thebulwark--2020-11-01--Trump Co-Opts Mexican Holiday with Proclamation Demonizing Illegal Immigrants

Thirty-five minutes before midnight on Friday , Donald Trump dumped a Halloween surprise on the country .
It was so stunningly tone-deaf , many initially thought it was parody .
It wasn ’ t .
The president introduced a proclamation to assist “ Our Angel Families ” before using the deaths as a launching-board to brag about his mostly unbuilt border wall .
The proclamation , headlined “ National Day of Remembrance for Americans Killed by Illegal Aliens , 2020 , ” sets aside November 1 for this occasion—or Día de Muertos , the Day of the Dead .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many in the Hispanic community on social media .
“ I call upon the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and activities , ” Trump , or more likely Stephen Miller , wrote .
The proclamation emailed to White House reporters did not show up until hours later on the White House website , prompting many to believe the callous , xenophobic statement was either satire or “ fake news.
” When we reported the proclamation many were left wondering , Is this real ?
or Can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are : Yes , it is real .
And yes , they can sink lower .
This latest proclamation has led many to question the administration ’ s priorities .
George Conway tweeted out , “ When ’ s the National Day of Remembrance for Americans Killed by the Trump Administration ’ s Failed Pandemic Response ?
” Actor Jon Cryer noted that “ immigrants both documented and undocumented commit crime at a LOWER rate than citizens .
Are we gon na have a national day of remembrance for the vastly larger group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Others wondered if we would have a national day of remembrance for those killed by police , white supremacists , and other assorted mayhem .
As the election gets closer , Trump and his cronies are hitting all their foghorns .
Never forget that racism is a cornerstone theme in the Trump rancid roadshow .
And remember , they can always go lower .
Trump ’ s not above using the dead to promote his wall , which Mexico has never paid for and which remains largely unbuilt .
Independent audits show that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been built is actually replacement , and just a few miles of new wall have been erected .
That ’ s not much of an erection along a 1,954-mile-long border .
It ’ s also mostly steel bollard fencing , and not the “ wall ” Trump promised .
But facts , again , mean little and have never meant much to Donald Trump .
If they did , he wouldn ’ t have co-opted the Day of the Dead that many immigrants celebrate to proclaim a day of celebration for the families @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hands of undocumented immigrants .
His proclamation not only foments anger against immigrants , but goes against the American principles enshrined on the Statue of Liberty .
Emma Lazarus ’ s sonnet “ The New Colossus , ” cast in bronze and mounted inside the statue ’ s lower level , is seemingly irrelevant to Trump and his ilk : In Trump ’ s vision of America , we don ’ t want the wretched refuse .
We sure don ’ t want any homeless .
He tells us these people are “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The history of the United States has been one of acceptance of immigration .
As President Ronald Reagan put it in his 1988 State of the Union address , America has long been a shining city on a hill for freedom-loving people everywhere , open and accepting people from other countries , with minimal requirements to become citizens .
But for those who have come from our own hemisphere , south of us , America has failed to live up to these ideals and often been dismissive of our neighbor ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experiment .
We waged wars to reduce the size of Mexico and increase our own country ’ s size due to “ manifest destiny.
” “ I spent 33 years in the Marines , most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big business , for Wall Street and the bankers .
In short I was a racketeer for Capitalism , ” explained one of the most decorated Marines in U.S. history , Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler , in his famous speech and later book War is a Racket .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wars in our own hemisphere for the sake of profit or business interests .
As Butler pointed out , we have tried to keep Central and South America in check for years in order to provide cheap labor for the United States .
Trump ’ s disdain for the downtrodden certainly isn ’ t anything new .
But Trump ’ s xenophobia is blatant and unmatched in modern American political culture .
Not only does he not pay lip service to the ideals of our forefathers or heed the advice and warnings from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ideal : No room at the inn .
Caging children and disparaging the immigrant population by singling out the very few undocumented immigrants who commit violent crimes does a disservice not only to the immigrant community but to the victims of the violent crimes—reducing them to pawns in Trump ’ s greater xenophobic vision for the United States .
Many victims of violent crimes in immigrant communities are immigrants themselves and many of the crimes in those communities go unreported for fear of being deported .
These are not the people whom Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this is another callous political stunt to appeal to his base of God-fearing white people .
As the country heads into the final stretch of the election , it ’ s increasingly obvious that not only will Trump not change—he is incapable of it and administration has only one note left to play : Fear .
They want you afraid .

Thirty-five minutes before midnight on Friday, Donald Trump dumped a Halloween surprise on the country. It was so stunningly tone-deaf, many initially thought it was parody. It wasn’t.
The president introduced a proclamation to assist “Our Angel Families” before using the deaths as a launching-board to brag about his mostly unbuilt border wall. The proclamation, headlined “National Day of Remembrance for Americans Killed by Illegal Aliens, 2020,” sets aside November 1 for this occasion—or Día de Muertos, the Day of the Dead. The move has been decried as insensitive by many in the Hispanic community on social media.
“I call upon the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and activities,” Trump, or more likely Stephen Miller, wrote.
The proclamation emailed to White House reporters did not show up until hours later on the White House website, prompting many to believe the callous, xenophobic statement was either satire or “fake news.” When we reported the proclamation many were left wondering, Is this real? or Can they sink any lower?
The answers are: Yes, it is real. And yes, they can sink lower.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
This latest proclamation has led many to question the administration’s priorities. George Conway tweeted out, “When’s the National Day of Remembrance for Americans Killed by the Trump Administration’s Failed Pandemic Response?”
Actor Jon Cryer noted that “immigrants both documented and undocumented commit crime at a LOWER rate than citizens. Are we gonna have a national day of remembrance for the vastly larger group of Americans killed by Americans?”
Others wondered if we would have a national day of remembrance for those killed by police, white supremacists, and other assorted mayhem.
As the election gets closer, Trump and his cronies are hitting all their foghorns. Never forget that racism is a cornerstone theme in the Trump rancid roadshow. And remember, they can always go lower.
Trump’s not above using the dead to promote his wall, which Mexico has never paid for and which remains largely unbuilt. Independent audits show that most of the wall Trump claims has been built is actually replacement, and just a few miles of new wall have been erected. That’s not much of an erection along a 1,954-mile-long border. It’s also mostly steel bollard fencing, and not the “wall” Trump promised.
But facts, again, mean little and have never meant much to Donald Trump.
If they did, he wouldn’t have co-opted the Day of the Dead that many immigrants celebrate to proclaim a day of celebration for the families of those who have died by the hands of undocumented immigrants.
His proclamation not only foments anger against immigrants, but goes against the American principles enshrined on the Statue of Liberty. Emma Lazarus’s sonnet “The New Colossus,” cast in bronze and mounted inside the statue’s lower level, is seemingly irrelevant to Trump and his ilk:
. . . “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
In Trump’s vision of America, we don’t want the wretched refuse. We sure don’t want any homeless. He tells us these people are “thugs” and “very bad people.”
The history of the United States has been one of acceptance of immigration. As President Ronald Reagan put it in his 1988 State of the Union address, America has long been a shining city on a hill for freedom-loving people everywhere, open and accepting people from other countries, with minimal requirements to become citizens.
But for those who have come from our own hemisphere, south of us, America has failed to live up to these ideals and often been dismissive of our neighbor’s efforts to become part of the American experiment. We waged wars to reduce the size of Mexico and increase our own country’s size due to “manifest destiny.”
“I spent 33 years in the Marines, most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short I was a racketeer for Capitalism,” explained one of the most decorated Marines in U.S. history, Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler, in his famous speech and later book War is a Racket. He warned of the dangers in waging wars in our own hemisphere for the sake of profit or business interests.
