By Nick Catoggio
Friday, January 24, 2025
How many pardoned January 6 rioters will serve in the
next Congress?
I’d set the over/under at something like 3.5, with an
outside chance that there’ll be enough elected to form a small but vibrant
House Insurrectionist Caucus. Come January 2027, it’s quite likely that some
Capitol Police officer stationed inside the building will feel a flash of
recognition as a new congressman passes him in the hall: Isn’t that the guy
who bear-sprayed me and clubbed me with a flagpole?
Per The
Daily Beast, some are already thinking about a future in politics.
Convicted seditionist Stewart Rhodes, leader of the Oath Keepers, was back
on Capitol Hill Wednesday, one day after Donald Trump commuted his 18-year
sentence. He told the Wall
Street Journal that he hopes to work in Trump’s administration,
possibly at, uh, the FBI. Proud Boys chief Enrique Tarrio, reprieved from a
22-year sentence for his own seditionist activity, more modestly imagined
himself door-knocking
for candidates who represent “the new conservative movement” to which he
belongs.
If you open your door in the fall of 2026 to find a goon
squad of scowling brownshirts on your porch demanding that you accept a
campaign flier for the local Republican or else, the smart move is to say
“thanks” and accept. Don’t bother calling the cops; if you live in a red state
and someone ends up getting hurt, these chuds will just get pardoned again.
The more ambitious J6ers are destined to think bigger by
running for office themselves, though, and why wouldn’t they? Empowering
violent seditionists is an American tradition. No fewer than 63
former Confederates were chosen to serve in the U.S. Senate following the
Civil War. Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy, was named to
the Senate by Georgia’s state legislature the year after the war ended but
was barred. Undaunted, he successfully ran for the U.S. House in 1873 and held
his seat for nearly a decade.
Nationalists believe that making America great “again”
requires making it more like it used to be, right? Well, it used to be that
insurrectionists were rewarded with high office, and so it will be again.
“Greatness” is a nuanced concept.
Skeptics might remind me at this point that pardoning the
J6ers is quite
unpopular, as are the J6ers themselves. A CBS
News poll published earlier this month found that, even among Republicans,
just 30 percent approved of those who forced themselves into the Capitol that
day; an equal share strongly disapproved and 40 percent somewhat disapproved.
Which, admittedly, doesn’t sound like the makings of a successful congressional
candidacy.
Just you wait, though.
Unpopularity contest.
A key early subplot of Trump’s second term is Democrats agonizing
over how much to cooperate with the president and his party and how much to
resist. “We’re obviously in a bit of disarray,” one Democratic senator bluntly
confessed to Semafor.
“I don’t think people are really completely sure about what lesson is to be
learned in this election.” What goal should liberals set for the coming year?
On Wednesday Jonathan
Last made it simple for them: Democrats should do everything they can to
make Trump less popular. “When a president is popular, nothing sticks and
nothing matters,” he wrote. “When a president is unpopular, every stupid,
random thing is a catastrophe they have to answer for.” Trump’s political
capital won’t begin to erode until the public stops extending him the benefit
of the doubt, so job one for the left is do what it can to make that happen.
Events might do it for them. Already the
price of eggs is on its way up, for instance, not because of Trump’s
policies but because bird flu has killed 30 million chickens in the past three
months. Even so, fickle American voters aren’t known for being sticklers about
cause and effect. If those voters come to believe that candidate Trump sold
them some magic
beans about controlling the cost of living, disillusionment about him might
spread the same way it did about Joe Biden after the collapse of Afghanistan.
Biden never recovered. Trump might not either.
Egg prices are out of Democrats’ hands—but rubbing
Trump’s face in his filthy pardons and commutations for the J6ers is not, Last
argued. The out party should showcase the worst of the worst among the
insurrectionists in advertising campaigns and make household names of people
like David
Dempsey, who used “his hands, feet, flag poles, crutches, pepper spray,
broken pieces of furniture, and anything else he could get his hands on” to
attack police officers, according to prosecutors. If Americans come to think of
Dempsey when they think of Trump, the president will be badly damaged.
It’s a nice theory. But I don’t buy it and neither does
Trump. How else to explain his surreal interest in inviting
some of the freed J6ers to the White House?
