The Choice Trump Has Forced Us To Make
At some point soon, the Republic either lives or dies. Hold tight.
“I just found, isn’t that amazing? This totally wins my case, you know. Except it is like, highly confidential. Secret. This is secret information. Look, look at this. This was done by the military and given to me,” - president Donald J Trump.
And there you have it. The feds have indicted Donald J Trump on the grounds of imperiling national security in his handling of classified documents since he left office; he’s almost certainly guilty; and, if precedent is any guide, he’ll almost certainly be convicted.
The indictment itself, which I’ve just read, is devastating in several ways. First, the substance of the top secret material is not trivial — it’s as grave as it could be, involving nuclear secrets and war plans against adversaries. That removes any doubt about the need to bring the case. I’m skeptical of most claims of secrecy our government makes — but this is such a grotesque violation of national security it passes any sniff-test.
Second, Trump says on audio-tape that he knows the material he’s passing around is still classified, but does it anyway. This is Marion Barry level proof of guilt. You just cannot get around it.
Third, he concealed evidence, lied to the FBI, and obstructed justice in the crudest way imaginable. Moving boxes around, getting his underling to lie: it’s beyond belief how obvious it is. And how monumentally stupid.
And so the full legal and constitutional meltdown — long postponed — will now unfurl in the weeks and months ahead, dragging what’s left of the legitimacy of our legal and constitutional system into an ever-darker undertow of stupidity and pathology. We are going to see the absolutely manifest clash between the rule of law, proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the pyramid of lies a cult leader has constructed in the dock. In a court of law, there is no way out. So I guess, unless Trump withdraws, we are going to have put the country through its ultimate Constitutional stress test. We haven’t dodged the bullet. It’s hurtling directly toward us.
And the whole thing is classic Trump. As of yet, there is no truly sinister motive we can see — no sale of secrets to America’s enemies, for example; no apparent or easily accessible reason for retaining, then concealing, documents he knew to be classified; and then obstructing federal officials from cleaning it all up. But if there’s one thing we learned from the Russia investigation, it is that Trump needs no reason to defy the law and obstruct justice; he is not some criminal genius, or devious plotter. He is just characterologically incapable of obeying the rule of law if his ego ever gets a smidgen in the way.
That’s why he leaned on Ukraine to prosecute Biden; it’s why he refused to accept a legitimate election defeat; it’s why he fomented an insurrection; it’s why he simply could not follow the rules for classified documents; and could not cooperate properly with the FBI. Any system where he is just one among equals — even if those equals are other presidents — is one he simply does not and cannot comprehend. He has to violate any system based on equality with his peers, or any system he cannot fully control. Without that, he disintegrates. That’s why he is, and always has been, unfit for office in a democratic system under the rule of law.
But he’s also a demagogic genius who for many years now has held a good 30 percent of the country in a personality cult, and successfully intimidated an entire political party. He has been able to marshal understandable resentment of our current elites to shake the very core of our democratic processes in a way unprecedented in American history. And the elites — with their woke Kulturkampf, incompetence, overreach and bigotry — have legitimized him in ways I honestly never thought possible.
I’d hoped we could find a way around this. I was eager for an alternative Republican, or a younger Democrat to emerge. But Trump just won’t let us move past him, and he has now set up yet another showdown for the soul of the republic in 2024. Up against him: a frail, meandering octogenarian whom 70 percent of Americans don’t want to run again. Maybe Dark Brandon will surprise us again. But maybe he won’t.
I wish I believed that what we are about to witness is the ultimate triumph of the rule of law in America. Maybe the facts of the case in a court of law could finally break the spell of the last eight years. I sure hope and pray so. But I fear we may now be past that. And there is no way beyond this but through it. A hung jury? A presidential candidate running from jail? An election to end all elections? The next act may surpass any show-runner’s most gothic imagination.
(Note to readers: This is an excerpt of The Weekly Dish. If you’re already a subscriber, click here to read the full version — though the Trump item above is the full version, because news happened fast today. Subscribe for the full Dish experience!)
When Diversity Works On Stage And Screen
Out of a no-doubt misplaced sense of civic duty, I went to see The Little Mermaid’s live-action re-make this week. And it was curiously deflating. It was about 20 minutes too long; the new ballad, penned by Lin-Manuel Miranda, for Prince Eric, was a melody-free, obviously auto-tuned dirge; Melissa McCarthy’s Ursula was strangely flat with bad makeup (no gays were involved); and even the crab, the bird and the fish tag-alongs worked much better as cartoons. The one saving grace was Halle Bailey’s spectacular performance — and her early show-stopper, “Part of Your World,” brought a classic gay Disney lump to my throat.
Her race? Completely irrelevant to the plot — but, it seems to me, a case study in why minority representation is well worth doing, if done right.
There was no clunky, ideological message attached. And there’s no reason a mermaid has to be “white”. Giving the starring princess role to a non-white actress was a completely cost-free way to give young girls of color a sense they belong in the Disney universe — try to watch this reax without tearing up. The casting also had the advantage of giving us an inter-racial (as well as inter-species!) love story. And that love story, by the way, was very old-school, with Prince Eric a near-model of gentlemanly grace — a teenage girl’s fantasy of a non-threatening male.
And then, this being 2023, the movie decided to have the prince’s stepmother be a black woman with an English accent, and her benign prime minister be a South Asian. And so a movie that in one important respect transcended woke excess, then sank back right into it, with bells on. Sigh.