As Butler pointed out, we have tried to keep Central and South America in check for years in order to provide cheap labor for the United States. Trump’s disdain for the downtrodden certainly isn’t anything new.
But Trump’s xenophobia is blatant and unmatched in modern American political culture.
Not only does he not pay lip service to the ideals of our forefathers or heed the advice and warnings from generals, he has adopted a new ideal: No room at the inn. Caging children and disparaging the immigrant population by singling out the very few undocumented immigrants who commit violent crimes does a disservice not only to the immigrant community but to the victims of the violent crimes—reducing them to pawns in Trump’s greater xenophobic vision for the United States.
Many victims of violent crimes in immigrant communities are immigrants themselves and many of the crimes in those communities go unreported for fear of being deported. These are not the people whom Trump is engaging with this proclamation. No, this is another callous political stunt to appeal to his base of God-fearing white people.
As the country heads into the final stretch of the election, it’s increasingly obvious that not only will Trump not change—he is incapable of it and administration has only one note left to play: Fear.
They want you afraid.
Don’t be.


thebulwark--2020-11-01--Untangling Faith and Love of Country

Untangling Faith and Love of Country

In August , I joined over 100 former Republican national security officials in explaining our security concerns with the current president .
In my view , the president ’ s lapses and failures on matters of national security alone are sufficient to disqualify him from his role .
Coming to that understanding , however , led to months of wrestling with several key arguments that had swayed me to vote for Trump in 2016 .
Like many Christian Republican voters , I saw Trump primarily as a “ lesser of two evils ” vote against Hillary Clinton .
Since speaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the anti-Trump coalition : “ How could I have voted for him in the first place ?
” Christians , Republicans , and conservatives , including friends and those in the church , have all excoriated me—in reference to abortion they say I have blood on my hands .
In their eyes , I ’ ve signed the death warrant of religious freedom .
But I have also heard from a third group : believers who have expressed gratitude that I spoke out .
They , too , have felt a tug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t right .
They see a disconnect between what the Bible teaches and what their church leaders are supporting .
They are scared to speak out because of the potential rejection from their community .
They feel alone .
I write this not to justify my decision to the first two groups , but to share my journey in case it aids the third group in their wrestling .
For decades , my faith community and the insistent mouthpieces of the right taught me to fear the loss of our most cherished freedoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ figures of authority and adamant commentators is compelling , comprehensive , and relentless .
We are told that “ they ” are coming to take away our religious liberties and our ability to teach our children the way we think they should be taught ; instead , “ they ” will be forcing agendas with which the church disagrees upon society .
We are exhorted further : moral decline is ruining our country ; and , within our lifetime , pastors could be jailed for preaching historically orthodox Christianity , and perhaps our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If you are not an evangelical Christian familiar with this persecution narrative , I can understand how extreme this might seem .
Understand that these arguments exploit a shared experience of real changes in our culture and the interpretation of law , which have occurred quickly and are fueled by statements and actions from the left .
While our current cultural shifts , increasing political intolerance to different viewpoints , and widespread breakdown of social trust are something to discuss , the use of fear to motivate voting for a political candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Christianity .
But the Bible is clear : The more we look to Christ , we find rest in Christ alone , and only in Him , we discover it easier to let go of the fear .
We should never let our faith be co-opted by fear-driven , politicized narratives .
The truth is : America is not , was never intended to be a “ Christian nation.
” Historically speaking , the United States was founded by groups of people who held to Christian teachings—some more stringently than others .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention , has written and spoken out to explain the misunderstandings among believers who may be confused about this and who might therefore start infusing nationalism into their spiritual or religious identity .
Moore maintains that scripture does not support the notion that America , along with its people and its governmental institutions , have a special covenant relationship with God .
For those people who see their faith intricately tied with a belief that “ America is a Christian Nation , ” it becomes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fellow citizens exhibit a moral code different from that of the Bible .
They may even feel the need to fight—using the democratic process—to preserve their faith through governmental means .
It then seems justifiable to choose the “ lesser of two evils ” because one side is campaigning on the promise to “ protect Christianity.
” The good news for the believer is : Biblical faith is not dependent on the governments of this world .
Jesus , standing before Pontius Pilate—a representative of the world government of the day—states clearly that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world.
” ( John 18:36 ) Jesus does not stop there .
He points out that if it was of this world , His “ servants would have been fighting , that [ He ] might not be delivered over .
.
.
” Now , this does not mean the believer can not be politically active or involved in government .
But it does make clear that we do not have to compromise the teachings of Scripture in order to vote for a man who claims to protect our faith .
Moore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ healthy Christianity should bring some friction with the culture : In the context of 2,000 years of church history and Christians in other parts of the world today , believers in America are remarkably unpersecuted—and perhaps too comfortable .
Of course , I do not want my pastor to be censored by the state , nor do I desire the increasingly hostile cancel culture ( which , despite what Christians and Republicans are told , is found on both sides of the aisle ) for anyone who does not hold a mainstream view @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” were to happen , our trust , as Christians , must remain in God—not in a man who says he will defend religious liberties , not in the institutions of our country , not even in the Constitution .
Our trust , as Christians and believers , is in God .
Further , the best way to fight to protect religious liberties is a consistent moral witness for protecting all liberties and a shared commitment to constitutional norms .
On this latter point , I have been convinced that my witness was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear blinded me from pausing and actually considering the injustices many are facing .
One of the more challenging aspects of my job these last three years was the necessity of looking into ideologies that promote hatred of the ‘ other.
’ The increase in the number of attacks by white supremacists and other right-wing extremist groups over the last six years forced me to look at an evil many of us thought was in the past .
It led me to personally reflect on how Christians should respond .
Faced with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we should be making every effort towards racial reconciliation .
It ’ s clear in light of the “ greatest commandments ” in Matthew 22:34-40 that the way forward is through listening first , learning and understanding the systematic nature of racism , and then lamenting with those in pain .
But this is the opposite of how Republicans and Trump have responded—dismissing calls to address racial injustice .
Trump , in particular , ignored the rising threat of domestic terrorists and has added fuel to the fire of extremism .
Consider also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bigoted nativism that turns away immigrants and refugees seeking safe haven .
I am a counterterrorism expert and a longstanding security professional well aware of dangers posed by threat actors ; and I want to properly vet those who want to enter our country to ensure they do not intend harm .
But what has occurred in our culture and is reflected in the Trump administration ’ s policies—significant reductions of the refugee ceiling , travel restrictions which largely target underdeveloped countries , and using intentionally cruel family separations as a deterrent—is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and racism , rooted in fear .
The Bible teaches that all human beings are made in the image of God ( Genesis 1:26-27 ) , equal in dignity , value , and worth .
Throughout Scripture , God demonstrates His heart for the vulnerable and oppressed and calls His people to advocate for the immigrant , the refugee , and the poor .
“ Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the sojourner , the fatherless , and the widow , ” reads Deuteronomy 27:19 , and “ when a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you shall not do him wrong , ” reads Leviticus 19:33-34 .
This call to care for the vulnerable is so woven into God ’ s character that when the prophets are pronouncing judgment and calling for Israel to repent and return to God , one of the charges He lays against them , over and over , is that they oppressed the vulnerable .
Being a follower of Christ and demonstrating his grace means fighting against human trafficking , slavery , sexual abuse , domestic abuse , and racism , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the orphan , the poor , refugees , the migrant , the disabled , the sick , and the elderly .
The party with which I associated ignored major aspects of this call—choosing to focus on anti-abortion and the life of the unborn ( conception-to-birth ) rather than a holistic ( conception-to-grave ) pro-life ethic .
This is not to minimize the importance of anti-abortion efforts .