Normally politicians are sensitive about photo ops. Think
of the reports you see every midterm cycle about skittish congressmen who are
up for reelection in competitive districts avoiding their party’s unpopular
president and asking him not to campaign in their backyards. The fastest way to
lose popularity in politics is to be seen gladhanding someone who’s already
unpopular. Yet the J6ers are unpopular and Trump seems eager to gladhand them.
Why? If Last is right that the insurrectionists are a
potential liability for him, the last thing he should want to do is saddle
himself with that liability by embracing them.
But this is where Trump, the most successful con artist
who’s ever lived, understands human psychology better than eggheads like Last
and I do.
Shame and shamelessness.
Embracing the J6ers might hurt him a bit in the near
term, but it’ll pay off in the long run by reducing the social stigma around
them. The way the president will keep them from becoming a political liability
isn’t by avoiding them, it’s by doing the opposite—by normalizing them until
people hear the name “David Dempsey” and don’t blink.
Shamelessness is infectious. If there’s anything profound
about Trumpism, it’s that.
It’s been said before that shamelessness
is Trump’s superpower, but that’s not quite right. His superpower is making
a spectacle of his shamelessness to convince Americans who should know better
that there isn’t anything to be ashamed of. Students of demagoguery have always
marveled at
the cunning he displays by not trying to hide his corruption, something I saw
firsthand recently in chatting with family about his new memecoin
bribery scam. How can it be corrupt, one relative wondered, if he’s doing
it out in the open?
To a human being prone to normal emotions like shame and
remorse, his sheer brazenness is powerful evidence that he sincerely believes
he’s done nothing wrong—which in turn is evidence that he really might not
have done anything wrong. That’s the essence of his messaging strategy around
January 6, one of the most successful propaganda campaigns in U.S. history.
Through herculean amounts of shamelessness and gaslighting, never apologizing
or betraying any sense of regret, the president and his toadies in right-wing
media successfully persuaded millions of swing voters that America’s first-ever
coup attempt was either no big deal or some sort of frame-up.
If, through sheer shamelessness, you can turn a putsch
into what’s functionally a 50-50 issue, you can do anything.
So why wouldn’t he continue to follow that strategy with
the J6ers? By welcoming them to the White House, he’d be signaling in the
boldest way possible that he and they have nothing to be ashamed of. The stigma
around them will erode, leading elements of the public that had looked dimly on
the insurrection to feel more ambivalent about it. And Republican voters,
always so susceptible to Trump’s influence, might at last come to see them as
the “patriots” he’s forever claiming they are.
By the time some of them run for Congress in 2026, the 70
percent of the GOP that disapproves of pardoning them will have softened
considerably. In blood-red House districts, their criminal convictions will be
seen as badges of honor, afforded the sort of respect that the right once
reserved for military service. I wouldn’t entirely rule out David Dempsey
returning to the Capitol, this time as his place of employment.
If you want to boil frogs,
you have to turn up the heat. That’s what Trump is doing by embracing the
J6ers. It might already be working: The latest poll on his decision to grant
clemency to insurrectionists has 43 percent in
favor, easily the best numbers I’ve ever seen on that question. After the
inevitable thumbs-up photo op with Rhodes and Tarrio in the Oval Office, I
wouldn’t be surprised if it settles in the high 40s.
The end of outrage.
You can see why Democrats are at sea right now about how
to confront Trump.
They’re at sea on policy, spooked by the fact that some
of their working-class base defected to the GOP on Election Day. If they pitch
a fit over his immigration crackdown, the centerpiece of his domestic agenda,
they’ll be seen as the same ol’
open-borders radicals that Americans rejected in November.
But they’re also at sea on how to respond to civic
abominations like the J6 pardons. Granted, numerous congressional liberals
criticized Trump for that this week, but the tone was muted. “In one fell
swoop, he gave cover and a permission structure for political violence in this
country,” Georgia Sen. Raphael
Warnock said of Trump—before pronouncing himself “concerned.” In the
president’s first term, Warnock and his colleagues would have been a lot more
than “concerned” about him choosing to place political street fighters and
paramilitary thugs above the law.
I don’t blame Democrats for not leaning into moral
outrage this week, though. Why bother? It doesn’t work. Americans don’t share
it, or don’t share it enough. The campaign was a referendum on whether the
shame of having a president with a coup plot, two impeachments, and four
indictments to his record would bother swing voters enough to prefer a
lackluster normie Democrat instead. We got our answer.
