In two interviews released this week, Donald Trump made it clear that he will only accept the results of the 2024 election if he wins. And even more alarming, Trump—as he did in 2020 —is beginning the process of radicalizing his supporters to commit another Jan 6 type attack if he loses.
Before we get into Trump’s comments, please understand that none of this should come as a surprise. After all, Trump attempted a coup and the incited the deadly Jan 6 attack on our Capitol yet he walks free almost three and a half years later. When a corrupt person like Trump is not swiftly held accountable for his crimes, he will not change his conduct. In fact, he will be emboldened to engage in that same conduct—if not worse.
That is why for years I was slamming Attorney General Merrick Garland in both articles and on cable news for his failure to promptly charge Trump with crimes. At the very least, Garland should have appointed a Special Counsel to investigate Trump for Jan 6 related crimes as soon as he was sworn in as AG in March 2021. But instead—as we know from reporting—Garland slow walked the investigation into Trump. Consequently, Trump is the 2024 GOP presidential nominee and if he wins in November, he will escape accountability for his federal crimes.
That bring us to Trump’s recent interviews where he is copying his 2020 playbook to both delegitimize the election results if he loses and prepare his supporters for violence on his behalf. On Wednesday, in an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel while in Wisconsin for a rally, Trump was asked if he would accept the results of the 2024 election. As the Journal Sentinel noted, Trump “did not commit to accepting the results of the 2024 election.” Rather, he stated, “If everything's honest, I'll gladly accept the results.” But Trump then added ominously, “If it's not, you have to fight for the right of the country."
Trump saying his supporters have to “fight” if he loses instantly conjures up what he said after the 2020 election to radicalize his supporters to ultimately wage the Jan 6 terrorist attack. In fact, at the rally on Jan 6 before the attack, the crowd’s war cry was, “Fight for Trump!” And Trump bellowed the word “fight” or “fighting” to that riled up MAGA crowd 20 times before they waged the actual attack.
Trump made these same points in his series of Time interviews released this week. When asked about the potential of political violence, Trump should have made it clear given Jan 6, he rejects it and calls on his supporters to do the same. In fact, he should have mimicked the words of President Biden in 2022 on this very issue: “I want to say this plain and simple: There is no place for political violence in America. Period. None. Ever.”
Trump didn’t. Instead, when Trump was first asked by the reporter: “Are you worried about political violence in connection with this November's election?” Trump responded, “I think we're gonna have a big victory. And I think there will be no violence.”
The reporter then pressed Trump in a follow up interview on the point: “On our last conversation you said you weren't worried about political violence in connection with the November election. You said, “I think we're going to win and there won't be violence.” What if you don't win, sir?”
To that Trump said, “I do think we're gonna win. We're way ahead. I don't think they'll be able to do the things that they did the last time, which were horrible.” But alarmingly he then added, “And if we don't win, you know, it depends. It always depends on the fairness of an election.”
Trump is telling us and his followers that if he wins, the election is fair. If not, then they have to “fight” for him the same way they did on Jan 6.
But Trump was not done priming his base to commit violence on his behalf if he calls upon them. In that same Time interview, Trump first praised the Jan 6 attackers as “patriots” and then re-affirmed that if he wins, he will pardon them. When pressed by the reporter, “Will you consider pardoning every one of them?” Trump did not hesitate, “I would consider that, yes.”
That means Trump would pardon his beloved Proud Boys leaders—all convicted of seditious conspiracy—and others who brutally beat police officers with poles, bats, dragged them down stairs, etc.
Why this is all part of Trump’s radicalization process was made clear by authoritarian expert Ruth Ben-Ghiat in my recent interview. First, she explained that Trump’s praise of the Jan 6 attackers as “patriots,” is “to get people to see that violence is not negative.” Rather, Trump wants his base to understand that “violence is sometimes morally necessary and even righteous, and even patriotic.” Ben-Ghiat explained that is “one of the major things that fascists did.”
Getting to Trump’s offer of pardons, Ben-Ghiat explained that Trump saying he will pardon the Jan 6 attackers is to incentivize future violence. Alarmingly, she noted that Trump’s message to his followers is, "If you commit crimes for me as we get closer to the election, I will do the same for you,"—namely pardon them.
If there had not been a Jan 6 attack, we could dismiss Trump’s words as being nothing more than overheated campaign rhetoric. But we can’t. As the Jan 6 House committee’s final report put it: “The central cause of January 6th was one man, former President Donald Trump, whom many others followed. None of the events of January 6th would have happened without him.”
No one better understands the MAGA base than Trump. He knows how to manipulate, radicalize and then activate them to commit violence. And Trump is now laying the groundwork for another such attack—or even a series of attacks—right in front of our eyes.
Who will finally stand up to this lunatic? I realize that Judge Merchan has to walk a fine line in order to get a good result within a minimal timeframe. And I know that nailing him requires a very complex strategy. I just wish someone could poke a pin in that giant orange gas balloon and watch it go flying and squealing around the room until it falls into a shriveled soggy heap of rubber on the floor.
His brain is geschwöinckted. He doesn't perceive how INSANE it seems? —to say he's not willing to accept an outcome that doesn't favor HIM? He doesn't recognize that? — HE DOESN'T GET THAT? (how crazy it is) And . . . he doesn't get the beyond-obvious, implicit monumental arrogance and megalomania in that? It suggests he really is ill.