It was by far , the most difficult issue with which I wrestled .
I am much indebted to the teachings and writings of David French @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Matt Chandler , John Piper , and Michael Gerson .
If you are wrestling with this , I encourage you to consider their perspectives .
I am not suggesting that they endorse where I ended up , but that their scholarship can help raise and answer questions that go deeper than the constant cycle of reactive political news .
I learned that abortions are at a historic low—lower than prior to the Roe decision .
I also believe there is still much work to be done , and while we should advocate for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am convinced that work in your local community in a way that addresses the full needs of a vulnerable mother and her children is significantly more impactful than the role of the president .
As I was working through these issues , I came upon Keller ’ s framing that “ most political positions are not matters of biblical command but of practical wisdom.
” While Christians may disagree on the “ how ” —the best policies and programs to protect the vulnerable and seek justice—the calling to do justice , love @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Micah 6:8 ) is so clear , that for a Christian to deny it is to miss an important part of the Gospel .
Matt Chandler puts it this way : “ The Gospel vertically reconciles us to God , that ’ s the hope of our calling , but then the Gospel begins to work horizontally reconciling us to men and women , reconciling the brokenness of the world around us .
So that the Gospel doesn ’ t just reconcile me to God , but then begins to reconcile me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrestling experience led me to the conclusion that neither political party addresses our nation ’ s challenges in a manner consistent with Scripture ’ s teachings .
Tim Keller makes a case that Scripture does not allow us to “ withdraw and try to be apolitical , ” but neither can we “ assimilate and fully adopt one party ’ s whole package in order to have your place at the table.
” In 2020 , I find myself with “ The Spiritual Blessing of Political Homelessness , ” and without a default @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have concluded that I can not vote for President Trump again—for the reasons explained in this article , as well as in others related to my concerns for our nation ’ s security .
Having examined the character and competence of Joe Biden , I will be voting for him , knowing that I disagree with some of his policies .
Thoughtful Christians will wrestle and come to different conclusions .
Christians do not believe in consequentialism and therefore do not have to choose “ the lesser of two evils.
” My @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We can disagree about for whom to vote and remain united in Christ and animated by a shared commitment to love and care for each other .
Wherever you end up in your wrestling and however the election turns out on Tuesday , be encouraged , Believer : Our hope is in Christ ( I Peter 1:3 ) ; our citizenship is in heaven ( Philippians 3:20 ) , we are but sojourners here ; God is sovereign and will never leave or forsake us ( Hebrews 13:5 ) .

In August, I joined over 100 former Republican national security officials in explaining our security concerns with the current president. In my view, the president’s lapses and failures on matters of national security alone are sufficient to disqualify him from his role.
Coming to that understanding, however, led to months of wrestling with several key arguments that had swayed me to vote for Trump in 2016. Like many Christian Republican voters, I saw Trump primarily as a “lesser of two evils” vote against Hillary Clinton.
Since speaking out, I’ve been criticized by the anti-Trump coalition: “How could I have voted for him in the first place?” Christians, Republicans, and conservatives, including friends and those in the church, have all excoriated me—in reference to abortion they say I have blood on my hands. In their eyes, I’ve signed the death warrant of religious freedom.
But I have also heard from a third group: believers who have expressed gratitude that I spoke out. They, too, have felt a tug on their hearts that something isn’t right. They see a disconnect between what the Bible teaches and what their church leaders are supporting. They are scared to speak out because of the potential rejection from their community. They feel alone.
I write this not to justify my decision to the first two groups, but to share my journey in case it aids the third group in their wrestling.
Fearing the Loss of a “Christian Nation”
For decades, my faith community and the insistent mouthpieces of the right taught me to fear the loss of our most cherished freedoms. The narrative of fear coming from figures of authority and adamant commentators is compelling, comprehensive, and relentless. We are told that “they” are coming to take away our religious liberties and our ability to teach our children the way we think they should be taught; instead, “they” will be forcing agendas with which the church disagrees upon society.
We are exhorted further: moral decline is ruining our country; and, within our lifetime, pastors could be jailed for preaching historically orthodox Christianity, and perhaps our children will be punished for their faith.
If you are not an evangelical Christian familiar with this persecution narrative, I can understand how extreme this might seem. Understand that these arguments exploit a shared experience of real changes in our culture and the interpretation of law, which have occurred quickly and are fueled by statements and actions from the left.
While our current cultural shifts, increasing political intolerance to different viewpoints, and widespread breakdown of social trust are something to discuss, the use of fear to motivate voting for a political candidate is deeply rooted in a serious misunderstanding of Christianity. But the Bible is clear: The more we look to Christ, we find rest in Christ alone, and only in Him, we discover it easier to let go of the fear. We should never let our faith be co-opted by fear-driven, politicized narratives.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
The truth is: America is not, was never intended to be a “Christian nation.” Historically speaking, the United States was founded by groups of people who held to Christian teachings—some more stringently than others. Russell Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, has written and spoken out to explain the misunderstandings among believers who may be confused about this and who might therefore start infusing nationalism into their spiritual or religious identity. Moore maintains that scripture does not support the notion that America, along with its people and its governmental institutions, have a special covenant relationship with God.
For those people who see their faith intricately tied with a belief that “America is a Christian Nation,” it becomes frightening and threatening to see laws and fellow citizens exhibit a moral code different from that of the Bible. They may even feel the need to fight—using the democratic process—to preserve their faith through governmental means. It then seems justifiable to choose the “lesser of two evils” because one side is campaigning on the promise to “protect Christianity.”
The good news for the believer is: Biblical faith is not dependent on the governments of this world. Jesus, standing before Pontius Pilate—a representative of the world government of the day—states clearly that His Kingdom “is not of this world.” (John 18:36) Jesus does not stop there. He points out that if it was of this world, His “servants would have been fighting, that [He] might not be delivered over. . .”
Now, this does not mean the believer cannot be politically active or involved in government. But it does make clear that we do not have to compromise the teachings of Scripture in order to vote for a man who claims to protect our faith.
Moore further explains in his book Onward that healthy Christianity should bring some friction with the culture:
Our call is to engaged alienation, a Christianity that preserves the distinctiveness of our gospel while not retreating from our callings as neighbors, and friends, and citizens. . . . The church now has the opportunity to bear witness in a culture that does not even pretend to share our “values.” That is not a tragedy since we were never given a mission to promote “values” in the first place, but to speak instead of sin and of righteousness and judgment, of Christ and his kingdom. . . . Our end goal is not a Christian America, either of the made-up past or the hoped-for future. Our end goal is the kingdom of Christ, made up of every tribe, tongue, nation, and language. [Italics in original, bold added for emphasis.]
In the context of 2,000 years of church history and Christians in other parts of the world today, believers in America are remarkably unpersecuted—and perhaps too comfortable.
Of course, I do not want my pastor to be censored by the state, nor do I desire the increasingly hostile cancel culture (which, despite what Christians and Republicans are told, is found on both sides of the aisle) for anyone who does not hold a mainstream view. But if the “worst-case scenarios” were to happen, our trust, as Christians, must remain in God—not in a man who says he will defend religious liberties, not in the institutions of our country, not even in the Constitution. Our trust, as Christians and believers, is in God.
Further, the best way to fight to protect religious liberties is a consistent moral witness for protecting all liberties and a shared commitment to constitutional norms. On this latter point, I have been convinced that my witness was tarnished by supporting President Trump, and fear blinded me from pausing and actually considering the injustices many are facing.
Addressing Injustice in Pursuit of a Holistic Pro-Life Ethic
One of the more challenging aspects of my job these last three years was the necessity of looking into ideologies that promote hatred of the ‘other.’ The increase in the number of attacks by white supremacists and other right-wing extremist groups over the last six years forced me to look at an evil many of us thought was in the past.