No wonder some of the shriller Trump critics in the media
are either calling for détente
with the White House or being quietly
sidelined. Shrillness has gotten us nowhere. (Although it works okay if you
earn a living by writing a daily political newsletter, ahem.) Voters want to
give Trump a shot on policy and have been successfully conditioned not to feel
ashamed of him, no matter how disgustingly he behaves. If you’re a left-wing
officeholder, why howl into the void about it?
Even if Democrats had an effective message, it’s an open
question at this point whether they could overcome Trump’s propaganda machine
and reach Americans in meaningful numbers. An example: Joe Biden’s margin of
victory in the 2020 popular vote was three times larger than Trump’s in 2024
but almost twice as many Americans believe Trump
won more comfortably than Biden did. That’s what two and a half months of
relentless moronic “MOST HISTORIC LANDSLIDE EVER” screeching has done to public
opinion.
Our politics is increasingly postliberal on policy and
already post-shame on leadership: What exactly can Democrats do except pray for
the price of eggs to double?
Frankly, I wonder if Jonathan Last is right to believe
that driving down Trump’s popularity would meaningfully constrain his power as
president. He’s term-limited (hopefully!)
and clearly intends to govern much more autocratically this time around, having
learned the ins and outs of wielding power over his first four years. If
pardoning the J6ers really does hurt his approval rating, so what? Are the
congressional Republicans who feared in 2021 that they’d
be killed if they voted to impeach him going to courageously roadblock his
agenda when he’s polling at 43 percent approval instead of 48?
The point of the authoritarian project is to treat all
constraints on executive power, including public opinion, as
illegitimate and to desensitize the public to that fact. Pardoning the J6ers
can be understood as another step in the process. If Americans don’t like it,
tough. They put him in charge; they’ll learn to live with it.
The next riot.
I’m convinced that Americans will end up holding Trump to
a lower standard morally, ethically, and civically in his second term than they
have other presidents, and not just because his infectious shamelessness has
numbed them to his outrages.
It’s because, unlike in his first term, they knew what
they were signing up for. You cannot watch January 6 happen, vote for him four
years later, and then huff indignantly when he starts his own crypto Ponzi
scheme or cuts
off security for a critic who’s under credible threat of being murdered by
terrorists. Even if you feel a pang of vestigial embarrassment or disgust
about it, you can’t complain without looking like a preposterous rube. Trump is
being Trump. What on earth did you expect?
So many Americans won’t complain, if only to save face.
They’ll rationalize. If he wants to pardon a bunch of insurrectionists and then
make them FBI agents or whatever, Trump voters will swallow that bitter pill
with a pained smile on their faces and strain for a way to celebrate the taste.
“They might turn out to be good agents because they really understand how the
justice system works now.”
We can (and should) scoff at Trump’s claims that the
election gave him a “mandate” on policy given the narrowness of his victory and
questionable
popular support for key parts of agenda. But a mandate to behave
shamelessly? It’s hard to argue that Americans didn’t grant him that.
When I read a list of 10
excuses Republicans in Congress have already made for his despicable J6 pardons,
then, I’m of two minds about it. On the one hand, the moral depravity required
to justify impunity for violent seditionists is so irresponsible in political
leadership that it feels like a Rubicon-crossing, even by the loathsome
standards of the GOP. After this, I can’t imagine what Republican leaders could
or would say to voters in party primaries to discourage them from electing
insurrectionists to Congress.
Come to think of it, I can’t imagine what they could or
would say to condemn the next act of organized violence to serve Trump. If
leftists stage a sit-in to obstruct federal immigration officials from
detaining some illegal immigrants, and a bunch of Proud Boys show up and stab
some of them to death, what’s the Republican take on that? The best we
could expect, I think, is some mealy-mouthed both-sides-ism about how violence
is bad but civil disobedience is also bad.
So, certainly, the cowardice they showed this week by not
emphatically denouncing the pardons is reprehensible. But on the other hand: What
on earth did you expect?
Our problem is not Republicans in Congress or even the
Republican in the White House. Our problem, as
ever, is the millions of boiled frogs who’ve concluded that shamelessness
is a political virtue, not a vice. Blame them for what’s happened, and for
what’s to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment