The Return of “The Reign of the Witches”: Biden and Trump are Not the First to Use “Rage Rhetoric” for Political Gain

Below is my column in the Hill on how history appears to be repeating itself in the rise of rage politics by the two major parties.  Both President Joe Biden and former president Donald Trump have made headlines in labeling each other as enemies of the state. We have seen this before…

Here is the column:

President Joe Biden recently stood in front of a blood-red background in Philadelphia, framed by two Marines, to denounce millions of “MAGA Republicans” and his political opponents as “semi-fascist” extremists. In Wilkes-Barre, Pa., former president Donald Trump stood before his followers and denounced Biden as an “enemy of the state” and the FBI as “vicious monsters.”

Although I have previously expressed alarm over what I call the “age of rage,” we are seeing a more serious turn as our leaders fuel that rage in hopes of retaining or regaining power.

Not surprisingly, polls show more than 40 percent of voters now believe we are heading into a civil war. Not only are more columnists discussing the approach of a possible civil war, President Biden reportedly told a senior Democrat: “I certainly hope [my presidency] works out. If it doesn’t, I’m not sure we’re going to have a country.”

A Trafalgar poll shows a majority of Americans believe Biden tried to “incite conflict” with his Philadelphia speech. Given an opportunity to assume higher ground after that speech, Trump instead engaged in the same kind of unhinged rhetoric. Liberal and conservative pundits add to all that by discussing the gathering clouds of civil war while blaming each other.

While many insist there is a systemic failure of our political system, the United States faces not a constitutional crisis but a crisis of leadership, because both parties view rage as a political weapon.

As polls show the midterm election tightening, both parties appear to be giving up reason in favor of rage for better results.

Despite our history of highly divisive periods, this is one of the most dangerous we have encountered.

I recently completed a study of what I call “rage rhetoric” and how our country has addressed such periods, legally and politically, from colonial to contemporary times. Rage politics is the most dangerous form of demagoguery. With the rise of democracy came a rise in demagogues who sought to use rage to generate popular support. As Aristotle noted, demagogues “are like the fishers for eels; in still waters they catch nothing, but if they thoroughly stir up the slime, their fishing is good.” The fishing is particularly good today, as people tend to receive their news from siloed, partisan sources.

Rage politics is nothing new

Rage politics is not new to America, and the period that is most similar to today occurred at the very start of our republic.

At the start of the 19th century, the newly minted nation was deeply divided between Federalists aligned with John Adams and Democratic-Republicans aligned with Thomas Jefferson. President Adams labeled Jeffersonians as “seditionists,” while Jefferson referred to the Adams administration as “the reign of the witches.”

Adams sought to punish his opponents through the infamous Alien and Sedition Acts. Vermont Rep. Matthew Lyon was prosecuted for criticizing Adams’ “unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice.” Adams seemed eager to prove the point through partisan prosecutions. Twenty-five leading Democratic-Republicans were arrested, including journalists; others were threatened with arrest if they uttered such thoughts.

Federalist journalist William Cobbett called Jeffersonians “frog-eating, man-eating, blood-drinking cannibals” and the “refuse of nations.” Federalist newspapers predicted that if the Jeffersonians prevailed, then “murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest will be openly taught and practiced, the air will be rent with the cries of the distressed, the soil will be soaked with blood, and the nation black with crimes.”

Not unlike today, Supreme Court justices also were threatened. Then-Chief Justice John Jay was hated for his negotiation of what became known as the Jay Treaty with Great Britain; he was a target of Democratic-Republicans who considered the court a cabal of political activists. One editorial declared: “John Jay, ah! The Arch traitor — seize him, drown him, flay him alive.” Crowds burned Jay in effigy, including a Kentucky mob that stuffed its effigy with gunpowder, guillotined it, then blew it up. Jay remarked that he could travel the “country at night by the light of [my] burning effigies.”