It led me to personally reflect on how Christians should respond. Faced with the reality of overwhelming injustice the answer is we should be making every effort towards racial reconciliation. It’s clear in light of the “greatest commandments” in Matthew 22:34-40 that the way forward is through listening first, learning and understanding the systematic nature of racism, and then lamenting with those in pain.
But this is the opposite of how Republicans and Trump have responded—dismissing calls to address racial injustice. Trump, in particular, ignored the rising threat of domestic terrorists and has added fuel to the fire of extremism. Consider also how our country has been pulled towards a bigoted nativism that turns away immigrants and refugees seeking safe haven.
I am a counterterrorism expert and a longstanding security professional well aware of dangers posed by threat actors; and I want to properly vet those who want to enter our country to ensure they do not intend harm. But what has occurred in our culture and is reflected in the Trump administration’s policies—significant reductions of the refugee ceiling, travel restrictions which largely target underdeveloped countries, and using intentionally cruel family separations as a deterrent—is not about security. It is xenophobia and racism, rooted in fear.
The Bible teaches that all human beings are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27), equal in dignity, value, and worth. Throughout Scripture, God demonstrates His heart for the vulnerable and oppressed and calls His people to advocate for the immigrant, the refugee, and the poor. “Cursed be anyone who perverts the justice due to the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow,” reads Deuteronomy 27:19, and “when a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong,” reads Leviticus 19:33-34.
This call to care for the vulnerable is so woven into God’s character that when the prophets are pronouncing judgment and calling for Israel to repent and return to God, one of the charges He lays against them, over and over, is that they oppressed the vulnerable.
Being a follower of Christ and demonstrating his grace means fighting against human trafficking, slavery, sexual abuse, domestic abuse, and racism, and caring for and protecting the unborn, the orphan, the poor, refugees, the migrant, the disabled, the sick, and the elderly.
The party with which I associated ignored major aspects of this call—choosing to focus on anti-abortion and the life of the unborn (conception-to-birth) rather than a holistic (conception-to-grave) pro-life ethic.
This is not to minimize the importance of anti-abortion efforts. It was by far, the most difficult issue with which I wrestled. I am much indebted to the teachings and writings of David French, Russell Moore, Tim Keller, Matt Chandler, John Piper, and Michael Gerson. If you are wrestling with this, I encourage you to consider their perspectives. I am not suggesting that they endorse where I ended up, but that their scholarship can help raise and answer questions that go deeper than the constant cycle of reactive political news.
I learned that abortions are at a historic low—lower than prior to the Roe decision. I also believe there is still much work to be done, and while we should advocate for federal policies that protect the unborn, I am convinced that work in your local community in a way that addresses the full needs of a vulnerable mother and her children is significantly more impactful than the role of the president.
As I was working through these issues, I came upon Keller’s framing that “most political positions are not matters of biblical command but of practical wisdom.” While Christians may disagree on the “how”—the best policies and programs to protect the vulnerable and seek justice—the calling to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with God (Micah 6:8) is so clear, that for a Christian to deny it is to miss an important part of the Gospel.
Matt Chandler puts it this way: “The Gospel vertically reconciles us to God, that’s the hope of our calling, but then the Gospel begins to work horizontally reconciling us to men and women, reconciling the brokenness of the world around us. So that the Gospel doesn’t just reconcile me to God, but then begins to reconcile me to my brothers and sisters.”
Political Homelessness–Reclaiming my Sojourner Status
This wrestling experience led me to the conclusion that neither political party addresses our nation’s challenges in a manner consistent with Scripture’s teachings. Tim Keller makes a case that Scripture does not allow us to “withdraw and try to be apolitical,” but neither can we “assimilate and fully adopt one party’s whole package in order to have your place at the table.”
In 2020, I find myself with “The Spiritual Blessing of Political Homelessness,” and without a default box to check when I vote. I have concluded that I cannot vote for President Trump again—for the reasons explained in this article, as well as in others related to my concerns for our nation’s security. Having examined the character and competence of Joe Biden, I will be voting for him, knowing that I disagree with some of his policies.
Thoughtful Christians will wrestle and come to different conclusions. Christians do not believe in consequentialism and therefore do not have to choose “the lesser of two evils.” My husband chose to write in a candidate. We can disagree about for whom to vote and remain united in Christ and animated by a shared commitment to love and care for each other.
Wherever you end up in your wrestling and however the election turns out on Tuesday, be encouraged, Believer: Our hope is in Christ (I Peter 1:3); our citizenship is in heaven (Philippians 3:20), we are but sojourners here; God is sovereign and will never leave or forsake us (Hebrews 13:5).


thebulwark--2020-11-02--“Law & Order” in Donald Trump’s America

“Law & Order” in Donald Trump’s America

In Graham , North Carolina over the weekend , police pepper-sprayed the predominantly black participants of a peaceful “ I Am Change ” march to the polls in a state that could be the tipping point in determining who controls both the presidency and the Senate .
Three hundred miles north in McLean , Virginia , a group of President Trump ’ s supporters gathered outside the home of Attorney General Bill Barr to express their displeasure that he had not moved swiftly enough to execute extrajudicial arrests of the president ’ s political foes , as he has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York and New Jersey , Trump supporters formed up caravans that they used to block traffic on the Mario Cuomo Bridge and along the New Jersey Parkway .
In Texas , another caravan of Trump trucks—the president did warn America about outlaw caravans !
—attempted to run a Biden campaign bus off of the highway .
These very fine people were then cheered by the president , who later , via Twitter , directed the FBI not to investigate them .
The local sheriff blamed the Biden campaign for not notifying them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if we live in the Old West .
Marchers exercising their civil rights are pepper-sprayed .
Political opponents of the White House are routinely threatened with jailing by the president and targeted by vigilante mobs of his supporters who largely act with impunity .
Such is the state of LAW & ORDER in America on the eve of the 2020 presidential election .
The scene on Saturday in North Carolina was something that the recently awakened among us thought was a relic of an ugly , but eradicated , past .
A few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Graham—a small town in Alamance County off Highway 40 between Winston Salem and Durham .
The march was billed as “ one part demonstration and one part get-out-the-vote initiative ” by Rev .
Greg Drumwright of Citadel Church .
The march stopped for speeches in front of the courthouse , the site of a Confederate monument which has been a recent target for protests .
Among those slated to speak was the niece of George Floyd .
But the assembly was disrupted by police before she had the chance .
According to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a moment of silence for Floyd , during which the crowd kneeled in remembrance , police told people to clear the road .
When the crowd did not do so quickly enough for law enforcement ’ s liking , the police began a crackdown .
Videos from multiple angles reveal police indiscriminately shooting pepper spray into a crowd that included young children and seniors .
You can see one law enforcement official decked out in fatigues and a gas-mask ( for a small-town civil rights protest ) .
You can hear people in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing , ” “ This is a peaceful protest , ” and “ Help me.
” The News & Observer talked to the parents of children aged 3 , 5 , and 11 who all threw up after being sprayed by the police .
One of these kids had been simply “ sitting on a brick wall across the street.
” The Elon University student newspaper , which had reporters at the rally , said that they were “ tear gassed ” without warning and witnessed “ multiple people falling out.
” One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about “ 30 seconds ” between the request to clear the area and when the spray was deployed .
The mayor of neighboring Burlington , who was attending the protest , said that the warning to disperse came after the pepper spray began .
A reporter was arrested on the scene for seemingly no reason beyond not moving as fast as the officer wanted him to .
Kind of makes you wonder what the sheriff would have done to the Trump supporters who illegally shut down major transit arteries in New Jersey and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pepper-sprayed them and locked up the whole lot of ’ em , right ?
