An Odd Way to Change the Subject
I don't blame DJT for wanting to change the subject after dining with anti-semites. Subverting the Constitution - and Hershel Walker's Senate candidacy - wasn't the way to do it.
I am tired of writing about Donald J. Trump, who has had an awful month. At least since November 8th, when many of his anointed and endorsed candidates either underperformed or lost their elections. But here we go again. Some things need to be said. Again. And probably not for the last time. Sigh.
Some say Trump has had a pretty terrible time since November 2020, when a pandemic-influenced political earthquake disturbed and politicized our election systems, inviting malfeasance, misfeasance, nonfeasance, and showcasing incompetence in many places. Maricopa County, Arizona, stands out, as does much of Pennsylvania. Americans are not unjustified in losing confidence in the integrity of their elections, despite efforts by more than 30 states to update and reform their laws to make it “easy to vote, hard to cheat,” at least in some cases. Elsewhere, emergency rules and diktats that were supposed to be “temporary” because of the pandemic are sometimes cemented into permanence. It’s not hard to figure out why. But frankly, in many places, Republicans have only themselves to blame.
I won’t regurgitate Trump’s demonstrably negative effect on self-identified “Independent” and soft-GOP voters during last month's mid-term elections (while he was “a” factor, he wasn’t “the” factor). And we may find out soon whether his antics of the last several days, when the 45th President regrettably turned the spotlight on himself, again, perhaps unintentionally, contributed to GOP Senate candidate Herschel Walker’s failure to defeat Democrat Raphael Warnock on November 8 when the rest of the statewide GOP ticket was winning. Other factors, from Warnock’s considerable financial advantage to Walker’s deficiencies and liabilities as a candidate, may have been more consequential.
I’m referring to the infamous Mar-a-Lago dinner with a mentally disturbed rapper and two provocateurs and grifters. Two of the three are notorious antisemites. Where was Trump’s staff? What was he thinking? The mainstream media reflexively reacted in their usual way, running with cameras in tow, demanding Republican officials to respond to Trump’s latest protestations. It’s a tiresome media model, and the best response seems to be, “Trump speaks for himself,” then hanging up the phone or walking away. Trump’s infamous guests doubled down with an appearance on “InfoWars” with Alex Jones. That is not exactly my idea of a damage-control plan.
Condemnations of the Mar-a-Lago dinner were loud and ubiquitous, including Georgia’s Governor, Brian Kemp, who just handily won reelection, outpolling Walker by 203,000 votes, despite solid opposition from the former President. It put Walker, who trailed Warnock by 37,000 votes and needed every vote he could get for this Tuesday’s runoff, in an awkward position, particularly with Atlanta suburban voters the GOP has been losing since 2016. Walker kept a low profile. Who knows what the 81,000 people voting for the Libertarian candidate would do? I’m guessing that they did not show up. If they were willing to waste their vote on November 8th, why not waste them again? When casting votes that could incrementally advance part of their agenda, Libertarians often punt. How weird. Thus are drug cults.
So the President can’t be blamed for trying to change the subject. The problem is how he chose to do that.
Fellow Substacker and Philadelphia immigration lawyer Christine Flowers (whose Substack I recommend) said this eloquently on Facebook in response:
One of the questions on the citizenship exam is "What is the Supreme Law of the Land?" I make sure, when preparing my clients to take that test, to have them memorize the answer. To me, it is the most important question of all (certainly more important than naming one of the original Native American tribes or one of the two longest rivers in the United States.)
That question is so important precisely because it hits at the heart of what and who we are as a country: people who created the document that would govern us, and not be governed by our whims. That document, more precious than the precious Declaration, is the Constitution.
Former president Trump has indicated that we should suspend the Constitution because he is angry, as many are, about the 2020 presidential election. No sane or honest person would agree that this was an election of transparency and documented fairness. It was not. Whether it was riddled with fraud, or whether it was simply the incompetence and malfeasance of party apparatchiks desperate to mollify their lazy constituents (wah wah wah, I can't stand in line, wah wah wah, why won't you feed me and give me water, wah wah wah, I need more time to lick the stamp, wah wah wah) that election will go down as one of the more troublesome and suspicious in recent history.
And yet, to suggest as a remedy the suspension of the Constitution completely delegitimizes the person who makes that suggestion. And I'm not afraid to say it, despite whatever conservative cred I lose doing so.
Too bad the Founders aren’t around to respond. Writing for the conservative Western Journal, Warner Todd Huston tried his best to defend the indefensible.
Former President Donald Trump did not attack the Constitution of the United States of America — despite what the establishment media is saying.
In the wake of the release of the “Twitter Files” that show that Big Tech conspired with leftists to sway to 2020 election and discredit the Hunter laptop story, critics accused Donald Trump of saying that the U.S. Constitution should be “terminated.”
While Trump’s post was ham-handed and poorly written, in fact he did not come straight out and suggest that the law of the land be thrown in the circular file and forgotten as his critics have charged.
I don’t know what part of “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution” Huston doesn’t get. Looks evident to me. His “pay no attention to that man behind the curtain” spin doesn’t sell.
This is worth repeating. I know, love, and respect many patriotic family and friends who remain steadfastly loyal to President Trump, whom I voted for twice. They enthusiastically support his candidacy for 2024, which he announced last month. I get why - he pulled the bark off many shenanigans by cultural leftists, our growing surveillance state, and their political and media sycophants, including the blatant politicization and corruption of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies. His blunt outspokenness can be a virtue (except when its not), and his record as President was outstanding in many respects, especially in nominating three outstanding Supreme Court justices. Many believe we should “have his back,” given the unjust way the legacy media and political establishment treated him. That includes two undeserved Pulitzer Prizes for propagandizing the Russia Collusion hoax, two badly-premised impeachments, and many other false, even scurrilous, attacks and abusive legal antics. I like much of his “America First” agenda, and no serious person believes Trump himself is antisemitic.
You can’t drain the swamp when voters don’t hand you the plug.
I get all that and more. It is also fair to ask whether his incessant hunger for the limelight and ham-handed antics make him radioactive in 2024 when the GOP bench is replete with outstanding governors, Senators, and former cabinet officials who share most of the Trump agenda without . . . Trump. Can we do better? I don’t accept that he’s the only one who can “drain the swamp.” You can’t drain a swamp when voters don’t hand you the plug. When Democrats cheer most for a Trump candidacy, Republicans should ask why.
Republican primary and caucus voters may soon change more than the subject. It may not be too late for Trump, but when the audience changes, the act needs to change.