Later, Chief Justice John Marshall also was burned in effigy after writing the famous opinion in Marbury v. Madison. While the opinion is known for laying the foundations of judicial authority, it was an outgrowth of Adams’ attempt to appoint a slew of “Midnight judges” in his final hours as president, in order to dominate the courts. (Sound familiar?)

Today’s leaders seek to garner support by leading the mob. In 2020, for example, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) declared on the steps of the Supreme Court: “I want to tell you, [Justice] Gorsuch, I want to tell you, [Justice] Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Win-at-any-cost strategy

People like Schumer hardly make convincing revolutionaries. They want to tap into the energy of rage while assuming it will be directed solely at their opponents — but history often has proven such assumptions wrong. Revolutions take on an appetite of their own; French journalist Jacques Mallet du Pan famously observed during the French Revolution that “like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children.”

Today’s rage rhetoric is strikingly similar to what we saw in the Adams-Jefferson period. Though many denounced Biden’s speech as inflammatory and divisive, others complained it did not go far enough. MSNBC regular Elie Mystal objected to Biden’s use of “MAGA Republicans” when, he claimed, all Republicans are white supremacists. Mystal and others have denounced the Constitution as “trash,” and even some law professors want to “reclaim America from Constitutionalism.

Rather than temper such passions, both Biden and Trump appear intent on fueling the rage to win at any cost in 2022 and 2024. With leaders on both sides trafficking in rage politics, it is hardly surprising that Americans expect an increase in political violence.

Fortunately, our Constitution was not just written for times like these, it was written and ratified in times like these. It (and we) have survived.

As we did in the 1800s, we will not commit the self-immolation advocated by so many — but the costs are likely to be high, due to the failure of leadership that is fueling this crisis of faith.

Author James Freeman Clarke once said “a politician thinks of the next election; a statesman thinks of the next generation.” Today, we have far too many politicians and far too few statesmen at an increasingly perilous moment.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

131 thoughts on “The Return of “The Reign of the Witches”: Biden and Trump are Not the First to Use “Rage Rhetoric” for Political Gain”

  1. Jonathan: This country was built on “rage”. You name the topic and you will find rage. Rage is in our American DNA. It’s the glue that holds us together. Rage is not confined just to politicians. You will see rage here in this chatroom every day. Your employer, Fox News, is full of rage. Just watch Tucker Carlson on any given night and you will see rage in full display. You appear on Fox regularly. I guess Carlson’s rage doesn’t bother you. Just look around. Rage is every where. The young man who blew away 19 school children was full of rage. There’s rage on airplanes. There is rage over certain books used in public schools. Book banning is all the rage. Even in my HOA some homeowners are outraged they can’t put a huge plastic storage container in their backyards to store their riding lawnmowers. Rage is all the rage!

    When Donald Trump (full of rage all the time) incited his MAGA followers to storm the Capitol on Jan. 6 that was RAGE in capital letters. You encouraged that rage by claiming Trump’s speech was just an exercise in “free speech”. When Trump got in a fight with his Secret Service detail after the speech you bizarrely claimed Trump had the right, as president, to join the insurrectionists. Trump continues to fuel the rage among his MAGA supporters by demanding he be immediately reinstated as president. His supporters are even calling for another Civil War to put Trump back in power. That’s unprecedented rage!

    But when President Biden calls out those who want to trash our Democracy through violence and calls for “unity, hope and optimism” you call his rhetoric “inflammatory”. A strange way to “temper passions” as you seem to want to do. You complain there are “too few statesmen” in this country. Given the state of political affairs in this country I think it’s a little late to complain about that now. Our Democratic institutions are now threatened by those who see violence as a way to get what they want. When you attack Biden this doesn’t seem the best way to “temper such passions”.

    1. Dennis, some of our founders had more rage than others, but most were calm and cool heads prevailed. If you recall, the rage you claim didn’t stop our founders from first wishing to compromise with the King. When the war ended, the rage was not such that the founders called for the beheading of the Tories.

