Trump's Legacy

Even if one is irreconcilably opposed to Biden's agenda, one has to admire the flurry of activity surrounding his first week in office. There is no disputing the fact that the new president "hit the ground running." Another feature of the new administration that hasn't received as much attention from the news media, but is arguably even more important than Biden's actions, is the relative peace and quiet that has emanated from the White House. There haven't been any divisive tweets, statements or incitements to riot.

Nevertheless, over this new beginning, it seems as though a dark cloud has been hanging over the entire nation in the form of one question: How are we to deal with the man who just vacated the Oval Office? The Congress of the United States has been grappling with the question of whether or not to hold Donald Trump accountable for what happened on January 6th, and the great lie which inspired it all - that he was the real winner of the 2020 election. For now, the answer to that question (How are we to deal with him?) seems to be different depending on the party affiliation of the person whom we are asking. Democrats generally demand accountability, and Republicans generally offer excuses and justifications.

Historians, however, have a tendency to examine the evidence and arrive at something approaching a coherent evaluation of a president's tenure in office. The distance of years and the cooling of the passions of the moment tend to produce a more objective assessment of the subject, and they also tend to result in something approaching a consensus opinion about the legacy of the person (or the consequences of his/her actions/policies). And, while I wouldn't count on Democrats and Republicans reaching anything approaching a consensus about what should happen to Donald John Trump, as a historian, I think Trump's chances for receiving high marks in that inevitable future assessment aren't very good.

As a matter of fact, I find myself in almost complete agreement with Mark Updegrove's verdict in the article, Donald Trump and the verdict of history: Analysis. In the article, Updegrove cites Claire Booth Luce's thesis that historians tend to summarize - and that their conclusions are very often distilled into a single sentence. What would that sentence be for Trump?

Updegrove cites the two great crises of Trump's presidency as the most likely sources for that answer. He wrote: "Given the patterns of history, it is likely that Trump will be remembered primarily for the central crises of his administration. The first is the COVID-19 pandemic, the worst health calamity to befall the nation in over a century. While Trump can't be blamed for creating the pandemic, he will be held to account for allowing it to spread unchecked with no coherent plan in place as he played it down for fear of it putting a damper on a roaring economy, ignoring science and insisting that the virus would magically go away."

The second crisis was the final act of his presidency. Updegrove wrote: "But even more so, Trump will be remembered for the other crisis of his administration, one very much of his own doing: baselessly challenging the integrity of a presidential election that led to the seditious siege on the Capitol on Jan. 6. The commander-in-chief stirred up a mob to take down the federal government as lawmakers convened to certify the election in an attempt to overturn the will of the people and, antithetically, "take back our country," resulting in the deaths of five people including a police officer who was bludgeoned to death with a fire extinguisher. The attempted coup is a black mark that even the Teflon Trump can't dodge."

Like Updegrove, I'm confident that Trump and his supporters would like for him to be remembered for the nation's economic performance prior to the pandemic, his judicial appointments, tax cuts and deregulation. Nevertheless, I'm afraid that his abject failure in handling the two most important crises of his reign will blot out any memory of those things. Indeed, I find myself in complete agreement with Mr. Updegrove's speculation about the future historian's one sentence about Trump: "he divided the nation and fought democracy -- and democracy won."

Democracy has survived!

This morning, Donald Trump shamefully slipped away before his successor could be sworn into office. After a shameless attempt to overturn the results of a democratic election, he simply could not bring himself to face the man who had defeated him and symbolically transfer the reins of government into his hands. Even so, without his assent or participation, democracy triumphed. The peaceful transfer of power to Joseph R. Biden happened anyway. There is something very reassuring about that. Our republic endures, and we are reminded of Benjamin Franklin's statement so long ago: Will we be able to keep it?

Just forget what we said

It's amazing how quickly things change when legal action for false and defamatory statements is threatened! One of the chief conspiracy theories related to the 2020 General Election being fraudulent was the charge that Dominion Voting Systems had manipulated vote counting in favor of Joe Biden. Notice this retraction from American Thinker:

"We received a lengthy letter from Dominion's defamation lawyers explaining why they believe that their client has been the victim of defamatory statements.  Having considered the full import of the letter, we have agreed to their request that we publish the following statement:

American Thinker and contributors Andrea Widburg, R.D. Wedge, Brian Tomlinson, and Peggy Ryan have published pieces on www.AmericanThinker.com that falsely accuse US Dominion Inc., Dominion Voting Systems, Inc., and Dominion Voting Systems Corporation (collectively “Dominion”) of conspiring to steal the November 2020 election from Donald Trump. These pieces rely on discredited sources who have peddled debunked theories about Dominion’s supposed ties to Venezuela, fraud on Dominion’s machines that resulted in massive vote switching or weighted votes, and other claims falsely stating that there is credible evidence that Dominion acted fraudulently.

These statements are completely false and have no basis in fact. Industry experts and public officials alike have confirmed that Dominion conducted itself appropriately and that there is simply no evidence to support these claims.