So here we have North Carolina law enforcement officials violently and indiscriminately interfering with : • American citizens ’ right to vote without intimidation • The right to a free press It is the type of thing that the constitutional conservatives who wet their pants anytime a freak with a Pepe the Frog avatar is suspended from Twitter for 24 hours might be concerned about if they had a genuine interest in protecting speech rights .
This was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Alamance County Sheriff ’ s Office was almost certainly purposefully targeting the gathering because it was a minority group—and by the by , they have a track record for this sort of thing .
In 2012 , when the U.S. Department of Justice cared about such matters , it found that the county sheriff ’ s office had shown a “ pattern of discriminatory policing ” under Terry Johnson .
Johnson was re-elected to his post nonetheless .
Just in case you thought that Sheriff Johnson might have gotten a raw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a man who last year said that “ criminal immigrants are raping our citizens in many , many ways.
” This year he made a public statement about how he was going to look the other way if he saw people violating COVID-19 protocols at the raceway .
Just a weird coincidence that the black civil rights protesters and brown undocumented immigrants get the book thrown at them while the boys down at the track get a friendly warning .
The president of the United States , for his part , is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supports them .
Because these are the exact types of actions that he has taken himself and that his henchmen uphold .
Consider again the scene in McLean .
Protesters gathered outside the home of the attorney general to demand the jailing of the president ’ s political opponents for imaginary crimes .
Now freedom of speech and assembly is for the crazies , too .
LARPers who fantasize about pedophile rings have rights , just like you and me .
But given that the context of the situation you might reasonably think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So what happened at the Barr residence ?
According to Barr ’ s spokesperson the attorney general “ went outside to greet the crowd , chatted with the folks out there , shook hands and posed for photos.
” ARE YOU FORKING KIDDING ME ?
Let me get this straight : The insane people coming to your house to demand you fabricate crimes get the selfie treatment while the people demanding justice for wrongful deaths get tear-gassed .
The Truck Nuts flirting with vehicular manslaughter get cheered by the president , while the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get out the vote are vomiting from pepper spray ?
Correction – A previous version of this article indicated Winston-Salem is part of North Carolina ’ s “ Research Triangle.
” It is not .
Chapel Hill ( UNC ) , Raleigh ( NC State ) , and Durham ( Duke ) make up the triangle .
Winston-Salem , the home of Wake Forest University , is 80 miles to the west .

In Graham, North Carolina over the weekend, police pepper-sprayed the predominantly black participants of a peaceful “I Am Change” march to the polls in a state that could be the tipping point in determining who controls both the presidency and the Senate.
Three hundred miles north in McLean, Virginia, a group of President Trump’s supporters gathered outside the home of Attorney General Bill Barr to express their displeasure that he had not moved swiftly enough to execute extrajudicial arrests of the president’s political foes, as he has been demanding on the campaign trail.
It's come to this: A neighbor reports that AG William Barr's house in McLean is being picketed by Trump supporters who believe he's not doing enough to lock up Joe Biden pic.twitter.com/Ko6Mbyfi97 — Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) October 31, 2020
In New York and New Jersey, Trump supporters formed up caravans that they used to block traffic on the Mario Cuomo Bridge and along the New Jersey Parkway.
In Texas, another caravan of Trump trucks—the president did warn America about outlaw caravans!—attempted to run a Biden campaign bus off of the highway. These very fine people were then cheered by the president, who later, via Twitter, directed the FBI not to investigate them. The local sheriff blamed the Biden campaign for not notifying them that they were passing through, as if we live in the Old West.
Marchers exercising their civil rights are pepper-sprayed. Political opponents of the White House are routinely threatened with jailing by the president and targeted by vigilante mobs of his supporters who largely act with impunity.
Such is the state of LAW & ORDER in America on the eve of the 2020 presidential election.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
The scene on Saturday in North Carolina was something that the recently awakened among us thought was a relic of an ugly, but eradicated, past.
A few hundred people marched through the main drag of Graham—a small town in Alamance County off Highway 40 between Winston Salem and Durham. The march was billed as “one part demonstration and one part get-out-the-vote initiative” by Rev. Greg Drumwright of Citadel Church.
The march stopped for speeches in front of the courthouse, the site of a Confederate monument which has been a recent target for protests. Among those slated to speak was the niece of George Floyd.
But the assembly was disrupted by police before she had the chance.
According to the Raleigh News & Observer, after a moment of silence for Floyd, during which the crowd kneeled in remembrance, police told people to clear the road. When the crowd did not do so quickly enough for law enforcement’s liking, the police began a crackdown.
Videos from multiple angles reveal police indiscriminately shooting pepper spray into a crowd that included young children and seniors. You can see one law enforcement official decked out in fatigues and a gas-mask (for a small-town civil rights protest). You can hear people in the assembly shouting “What are you doing,” “This is a peaceful protest,” and “Help me.”
The News & Observer talked to the parents of children aged 3, 5, and 11 who all threw up after being sprayed by the police. One of these kids had been simply “sitting on a brick wall across the street.” The Elon University student newspaper, which had reporters at the rally, said that they were “tear gassed” without warning and witnessed “multiple people falling out.” One participant in the protest said there was about “30 seconds” between the request to clear the area and when the spray was deployed. The mayor of neighboring Burlington, who was attending the protest, said that the warning to disperse came after the pepper spray began. A reporter was arrested on the scene for seemingly no reason beyond not moving as fast as the officer wanted him to.
Kind of makes you wonder what the sheriff would have done to the Trump supporters who illegally shut down major transit arteries in New Jersey and New York. Bet he would have pepper-sprayed them and locked up the whole lot of ’em, right?
LOL.
So here we have North Carolina law enforcement officials violently and indiscriminately interfering with:
American citizens’ right to peaceful assembly
American citizens’ right to vote without intimidation
The right to a free press
It is the type of thing that the constitutional conservatives who wet their pants anytime a freak with a Pepe the Frog avatar is suspended from Twitter for 24 hours might be concerned about if they had a genuine interest in protecting speech rights.
This was not just a random, rogue cop either.
The Alamance County Sheriff’s Office was almost certainly purposefully targeting the gathering because it was a minority group—and by the by, they have a track record for this sort of thing. In 2012, when the U.S. Department of Justice cared about such matters, it found that the county sheriff’s office had shown a “pattern of discriminatory policing” under Terry Johnson. Johnson was re-elected to his post nonetheless.
Just in case you thought that Sheriff Johnson might have gotten a raw deal from the feds, this is a man who last year said that “criminal immigrants are raping our citizens in many, many ways.” This year he made a public statement about how he was going to look the other way if he saw people violating COVID-19 protocols at the raceway.
Just a weird coincidence that the black civil rights protesters and brown undocumented immigrants get the book thrown at them while the boys down at the track get a friendly warning.
The president of the United States, for his part, is not indifferent to such goings on.
He supports them. Because these are the exact types of actions that he has taken himself and that his henchmen uphold.
Consider again the scene in McLean.
Protesters gathered outside the home of the attorney general to demand the jailing of the president’s political opponents for imaginary crimes. Now freedom of speech and assembly is for the crazies, too. LARPers who fantasize about pedophile rings have rights, just like you and me. But given that the context of the situation you might reasonably think that this was a security concern.
So what happened at the Barr residence?
According to Barr’s spokesperson the attorney general “went outside to greet the crowd, chatted with the folks out there, shook hands and posed for photos.”
POSED FOR PHOTOS?
ARE YOU FORKING KIDDING ME?
Let me get this straight:
The insane people coming to your house to demand you fabricate crimes get the selfie treatment while the people demanding justice for wrongful deaths get tear-gassed.
