Ever since January 6, 2021, Republicans have been trying to minimize the shameful events at the Capitol. The made-for-MAGA fantasies about antifa or secret FBI agents or other anti-Trumpers infiltrating the crowd and causing the violence have receded into the background of far-right conspiracy mongers.
More recently, Republicans embarrassed about January 6 have pivoted to denying that there was violence. During a 2023 CNN town hall, Trump described January 6 as a "beautiful day." The rioters have become “hostages”. Trump called for the release of “the J6 hostages” at a rally in Iowa in January, to the loud approval of the crowd.
However inappropriate it is to use popular sympathy for real hostages to win votes, that word is the logical conclusion of the Trump thought train. When Tucker Carlson spliced together a video collage that made January 6 look innocuous, and said, “These were not insurrectionists. They were sightseers,” Trump said it was “irrefutable” evidence that rioters have been wrongly accused of crimes. He called for the release from custody of people who were convicted or pled guilty in court.
That’s one side of Trump’s mouth, pointed towards the MAGA base that has an outsized influence on our politics. They apparently will believe anything, if he says it.
But Trump says other things. At the Supreme Court, where Trump’s personal political future is at stake, his lawyers cannot depend on fantasies. One of the key issues in Trump’s case is whether he should be prevented from running for President, because he aided an insurrection. Justice Ketanji Jackson asked Trump’s lawyer Jonathan Mitchell whether January 6 qualified as an insurrection. Mitchell thought it would weaken his argument, if he offered Trump’s campaign statements instead of the truth. He replied, "This was a riot. It was not an insurrection. The events were shameful, criminal, violent, all of those things, but did not qualify as an insurrection as that term is used in Section 3. What we said in our opening brief was President Trump did not engage in any act that can plausibly be classified as insurrection." An insurrection needs to be an "organized, concerted effort to overthrow the government of the United States through violence. This was a riot. It was not an insurrection.”
Even where truth matters most in our society, in courts of law, Trump is willing to spout fictions, castigate officers of the law, impugn judges, and repeat the same lies that got him convicted. I don’t think this speaks of rational calculation, but of preposterous narcissism and faith in the gullibility of his fans.
But more than he wants to inhabit the godlike persona he has cultivated for years, Trump wants to win. So his defenders at the Supreme Court admitted the obvious, implicitly calling Trump and other Republicans liars, so Trump could escape the label of “insurrectionist”.
Where truth matters, even in courts of law dominated by conservatives, Trump will speak the truth, or at least approach the truth, if it’s in his interest.
Will it matter that Trump tells two contradictory stories to suit his personal interests? Will American Jews who support any Republicans, thus support Republican talking points, thus the “hostage” rhetoric, admit that their political choices stoke antisemitism? Will they say out loud that Trump himself is an antisemite and thus not fit for American office? What more will it take?
Steve Hochstadt
Boston
March 7, 2024
