the rule of law. He and his supporters are calling for a sequel to the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
In his political life Trump has been unique in using the psychological process of projection to attack his political opponents. He accuses them of doing precisely what he has done and will do again. He falsely attacks them for rigging elections against him while he–and his GOP supporters–have endeavored precisely to rig them in his–and their–favor, beginning with the 2016 election, through the 2020 election, and continuing today. He–and they–accuse Democrats of using the tragic occasion of the Covid pandemic for political purposes while members of his Party do precisely this, arguably increasing the American death rate from the disease in the process.
In perhaps his masterpiece of projection, this week Trump asserted that, if elected to the presidency again in 2024, “I will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after the most corrupt president in the history of the United States of America, Joe Biden, and the entire Biden crime family.”
œœœœœœœœ
Treason: Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. (18 United States Code, Chapter 115, Section 2381)
No, the Republican Party will not be charged with treason. Nor will the individuals for their statements that comprise attacks on the Department of Justice, its representatives, and the Biden Administration, a striking number of them appearing to advocate violence. Speech is properly given wide latitude by the Constitution’s First Amendment, and criminal prosecutions for treason in the U.S. would require the government to prove connections between specific speech acts, intent, and the behaviors of others who act violently. That is a tall order.
It is also a complication that shadows the Special Counsel’s ongoing investigation into whether to also indict the former president for his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
But apart from the legal realm, we know from recent experience that certain sorts of speech–combinations of lies, scapegoating, fear-mongering, and hate speech–can inflame the beliefs of others, some of whom will take matters from violent thoughts to violent deeds.
Notice how many of the January 6 defendants now doing time in federal prisons argued in their defense that they were simply answering the call of the American president.
This is an excellent and level headed explanation of the current realm.
I fear what will happen if his supporters receive another call to arms from Trump or any other GOP member. Some were heard saying they are just waiting for the signal.
Also curious to hear your thoughts on the potential charges out of Georgia.
Always a pleasure reading these, as were my years in your classroom.
Many thanks, Gil!
Thank you for a great summary of the current dynamics surrounding Trump’s indictment. I find myself wanting one more paragraph on what you anticipate is likely to happen in the next year up to the election. But then I remember that you are a journalist and a sociologist who reports what you see, not a futurist! Depressing, but nicely done!
We just got back from Italy. Our friends are only a small sample of international opinion. But Trump’s misdeeds are all the talk aside from conflicting judgements about Berlusconi on the occasion of his death. Italians formerly compared the two but now believe Trump was more damaging to his country rather than simply immoral.
Your piece is well-researched. Thanks!