The Truck Nuts flirting with vehicular manslaughter get cheered by the president, while the black kids marching with their parents to get out the vote are vomiting from pepper spray?
That’s how Trump sees LAW & ORDER.
And if he’s re-elected . . .
***
Correction – A previous version of this article indicated Winston-Salem is part of North Carolina’s “Research Triangle.” It is not. Chapel Hill (UNC), Raleigh (NC State), and Durham (Duke) make up the triangle. Winston-Salem, the home of Wake Forest University, is 80 miles to the west.


The Dangerous Interregnum

Political opponents of President Donald Trump are rightly worried that he will not concede defeat but will use the period between election day and the meeting of the Electoral College on December 14 to subvert the counting of ballots , resorting to intensive litigation to remain in power .
The president has reportedly said as much himself , and some of his surrogates have been frank about the strategy .
Trump ’ s opponents have responded to this likelihood by calling for as large a Democratic victory as possible .
The bigger the margin of a Biden victory , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s strategy will prove .
Bill Kristol recently sketched the long-term significance of different magnitudes of victory , with FDR ’ s in 1932 as an example of one so massive that the election would transform the policy and partisan trajectory of the nation .
We can not be certain that Trump will lose on Tuesday , or that Biden ’ s victory will be definitive , but we must begin now to consider what problems would attend a Biden win .
Kristol ’ s example of a definitive victory for FDR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have another significant problem as serious as Trump ’ s efforts to thwart the legitimate transfer of power .
There was no question that Herbert Hoover would leave office after his electoral defeat .
He did not challenge the vote tally or FDR ’ s victory .
But Hoover was so committed to a vision of the public interest at odds with that of his opponent that , during the interregnum , he sought to advance it and to thwart the policy designs of the incoming administration with every tool in his constitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ main reasons the inauguration was moved from March 4 to January 20—so that there would still be enough time for an orderly transition , but less time for preemptive subversion of the democratic will of the people .
If someone as public-spirited as Herbert Hoover could be so dangerously anti-democratic in his use of constitutional authority , imagine what a president with no commitment to the common good might do .
The legitimate transfer of power remains a serious problem , but the illegitimate use of constitutional authority after electoral defeat now looms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ danger .
To understand the peril that the nation faces from the current president—a man whose office grants him enormous constitutional authority and yet who possesses no coherent conception of government and little actual concern for the public good over his own personal interests—let us review what Herbert Hoover did in those transition months in 1932-33 .
During another era of widespread suffering and despair , an incumbent president , who was also a self-proclaimed economic genius , lost his bid for re-election .
On November 8 , 1932 , Americans decisively rejected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost the popular vote by 17 percent and the Electoral College by 472 to 59 .
Franklin Roosevelt won an overwhelming victory , promising hope and government assistance for those in need .
Hoover was soundly defeated because he appeared uncaring , mean-spirited , and out-of-touch with the vast majority of voters .
Hoover ’ s efforts to frighten voters about his opponent ’ s alleged socialism— “ the witch ’ s caldron which boiled in Russia ” —had clearly failed .
Despite his defeat , Hoover was unrepentant , and doubled down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejected .
He used the long period between the election and the March 4 inauguration to sow discord , undermine the economy , and constrain his successor ’ s options .
Hoover even pressured Roosevelt to abandon his campaign promises and sign on to his own failed policies .
The challenges of the Hoover-Roosevelt transition are a historical warning about the dangers of the eleven weeks between tomorrow ’ s election and the next inauguration day , when a defeated and unrepentant Donald Trump continues to occupy the presidency of the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by popular opinion .
He believed that his critics had lied to the public and distorted the facts .
Roosevelt ’ s promised New Deal would undermine the sound basis of the American economy , as Hoover understood it , and he would do everything to prevent the newly elected president from carrying it out .
Hoover began by telling his fellow Republicans and foreign allies that he would remain uncompromising in his last months , even on the moderate reforms the Democrats sought around currency devaluation and assistance for banks and local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done , Hoover continued his campaign to undermine public confidence in his successor ’ s relief program .
Hoover even tried to blame the worsening of the Depression on Roosevelt , claiming that the president-elect had exaggerated the suffering in the country and discouraged a rapid recovery .
Time and again , Hoover demanded that Roosevelt embrace his longstanding commitment to low inflation , low taxes , and balanced budgets .
Prospects of profligate spending , high taxation , and currency devaluation , Hoover claimed , were the real source of continued declines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hoover ’ s closest advisers told him this was untrue , but he continued to push this story into early 1933 .
When American banks began to fail because they could not recoup bad loans and cover their depositors , the country entered a truly desperate situation , made worse by Hoover ’ s continued refusal to take action .
By February 1933 , the entire American credit system was in freefall and the Federal Reserve asked President Hoover to declare a bank holiday to preserve reserves and restore some public confidence .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Roosevelt endorse the bank holiday and Hoover ’ s larger economic program .
Without a compromise on policy aims to accommodate Hoover ’ s economic orthodoxy , he would not save the banks , and he threatened to blame Roosevelt for their failure .
Hoover ’ s coercive efforts continued as late as the night before Roosevelt ’ s inauguration .
Even in the last hours of his presidency , he demanded an agreement from Roosevelt before he took any action to help the banks .
When Roosevelt refused to tie his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the economy to continue its tumble .
By the time Roosevelt declared a bank holiday , on March 6 , more banks around the country had collapsed and additional Americans had lost their savings .
For almost a decade , the American economy remained mired in high unemployment , low production , and widespread poverty—conditions made much worse by Hoover ’ s stubborn refusal to act after his electoral defeat .
His last months as a lame-duck president left enduring scars .
The Twentieth Amendment , ratified in 1933 , moved the presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remains .
But that still leaves more than two months between the election of the next president and the departure of his predecessor .
A defeated but unrepentant and manipulative president , like Hoover , can use this interregnum to try and constrain his successor , pursue an agenda rejected by the public , and harm American society in lasting ways .
Even without the cooperation of the lame-duck Congress or the incoming Congress ( set by the Twentieth Amendment to start on January 3 ) , the outgoing president retains enormous power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his own personal interests above all , the interregnum allows countless opportunities for corruption—including favors to family and friends , attacks on enemies , and the procurement of payments for secrets and other resources controlled by the executive .
The time between election and inauguration is a window for bad behavior and long-term damage to the republic .
We can expect that a defeated President Trump , financially and legally desperate , will exploit this window for full value to himself , notwithstanding the harm to the country .
He will likely try @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even his family and himself , from legal prosecution .
He may expand his criminal activities .
He will likely lash out at his enemies , including by the use of foreign-authored disinformation , and take actions to enrich his loyalists .
Most dangerous , he may make deals with foreign leaders in return for personal favors and ego boosts .
Above all , we can be sure that he will not use his last days in power to serve the country .
Trump ’ s final presidential actions will likely increase American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and increasing our nation ’ s vulnerability to foreign aggression .
So , if Donald Trump is defeated , what can be done to blunt this looming danger ?
The first and most important tool in the constitutional arsenal for the victors in this election is civic education .
Our first plea would be that officeholders , journalists , scholars , and citizens generally turn their attention from the issue of transfer of power—of literally getting Trump out of the White House on January 20—to ways of countering anti-constitutional behavior between now and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faced this particular threat so clearly before , and the best resource we have is the collective wisdom of all those who have thought of useful and creative ways to insure a legal and orderly transition of power .
The enormously powerful energies of our citizens mobilized to vote must now turn to the task of protecting the Constitution .
Voting was only the first step ; popular attention should not stray from the continued goal of restraining a dangerous president , still in office for two more months .