One of the routine smears of those of us who oppose wokeness is that we do not believe in minority representation. But we do! Making movies and television that can appeal to a wide variety of people in the most multiracial society in human history is a good thing — and capitalism will reward it.
(Read the rest of the item here, for paid subscribers)
New On The Dishcast: Patrick Deneen
Deneen is a writer and academic. Based at the University of Notre Dame, he is Professor of Political Science and holds the David Potenziani Memorial College Chair of Constitutional Studies. His books include The Odyssey of Political Theory and Why Liberalism Failed, and his new one is Regime Change: Toward a Postliberal Future.
Listen to the episode here. There you can find two clips of our convo — on his book using Marxist analysis in defense of conservatism, and whether the government should give you money to stay home with kids. That link also takes you to reader commentary on post-liberalism, as well as continued debate over the impact of immigration.
Browse the Dishcast archive for another conversation you might enjoy (the first 102 episodes are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Tabia Lee on her firing as a DEI director, David Grann on an 18th-century mutiny that’s a “parable for our own turbulent time,” and Matt Lewis on ruling-class elites. Please send your guest recs and pod dissent to dish@andrewsullivan.com.
Dissents Of The Week: The Melting Pot Of Marriage
A reader responds to my latest column, “The Unstoppability of Mass Migration”:
This, too, is what happens when 15 percent of the US is foreign born: rates of inter-marriage are about 17 percent of all American marriages. That’s up from 3 percent in 1967 when the Supreme Court ruled that the Lovings — a white man and black woman — had a constitutional right to wed.
The trajectory of progress on attitudes toward inter-marriage is inspiring: public approval stands at a record 94 percent, according to Gallup. As a pioneering advocate of gay marriage, this will come as no surprise to you.
Bottom line: it is not at all clear that high levels of immigration (especially when they offset low domestic birthrates) need be the political or economic calamity you fear. We still have elections to assert tolerance over intolerance. And the marriage market is proof positive that free people have a way of adjusting to demographic change in a warm and loving manner, if you will pardon the pun.
Another dissenter:
Andrew, this country NEEDS immigrants. Without them, the US population is declining (a good thing for the environment, but problematic for the economy). Immigrants create jobs — both by starting businesses, and by being a customer base for existing businesses. Just google a term like “immigrants revitalize town” and you’ll find lots of stories. Remember that guy who warned of “a taco truck on every corner” as if that were a bad thing?? Whacko!
If you want to reduce illegal immigration, you should support making legal immigration easier. But you seem to want to restrict it! I don’t get it.
“But what about the culture?” What about it? Cultures change. They always have.
You should get George Will on your podcast. He can try to talk sense into you about immigration, and you can try to talk sense into him about climate change.
Ha! I’ll have a word. But on the immigration and growth question, there is a trade-off between the wages of working-class natives and mass immigration. If you want ever-increasing inequality, a low-wage economy, and maximal racial tension, mass immigration is a pretty good policy. That’s why big business has always favored it. I favor a slowing down of immigration, an attempt to raise wages across the board, and better integration.
A quick correction from a reader:
According to Snopes, the thing about Target making “tuck friendly” swimsuits for kids is false. It was for adults. I think it’s a dumb business decision, especially now with the political right using trans issues to fundraise and anger the base, but it wasn’t for kids.
As always, keep the dissents coming: dish@andrewsullivan.com. Follow more Dish discussion on the Notes site here (or the “Notes” tab in the Substack app).
For reader responses to the news of my recent divorce, we created a page here. Thanks for the love.
No, Mr Blow, There Is No “LGBTQ” National Emergency
For the first time since it was founded in 1980, the Human Rights Campaign — the largest group claiming to represent gay men and lesbians and trans people in the United States — has declared a “national emergency.”
They didn’t do this when the federal government refused to act quickly against AIDS in the mid-1980s; they didn’t do it as over 300,000 gay men subsequently died; they didn’t do it when Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, or when George W Bush endorsed the Federal Marriage Amendment. But now that gay men and lesbians have won the civil right to marry in all 50 states, and transgender Americans have the full protection of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and public support for marriage equality is over 70 percent, we are in a “national emergency.”
Why?
(Read the rest of the item here, for paid subscribers)
In The ‘Stacks
This is a feature in the paid version of the Dish spotlighting about 20 of our favorite pieces from other Substackers every week. This week’s selection covers subjects such as autistic kids, ketamine as therapy, and human-sacrifice societies. Below is one example, followed by a brand new substack:
Are redneck girls tougher than the daughters of progressive parents?
Kirchick and others discuss “the fall of the white American gay.”
You can also browse all the substacks we follow and read on a regular basis here — a combination of our favorite writers and new ones we’re checking out. It’s a blogroll of sorts. If you have any recommendations for “In the ‘Stacks,” especially ones from emerging writers, please let us know: dish@andrewsullivan.com.
The View From Your Window Contest
Where do you think it’s located? Email your guess to contest@andrewsullivan.com. Please put the location — city and/or state first, then country — in the subject line. Proximity counts if no one gets the exact spot. Bonus points for fun facts and stories. The deadline for entries is Wednesday night at midnight (PST). The winner gets the choice of a VFYW book or two annual Dish subscriptions. If you are not a subscriber, please indicate that status in your entry and we will give you a free month subscription if we select your entry for the contest results (example here if you’re new to the contest). Happy sleuthing!
The results for this week’s window are coming in a separate email to paid subscribers later today.
See you next Friday.