“Trump and I have come a long way,” Lindsey Graham said last year on the floor of the United States Senate. “All I can say is don’t count me. Enough. I tried to be helpful.” This was back in January 2021. He spoke late on the evening of 6 January. He seemed to be a little shocked. However, a few weeks later he was in Mar-a-Lago for a weekend of golf and no doubt great lunches with the aforementioned Trump, Donald J. Interestingly, Trump told Graham to convince him that their trip together was not was actually over. How did Trump reassure Graham that he didn’t come out?
That question comes to mind this late summer Monday because Graham showed just how much Trump can count on him the night before. there is no law. It’s all about getting it. There is a double standard when it comes to Trump,” he told Benghazi chief investigator-turned-Fox deputy Trey Gowdy, before launching into a monologue about how the FBI is in a tank for Hunter Biden. “If there is a prosecution of Donald Trump for mishandling classified information, after the Clinton debacle, which you led and did a damn good job, there will be riots in the streets.”
This content is imported from YouTube. You can find the same content in a different format or find more information on their website.
A subtext of Hunter Biden’s rage is the notion that Trump lost some significant part of the election because we didn’t get a proper dose of Hunter’s laptop stories in the week leading up to the big day. It may seem ironic to some to see this episode side by side with Hillary Clinton’s email protocol saga, given that then-FBI Director James Comey regularly made public statements about the ongoing investigation—a breach of Justice Department protocol—in the run-up to 2016. phenomenon that is actually did likely to influence the election.
But more importantly, you will notice that not much attention is paid to the actual facts of the case here. Why ask questions about what Trump actually did when you can just say: Hunter! Hillary! on the way to the present message: if Trump is charged with a crime, some of his supporters will react violently. Graham’s spokesman Kevin Bishop announced this. Washington Post that his comments in that interview were “a prediction/prediction of what he thinks will happen.” How MailHowever, as Philip Bump mentioned, most of us know that some people or groups that support Trump may react in this way if he is charged. What’s the point of bringing this up here other than to try to influence the decision of whether Trump will be indicted? In addition, Graham surrounded this “prediction” with rhetorical claims that the investigation is grossly unfair, a rhetorical justification for the kind of anger that could send people to the streets.
“There will literally be riots in the streets,” Graham said elsewhere in the interview, “I’m worried about our country.” With his concern in mind, and assuming that Graham wants to avoid the outcome discussed here, we contacted Bishop via email. “What is the senator doing to try and prevent this scenario?” we asked. We will notify you if he returns to us.
Of course, one way to “bring down the temperature” – a phrase we’ve heard very sincerely from Trumpworld in recent weeks – is to go on TV and point out that the feds have been working for months and months to get Trump to return his stash of documents before they decided to send FBI agents. These agents were executing a search warrant approved by a federal magistrate on the basis of an affidavit that contained evidence that amounted to probable cause.Graham might have said. We have seen some reports that indicate that some of the documents in question were quite serious, but even the most skeptical among us should wait for a clearer picture before accusing everyone involved of hopeless corruption.
What seems more likely is that Graham’s recipe for lowering the temperature is to ensure that Trump is not charged with a crime – even if there is enough evidence that his behavior was very illegal and very serious – because that it would infuriate his supporters and some might react badly. This is the argument that Trump should be above the law, that it does not apply to him, that he should be able to do whatever he wants and avoid consequences, because his adherents will respond to the application of the law with violence. Sounds like some kind of “semi-fascism” at least, and it happened the night before Trump spent his Monday. “True” that either he should be appointed president now, or re-elections should be held immediately. Trump also general excerpt from Graham’s comments without further comment. Can we get a “Don’t Rebel” message from the big guy? Not? I guess it was terribly hard to get it the last time.
If you object to Trump being prosecuted because his fans will see it as a bogus prosecution and/or react violently, you are giving in to his continued attacks on reality. Are we relying on the notion that there is an observable reality in which Trump can be charged with a crime based on his behavior in that reality? If this is the case, then the fact that some people believe other things in their head is actually inappropriate. This doesn’t mean that Trump should be charged with some petty wrongdoing, but a law isn’t a law if some people can break it and get away with it because they’ve fed their followers such poisonous fantasies that some of them carry an implied threat. violent force.
Jack Holmes is Esquire’s Senior Staff Writer covering politics and sports. He also hosts the Helpful Context video series.
This content is imported from OpenWeb. You can find the same content in a different format or find more information on their website.