Second , Speaker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibly the next Senate majority leader ; and President-elect Joe Biden must assemble a bipartisan coalition for emergency government .
Normally , the president-elect would be building a transition team that would work relatively cooperatively with the existing political appointees throughout the government .
A normal transition can not be taken for granted .
Democrats must reach out to congressional adversaries to reestablish the power of the first branch , the legislature , to superintend the executive branch .
Between the election and the first week of January that would mean that Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well as those who have retained their seats .
With nothing left to lose , defeated Republicans would be in a position to help resist Trump ’ s anti-constitutional and illegal actions as they occur .
They can back oversight hearings with teeth .
They can remember that their oath was to the Constitution , not their defeated party .
There is some reason for hope , already , that cooperation between the Democrats and Republicans in Congress may be possible .
Quietly , transition preparation is already underway , with political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at work on it .
The existing statute for transitions is , thus far , being followed by the Trump administration , including a mandated council of political appointees chaired by the White House chief of staff .
Donald Trump ’ s disruptive campaign rhetoric has not been reflected in the actions of political and career officials responsible for the transition .
But it is also possible that Trump does not actually know that a normal transition is underway , given his distaste for briefings and for the routine duties of governance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond the commentary of his favorite sycophants .
Faced with an actual loss , Trump ’ s behavior will be unpredictable , as it has been with managing the pandemic .
Pelosi , Schumer , and other leaders need to prepare themselves and the American people for a disruptive transition and for unprecedented actions by the president that fall outside the purview of standard transition matters .
Traditionally , the transition teams prepare briefing books on the ongoing activities of the array of governmental institutions .
It is quite possible that these normal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while Donald Trump focuses on openings to enrich himself and his family , ways to punish perceived political enemies , and general opportunities to abuse the constitutional power he holds during the interregnum .
This is why political oversight and immediate accountability are so vital .
If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refuses to cooperate and continues to enable Trump , potentially responsible Republicans—senators who see themselves as responsible—such as Susan Collins , Lisa Murkowski , Mitt Romney , and Ben Sasse , should form a temporary Independent GOP caucus that would vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as majority leader during the remainder of the lame-duck session and thus expedite the transition .
On the House side , if Speaker Pelosi finds it impossible to form an emergency government coalition with a significant number of her Republican colleagues and ideally the GOP House leadership , she should create a special bipartisan impeachment inquiry .
The point of this committee would be to unlock the powers of impeachment to compel testimony and documents for as robust oversight as possible .
The committee should revive the congressional power of inherent contempt—with which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to subpoenas are taken into custody by the Congress ’ s own law enforcement , quickly tried in the House , and held in the D.C. jail until they are willing to comply .
The House and Senate should use their appropriations powers to deny funds to agencies of the government acting for the personal protection or financial benefit of Donald Trump when budget negotiations begin again after the election due to the pending expiration of the continuing resolution funding the government now .
Special focus should be on the Justice Department and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leadership has misused resources to attack protesters and presidential critics while protecting presidential loyalists and dangerous right-wing extremists .
Congress must use its power of the purse to starve dangerous appointees who continue to act as Trump ’ s henchmen .
A bipartisan resolution should be passed that instructs the government to cooperate with the incoming administration—and in particular , to invite the president-elect to designate members of the Trump administration to brief him on the pandemic crisis and to inform the American people regularly on federal efforts to contain its spread .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Maybe Trump will again confound the pollsters and win the election .
Or maybe he will lose and will show an uncharacteristic quietude .
But now is the time to think seriously about countering his potential malfeasance during an interregnum .
Congressional leaders must show a willingness to step in and control a defeated Trump before he does more damage .
That is the clear will of the American people , and the obvious constitutional duty for elected officials , including those at the end of their current service .
Deference to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ circumstances would not only be cowardly , but would threaten a constitutional transition of power .
The losers do not get to burn down the government before they leave .
Trump must be highly constrained in this interregnum , by Congress , the courts , the civil service , and the expectations of the American people .

Political opponents of President Donald Trump are rightly worried that he will not concede defeat but will use the period between election day and the meeting of the Electoral College on December 14 to subvert the counting of ballots, resorting to intensive litigation to remain in power. The president has reportedly said as much himself, and some of his surrogates have been frank about the strategy.
Trump’s opponents have responded to this likelihood by calling for as large a Democratic victory as possible. The bigger the margin of a Biden victory, the reasoning goes, the less feasible Trump’s strategy will prove. Bill Kristol recently sketched the long-term significance of different magnitudes of victory, with FDR’s in 1932 as an example of one so massive that the election would transform the policy and partisan trajectory of the nation.
We cannot be certain that Trump will lose on Tuesday, or that Biden’s victory will be definitive, but we must begin now to consider what problems would attend a Biden win.
Kristol’s example of a definitive victory for FDR over Hoover shows that we may soon have another significant problem as serious as Trump’s efforts to thwart the legitimate transfer of power.
There was no question that Herbert Hoover would leave office after his electoral defeat. He did not challenge the vote tally or FDR’s victory. But Hoover was so committed to a vision of the public interest at odds with that of his opponent that, during the interregnum, he sought to advance it and to thwart the policy designs of the incoming administration with every tool in his constitutional arsenal. This is one of the main reasons the inauguration was moved from March 4 to January 20—so that there would still be enough time for an orderly transition, but less time for preemptive subversion of the democratic will of the people. If someone as public-spirited as Herbert Hoover could be so dangerously anti-democratic in his use of constitutional authority, imagine what a president with no commitment to the common good might do. The legitimate transfer of power remains a serious problem, but the illegitimate use of constitutional authority after electoral defeat now looms as the nation’s most serious danger.
To understand the peril that the nation faces from the current president—a man whose office grants him enormous constitutional authority and yet who possesses no coherent conception of government and little actual concern for the public good over his own personal interests—let us review what Herbert Hoover did in those transition months in 1932-33.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
During another era of widespread suffering and despair, an incumbent president, who was also a self-proclaimed economic genius, lost his bid for re-election. On November 8, 1932, Americans decisively rejected Herbert Hoover’s leadership; he lost the popular vote by 17 percent and the Electoral College by 472 to 59. Franklin Roosevelt won an overwhelming victory, promising hope and government assistance for those in need. Hoover was soundly defeated because he appeared uncaring, mean-spirited, and out-of-touch with the vast majority of voters. Hoover’s efforts to frighten voters about his opponent’s alleged socialism—“the witch’s caldron which boiled in Russia”—had clearly failed.
Despite his defeat, Hoover was unrepentant, and doubled down on the very actions that voters had rejected. He used the long period between the election and the March 4 inauguration to sow discord, undermine the economy, and constrain his successor’s options. Hoover even pressured Roosevelt to abandon his campaign promises and sign on to his own failed policies. The challenges of the Hoover-Roosevelt transition are a historical warning about the dangers of the eleven weeks between tomorrow’s election and the next inauguration day, when a defeated and unrepentant Donald Trump continues to occupy the presidency of the United States.
Like Trump, Hoover felt unconstrained by popular opinion. He believed that his critics had lied to the public and distorted the facts. Roosevelt’s promised New Deal would undermine the sound basis of the American economy, as Hoover understood it, and he would do everything to prevent the newly elected president from carrying it out. Hoover began by telling his fellow Republicans and foreign allies that he would remain uncompromising in his last months, even on the moderate reforms the Democrats sought around currency devaluation and assistance for banks and local communities. Even after the voting was done, Hoover continued his campaign to undermine public confidence in his successor’s relief program.
