First, Biden must decide if he wants to ignore Trump’s criminal cases. He certainly should not comment on the specifics of those cases (for fear of giving Trump grounds to appeal). However, while Trump spends weeks in courtrooms, Biden has the opportunity to make the election into a referendum: Do voters want to let Trump escape prosecution?
If Trump wins, he likely will either pardon himself or simply instruct the Justice Department to drop federal cases. He no doubt also will demand state courts halt their cases while he is in office. That would be antithetical to the rule of law, an outlandish effort to put himself above the law. The Trump campaign itself is a scheme to avoid the criminal justice system. Biden can present the stark choice: Do we rescue Trump from 91 criminal charges by putting him in the White House?
Moreover, Biden can remind voters that Trump thinks the presidency empowers him to act without fear of criminal liability. Trump’s counsel explicitly argued there are no consequences for a president’s overtly criminal acts (e.g., assassinating opponents). Biden should bring the argument to the country (and implicitly to the Supreme Court, which is considering Trump’s immunity case) that a president with this imperial outlook will upend our democracy.
Second, Republicans have reached a moment of truth. If Haley, former Wyoming congresswoman Liz Cheney, Sen. Mitt Romney (Utah) and former president George W. Bush recognize the threat Trump poses to democracy, the rule of law and America’s national security, they cannot merely withhold support. Do they continue to speak out against his election — or even endorse Biden, the only person who can prevent Trump from regaining power and sinking our democracy?
They can enlist supporters under the banner of something along the lines of “One Election.” (If Trump wins, there might be no others!) As Cheney has said, We “can survive bad policies. We can’t survive a president who goes to war with the Constitution.” Now it’s time for these Republicans to make that endorsement decision.
Third, mainstream news outlets must decide how to cover the general election. Do they finally cover Trump’s obvious defects, zero in on the implications of installing a Vladimir Putin sympathizer and confront the danger of another Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection if Trump loses? To date, the traditional print and TV news operations have refused to cover the race as they would a foreign contest between a democratic candidate and an authoritarian bent on overturning democracy. Some insist Trump’s campaign is pivoting from grievances to serious “policy”!
However, traditional media still have time to reveal the true nature of the MAGA movement, its leader and its cult followers. News outlets at any time can drop the false equivalence and educate themselves and voters.
The brilliant Democratic strategist Michael Podhorzer, for example, puts the MAGA movement in the context of the old Confederacy (which geographically overlaps GOP electoral strongholds):
You can think of MAGA as a fascist movement or as the “legitimate” expression of a theocratic Red Nation that is in a cold war with the Blue Nation, or both. (In the 21st century, the Red Nation has also been making inroads in the purple states.) Either way, the MAGA movement is an enemy of liberal democracy and has taken over the Republican Party. Its and MAGA’s continued success in building its preferred version of America depends on the political class’s stubborn refusal to call out the Republican Party for what it has become.
No matter how many times the Confederate Faction signals that it does not accept the legitimacy of the American project, we refuse to believe them. We reflexively reinterpret attacks against America as mere disagreements or empty rhetoric aimed at their MAGA base, even as our attackers lack no clarity about their own intentions. . . .
In reality, our choice in November is whether to keep giving the benefit of the doubt to rebels who believe that theirs, not ours, is the legitimate cause.
The mainstream news can reach out to any of the numerous expert historians on authoritarianism and the Lost Cause mind-set that still drives MAGA politicians. (E.g., Texas insists it can nullify federal immigration policy.) There is still time to explain to voters that the election will determine if we enter a fascist era that rejects democratic pluralism and cedes power to a dangerous strongman. (While news organizations are looking for experts, they should consult some candid mental health professionals to explain Trump’s mental state and seeming linguistic deterioration).
Distinguished people of the week
A civil case was settled this week with eye-opening details about the phony elector plot in Wisconsin. “Two attorneys for then-President Donald Trump orchestrated a plan for fake electors to file paperwork falsely saying the Republican won Wisconsin in a strategy to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 victory there and in other swing states,” the Associated Press reported. “Under their agreements, Kenneth Chesebro and Jim Troupis turned over more than 1,400 pages of documents, emails and text messages, along with photos and video, offering a detailed account of the scheme’s origins in Wisconsin.” The report continued: “The communications show how they, with coordination from Trump campaign officials, replicated the strategy in six other states including Georgia, where Chesebro has already pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the 2020 election.”
This evidence confirms key allegations in the Georgia and D.C. election coup cases and indicates Chesebro gave misleading testimony under oath. Just Security co-founder Ryan Goodman explained that Chesebro testified to a “Nevada grand jury that [the] false electors scheme was contingent on winning litigation before Jan. 6.” Chesebro also repeatedly told Michigan and Georgia prosecutors that this rationale was “contingent.” However, Chesebro’s Dec. 8, 2020, confidential email uncovered in the Wisconsin litigation rejects the fig leaf of contingent electors. The phony electors were not a backup plan; they were a vehicle to steal the election.
If prosecutors decide Chesebro lied under oath, additional charges might be brought. His plea deal in Georgia could be revisited, and special counsel Jack Smith might gain new leverage to force Chesebro to testify against Trump.
The tenacious legal team from the Georgetown University Law Center Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, which brought the case, deserves credit for digging into the documents and providing further evidence for criminal cases against Trump.
Edward Dolnick’s “The Forger’s Spell: A True Story of Vermeer, Nazis, and the Greatest Art Hoax of the Twentieth Century” tells the remarkable story of Han van Meegeren, a mediocre Dutch painter turned forger, who produced phony Johannes Vermeer oil paintings in the early 20th century. Given Vermeer’s status as one of the greatest Dutch painters (ranking up there with Rembrandt and Frans Hals) and the scarcity of his work, this was an audacious undertaking.
Even more extraordinary, the paintings were awful. Not just awful “Vermeers” but ugly, amateurish and compositionally flawed. Nevertheless, Meegeren managed to fool the Dutch art world and Hermann Goering, the highest Nazi military officer, head of the Luftwaffe and a gluttonous art “collector” (who looted museums and private collections throughout Europe).
Dolnick reveals the physical tricks forgers employ (e.g., grabbing blank pages from old books for drawings, baking oil paintings to create craquelure) and, even more gripping, the psychological strategies used to lure buyers. Passing off a fake as a masterpiece requires buyers to suspend rational judgment in the quest for something they crave. The most ingenious forgers like Meegeren don’t try a close imitation of a real master, which inevitably falls short of the real thing; instead, they create something out-of-the-box and claim it is a “missing link” between two stylistic eras. They include precisely those features the experts insist characterize the artist. And the forgers play to experts’ and buyers’ vanity, greed and fear of humiliation. This amounts to elaborately orchestrated confirmation bias.
If this phenomenon sounds familiar, consider the wide acceptance of political disinformation and propaganda and how easily journalistic and scientific fakes attain acclaim. In the vernacular, we sometimes call a story “too good to check” or a business deal “too good to be true.” Yet people — entire countries — repeatedly get snookered.
Dolnick’s fascinating guide to forgery, Nazi plunder and Dutch art contains a flashing red light: Be on guard when your certitude aligns perfectly with what you desperately want to believe.
Every other Wednesday at noon, I host a live Q&A with readers. Submit a question for the next one.
Credit: Source link