It was wrong for us to publish these false statements. We apologize to Dominion for all of the harm this caused them and their employees. We also apologize to our readers for abandoning 9 journalistic principles and misrepresenting Dominion’s track record and its limited role in tabulating votes for the November 2020 election. We regret this grave error." 

TRUE Christians Stand Against Insurrection!

Conservative Christian commentator David French recently posted an article entitled "Only the Church Can Truly Defeat a Christian Insurrection." In the piece, he points out that Christian involvement in (and support for) the recent insurrection against the government of the United States of America is not consistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ. That's fairly straightforward - should be self-evident - right? Sure, Christian's have resisted and opposed government throughout the history of this republic when they have felt a moral principle was at stake. We call it protesting and civil disobedience, but most Christians have always shunned engaging in sedition or participating in violence.

However, when Trump's supporters recently stormed the United States Capitol building and many folks were injured (and five lost their lives), we had the unfortunate spectacle of a not insignificant number of Christians participating in the melee or supporting it from afar. I've heard "Christian" pastors justify this action by pointing out that Christian pastors led their congregation's participation in the Revolutionary War and the Underground Railroad and Civil War.

In answering such an attempt at justifying this behavior, we should point out that the American Revolution began as an act of civil disobedience which the British government decided to suppress by employing their armed forces against the native civilian population, and that the Underground Railroad was firmly within the tradition of civil disobedience (and the South initiated armed hostilities against the Union). In other words, in none of these instances did Christians initiate violence or attempt to overthrow or overturn anything by violent means - and any attempt to use those instances as a justification for this current insurrection is inconsistent with what actually happened in the past.

So, what has actually motivated Christian participation in this sedition and insurrection? David French succinctly answers that question in the piece referenced at the beginning of this post. According to French, "The problem is that all too many Christians are in the grips of two sets of lies. We’ll call them the enabling lies and the activating lies. And unless you deal with the enabling lies, the activating lies will constantly pollute the body politic and continue to spawn violent unrest."

French then goes on to explain exactly what he's talking about and give concrete examples of how these lies apply to the current crisis. He wrote: "What’s the difference between the two kinds of lies? The enabling lie is the lie that makes you fertile ground for the activating lie that actually motivates a person to charge a thin blue line at the Capitol or take a rifle to a pizza parlor. Here’s an enabling lie: America will end if Trump loses. That was the essence of the Flight 93 essay in 2016. That was the core of Eric Metaxas’s argument in our debates this spring and fall. Here’s another enabling lie: The fate of the church is at stake if Joe Biden wins. And here’s yet another: The left hates you (this sentence sometimes concludes with the phrase “and wants you dead.”)"

As French points out, it is the belief/acceptance of these lies that motivates and allows Christians to forget the clear teachings of Jesus Christ about loving one's neighbor and turning the other cheek and embrace violence. French wrote: "when the stakes are deemed to be that high, the moral limitations on your response start to fall away. After all, when people believe our national destiny hangs in the balance, they often respond accordingly. Or, as I said in a December 4 newsletter warning about potential violence, “if you argue that the very existence of the country is at stake, don’t be surprised if people start to act as if the very existence of the country is at stake.”"

Unfortunately, French is absolutely correct in his assessment of this phenomenon within the Christian community. Too many Christians have gotten swept up into believing the partisan political propaganda of Trump and his supporters and have forgotten the very fundamental principles which are supposed to be motivating their thoughts and actions: love, peace, patience, kindness, humility and meekness. They have forgotten Christ's and Paul's admonitions to submit oneself to the governing authorities and to live peaceably with all men (even ones whom you believe to be evil, or who are actively persecuting you and your faith).

This is not complicated. Christians should not be supporting or participating in insurrection. Even if you believe the lie that the election was stolen from Trump - Even if you believe that all Democrats are evil pedophiles - As a Christian, YOU ARE NOT JUSTIFIED/AUTHORIZED TO ENGAGE IN VIOLENCE - period!

Hold on Liberals!

In the aftermath of the horrendous events at the Capitol, I have been discouraged by some of the commentary on the left. While I understand the impulse to criticize those who are currently abandoning Trump as being too late and opportunistic, I believe it is unwise to berate these folks. Are we trying to discourage folks from abandoning their loyalty to Trump? Do we want to permanently alienate these folks from the body politic? Will our desire for vengeance only widen the dangerous rifts which we have decried as poisonous to the body politic? Shouldn't we be welcoming folks back into reality and sanity - even at this late date? Isn't it wise to provide folks with an off ramp when they are racing toward going over the cliff? Are we trying to restore faith in our institutions or permanently exclude folks who disagree with us? Do we desire the restoration of the ability of folks on the right and left to have civil conversations and reach reasonable compromise solutions to our problems? OR Are we trying to create yet another group of folks who are permanently aggrieved? Yes, let's condemn and isolate the folks who continue to support Trump's wickedness, but we should welcome everyone who is willing to abandon him! 