Hoover even tried to blame the worsening of the Depression on Roosevelt, claiming that the president-elect had exaggerated the suffering in the country and discouraged a rapid recovery. Time and again, Hoover demanded that Roosevelt embrace his longstanding commitment to low inflation, low taxes, and balanced budgets. Prospects of profligate spending, high taxation, and currency devaluation, Hoover claimed, were the real source of continued declines in industrial production and consumer confidence. Hoover’s closest advisers told him this was untrue, but he continued to push this story into early 1933.
When American banks began to fail because they could not recoup bad loans and cover their depositors, the country entered a truly desperate situation, made worse by Hoover’s continued refusal to take action. By February 1933, the entire American credit system was in freefall and the Federal Reserve asked President Hoover to declare a bank holiday to preserve reserves and restore some public confidence. Hoover appealed to the president-elect, demanding that Roosevelt endorse the bank holiday and Hoover’s larger economic program. Without a compromise on policy aims to accommodate Hoover’s economic orthodoxy, he would not save the banks, and he threatened to blame Roosevelt for their failure.
Hoover’s coercive efforts continued as late as the night before Roosevelt’s inauguration. Even in the last hours of his presidency, he demanded an agreement from Roosevelt before he took any action to help the banks. When Roosevelt refused to tie his own hands, the outgoing president allowed the economy to continue its tumble.
By the time Roosevelt declared a bank holiday, on March 6, more banks around the country had collapsed and additional Americans had lost their savings. For almost a decade, the American economy remained mired in high unemployment, low production, and widespread poverty—conditions made much worse by Hoover’s stubborn refusal to act after his electoral defeat. His last months as a lame-duck president left enduring scars.
The Twentieth Amendment, ratified in 1933, moved the presidential inauguration to January 20, where it remains. But that still leaves more than two months between the election of the next president and the departure of his predecessor. A defeated but unrepentant and manipulative president, like Hoover, can use this interregnum to try and constrain his successor, pursue an agenda rejected by the public, and harm American society in lasting ways. Even without the cooperation of the lame-duck Congress or the incoming Congress (set by the Twentieth Amendment to start on January 3), the outgoing president retains enormous power. And with a president devoted to his own personal interests above all, the interregnum allows countless opportunities for corruption—including favors to family and friends, attacks on enemies, and the procurement of payments for secrets and other resources controlled by the executive. The time between election and inauguration is a window for bad behavior and long-term damage to the republic.
We can expect that a defeated President Trump, financially and legally desperate, will exploit this window for full value to himself, notwithstanding the harm to the country. He will likely try to pardon his friends, and perhaps even his family and himself, from legal prosecution. He may expand his criminal activities. He will likely lash out at his enemies, including by the use of foreign-authored disinformation, and take actions to enrich his loyalists. Most dangerous, he may make deals with foreign leaders in return for personal favors and ego boosts. Above all, we can be sure that he will not use his last days in power to serve the country. Trump’s final presidential actions will likely increase American division, worsening the suffering from COVID-19 and increasing our nation’s vulnerability to foreign aggression.
So, if Donald Trump is defeated, what can be done to blunt this looming danger?
The first and most important tool in the constitutional arsenal for the victors in this election is civic education. Our first plea would be that officeholders, journalists, scholars, and citizens generally turn their attention from the issue of transfer of power—of literally getting Trump out of the White House on January 20—to ways of countering anti-constitutional behavior between now and the inauguration. The nation has never faced this particular threat so clearly before, and the best resource we have is the collective wisdom of all those who have thought of useful and creative ways to insure a legal and orderly transition of power. The enormously powerful energies of our citizens mobilized to vote must now turn to the task of protecting the Constitution. Voting was only the first step; popular attention should not stray from the continued goal of restraining a dangerous president, still in office for two more months.
Second, Speaker Nancy Pelosi; Chuck Schumer, very possibly the next Senate majority leader; and President-elect Joe Biden must assemble a bipartisan coalition for emergency government. Normally, the president-elect would be building a transition team that would work relatively cooperatively with the existing political appointees throughout the government. A normal transition cannot be taken for granted. Democrats must reach out to congressional adversaries to reestablish the power of the first branch, the legislature, to superintend the executive branch. Between the election and the first week of January that would mean that Democrats should reach out to defeated congressional Republicans as well as those who have retained their seats. With nothing left to lose, defeated Republicans would be in a position to help resist Trump’s anti-constitutional and illegal actions as they occur. They can back oversight hearings with teeth. They can remember that their oath was to the Constitution, not their defeated party.
There is some reason for hope, already, that cooperation between the Democrats and Republicans in Congress may be possible. Quietly, transition preparation is already underway, with political appointees as well as career officials hard at work on it. The existing statute for transitions is, thus far, being followed by the Trump administration, including a mandated council of political appointees chaired by the White House chief of staff. Donald Trump’s disruptive campaign rhetoric has not been reflected in the actions of political and career officials responsible for the transition. But it is also possible that Trump does not actually know that a normal transition is underway, given his distaste for briefings and for the routine duties of governance, and his failure to attend to news beyond the commentary of his favorite sycophants.
Faced with an actual loss, Trump’s behavior will be unpredictable, as it has been with managing the pandemic. Pelosi, Schumer, and other leaders need to prepare themselves and the American people for a disruptive transition and for unprecedented actions by the president that fall outside the purview of standard transition matters. Traditionally, the transition teams prepare briefing books on the ongoing activities of the array of governmental institutions. It is quite possible that these normal and needed aspects of transition might proceed while Donald Trump focuses on openings to enrich himself and his family, ways to punish perceived political enemies, and general opportunities to abuse the constitutional power he holds during the interregnum. This is why political oversight and immediate accountability are so vital.
If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refuses to cooperate and continues to enable Trump, potentially responsible Republicans—senators who see themselves as responsible—such as Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Mitt Romney, and Ben Sasse, should form a temporary Independent GOP caucus that would vote with the Democrats to remove Mitch McConnell as majority leader during the remainder of the lame-duck session and thus expedite the transition.
On the House side, if Speaker Pelosi finds it impossible to form an emergency government coalition with a significant number of her Republican colleagues and ideally the GOP House leadership, she should create a special bipartisan impeachment inquiry. The point of this committee would be to unlock the powers of impeachment to compel testimony and documents for as robust oversight as possible. The committee should revive the congressional power of inherent contempt—with which executive branch officials who fail to respond to subpoenas are taken into custody by the Congress’s own law enforcement, quickly tried in the House, and held in the D.C. jail until they are willing to comply.
The House and Senate should use their appropriations powers to deny funds to agencies of the government acting for the personal protection or financial benefit of Donald Trump when budget negotiations begin again after the election due to the pending expiration of the continuing resolution funding the government now. Special focus should be on the Justice Department and the Department Homeland Security, where partisan leadership has misused resources to attack protesters and presidential critics while protecting presidential loyalists and dangerous right-wing extremists. Congress must use its power of the purse to starve dangerous appointees who continue to act as Trump’s henchmen.
A bipartisan resolution should be passed that instructs the government to cooperate with the incoming administration—and in particular, to invite the president-elect to designate members of the Trump administration to brief him on the pandemic crisis and to inform the American people regularly on federal efforts to contain its spread.
Perhaps none of this will be necessary. Maybe Trump will again confound the pollsters and win the election. Or maybe he will lose and will show an uncharacteristic quietude. But now is the time to think seriously about countering his potential malfeasance during an interregnum. Congressional leaders must show a willingness to step in and control a defeated Trump before he does more damage. That is the clear will of the American people, and the obvious constitutional duty for elected officials, including those at the end of their current service.
Deference to a dangerous, defeated president in these circumstances would not only be cowardly, but would threaten a constitutional transition of power. The losers do not get to burn down the government before they leave. Trump must be highly constrained in this interregnum, by Congress, the courts, the civil service, and the expectations of the American people.