Senator Romney Speaks the Truth!

Senator Mitt Romney of Utah issued this assessment of what happened yesterday:

"What happened at the U.S. Capitol today was an insurrection, incited by the President of the United States. Those who choose to continue to support his dangerous gambit by objecting to the results of a legitimate, democratic election will forever be seen as being complicit in an unprecedented attack against our democracy. The best way we can show respect for the voters who are upset is by telling them the truth. That is the burden, and the duty, of leadership."

see Senator Mitt Romney Twitter Thread

He's absolutely right. Donald Trump is unfit for the office he holds, and ANYONE who continues to support him after what happened yesterday is complicit in what he's done! Nevertheless, as I have elucidated in numerous posts here over the course of his presidency, there was already abundant evidence extant of Trump's unfitness.

The thing which has sustained support for Donald Trump throughout his presidency is the personal ego of each and every one of his supporters - To face and accept the evidence of Trump's glaring flaws is to acknowledge the failure of one's own judgement in supporting him. Sadly, they simply have too much invested in this guy to ever admit their mistake and abandon him.

Outrageous!

As I write, Trump's D.C. protest has turned violent, and his supporters have forced their way into the United States Capitol building! So much for law and order and supporting the police! The problem with outrageous claims and political posturing is that some folks will take it all to heart and believe that it justifies outrageous behavior like this on their part.

This is a sad day for this republic. A mob has succeeded in overthrowing a Constitutionally mandated exercise of democratic governance - the formal acceptance by Congress of the vote of the Electoral College. The mob should be immediately dispersed and forcibly removed from those hallowed hallways and chambers! This is NOT peaceful protest. The shining city on the hill doesn't look so shiny right now!

Trump continues his push to overturn the 2020 election

After attacking members of his own party who refused to cooperate with his efforts to overturn the results of the November General Election, Trump has finally succeeded in persuading twelve Republican senators to join with House Republicans in a bid to challenge the electoral votes of several states (Trump's attention has been focused heretofore on Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada). In a joint statement, the senators justified their refusal to certify the election results because "The 2020 election...featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities." And The Dallas Morning News reported that Senator Cruz (one of the leaders of the movement) explained the action in the following Tweet: "There is a deep distrust in our democratic processes that must be addressed. That’s why I’m calling for a 10-day emergency audit to resolve serious allegations of voter fraud, not dismiss them out of hand." How ironic that all of those "unprecedented allegations of voter fraud" and "deep distrust in our democratic processes" originated with Trump himself! Talk about a classic case of circular reasoning!

Interestingly a few Republican senators have been courageous enough to point out the very anti-democratic nature of this effort. The Dallas Morning News quoted Senator Pat Toomey as saying: "The effort by Sens. Hawley, Cruz, and others to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in swing states like Pennsylvania directly undermines … the right of the people to elect their own leaders." In another Tweet, the Republican Pennsylvania Senator said: "A fundamental, defining feature of a democratic republic is the right of the people to elect their own leaders. The effort by Sens. Hawley, Cruz, and others to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in swing states like Pennsylvania directly undermines this right." The same paper reported that Republican Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska said: "Adults don’t point a loaded gun at the heart of legitimate self-government." Likewise, they reported this statement by Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska: "I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and that is what I will do January 6 (the day that Congress meets to accept the electoral college results)...I will vote to affirm the 2020 presidential election. The courts and state legislatures have all honored their duty to hear legal allegations and have found nothing to warrant overturning the results."

Of course, these developments would be enough on their own to set off alarms, but this is not the only angle that Trump is still working in his efforts to overturn the election results. The Washington Post claims to have obtained a recording of an hour-long telephone conversation between Trump and the Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger that transpired this last Saturday! During the call, Trump claimed: "So look. All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state." Trump reportedly went on to say: "There’s no way I lost Georgia...There’s no way. We won by hundreds of thousands of votes." The paper reported: "Throughout the call, Raffensperger and his office’s general counsel rejected Trump’s assertions, explaining that the president is relying on debunked conspiracy theories and that President-elect Joe Biden’s 11,779-vote victory in Georgia was fair and accurate."

The Washington Post also reported that Trump threatened the upcoming runoff election for both Georgia senate seats. Apparently, Trump told former ally Raffensperger: "You have a big election coming up and because of what you’ve done to the president — you know, the people of Georgia know that this was a scam,” Trump said. “Because of what you’ve done to the president, a lot of people aren’t going out to vote, and a lot of Republicans are going to vote negative, because they hate what you did to the president. Okay? They hate it. And they’re going to vote. And you would be respected, really respected, if this can be straightened out before the election."

It is not enough to say that Trump's efforts will be unsuccessful in the end - that enough congressmen and senators will vote to confirm the vote tallies which they receive from the Electoral College to confirm Joe Biden's win. The fact that a sitting President of the United States of America is actively trying to overturn the results of an election is astounding and absolutely atrocious! I'll say it again: We simply cannot get rid of this guy fast enough!