      Perhaps you do not know what rage is or what is in American DNA. I think that is the case. The French Revolution represented rage. Thomas Paine, a great American revolutionary, had some of the rages you talk about, but he also supported the French Revolution. We all know what happened there.

      The rage we see comes from the left, or did you not notice the BLM riots or how the left has moved politics away from hating the politicians to hating the people? For a person who says he majored in history, you seem to lack a lot of historical knowledge. But that is the problem with leftists. They have tunnel vision and cannot use knowledge peacefully while reshaping America and moving it in a better direction.

      Take note, of how you hide from discussing policy in depth. That is rage determining what you think and how you act.

      1. S. Meyer: First, thank you for reading my comments. At least you are willing to engage and that’s saying more then I get in response to most my comments. Second, as you remember from a previous comment I was a history major in college. I got my BA in Latin American history–with an emphasis on the history of Mexico. I eventually did my thesis on the history of the Mexican Revolution and the influence of the US on that epic struggle.

        Now to the points you raise. You say “the rage we see comes from the left”. Then you lump in BLM and then claim the “left has moved politics away from hating the politicians to hating people”. Really? Please name one Dem politician or a person on the “left” who has said anything that could be construed as “hating the people”. Unless, you mean by the “people” Donald Trump and his supporters. I have been a severe critic of Trump because he represents an existential threat to our Democracy. But I don’t “hate” his supporters. They have been misled and lied to by the Trumpster.

        If we look at what happened on Jan. 6 many of the people who participated in that insurrection were not acting “peacefully while reshaping America and moving it in a better direction”. They engaged in violence to keep Trump in power. The were trying to prevent the “peaceful” transfer of power. They were led by violent right-wing nationalist groups like the Proud Boys and the Oathkeepers. There was no one there from BLM, Antifa or the “left”. You are the one who lacks “a lot of historical knowledge” if you ignore what happened just one year and seven months ago. Forget the French Revolution. It’s irrelevant to what happened on Jan. 6, 2021!

        Finally, I welcome “discussing policy in depth”. What “policy” do you have in mind?

        1. Dennis, one day we might have an opportunity to discuss Mexico. I spent time there and am fond of Mexican art, which explains why significant parts of my art collection are of Mexican origin. If I were to discuss Mexico, I would want to deal with Mexico as a bi-coastal nation rich in mineral wealth, oil, and agriculture that has failed to achieve the economic benefits a country so rich should have.

          “Please name one Dem politician or a person on the “left” who has said anything that could be construed as “hating the people”

          Joe Biden.

          “I have been a severe critic of Trump because he represents an existential threat to our Democracy. “

          That is a strange comment, especially since Biden has upset our Constitutional Republic more than anything Trump did. Trump was restrained compared to Biden and other Presidents. But we should not be dealing with names like Biden and Trump but rather the policies they promoted and their successes or failures. That is where I make my decisions.

          “They engaged in violence to keep Trump in power.”

          Very few engage in violence, and we should incarcerate those that did. However, when we look at the event, we note many things. There were no guns in the Capitol Building, but many selfies were taken. That type of person is not violent, especially when the doors were opened to them by the Capital Police. We should also note the killing of four people. Ashley Babbitt was murdered, Roseanne Boyland was murdered as well but more indirectly, and two men died likely due to a percussion bomb from the Capital police. Notable is the distance those two men were from the Capital Building. If the idea is to disperse the crowd, one doesn’t fire behind them as that pushes them forward towards the Capital Building.

          We also must recognize that the left was involved. The Speaker of the House is also responsible for the violence based on her failures. I won’t dwell on this because it was discussed at length in earlier discussions.

          “violent right-wing nationalist groups like the Proud Boys and the Oathkeepers.”

          Be careful how you categorize people and recognize that much of the chatter about these groups is meant to demean them. I have no affinity for either group, but I will say that good videos are showing the Oathkeepers helping the Capital Police maintain order on the east side of the Capital Building. I think, three separate events were documented in videos showing the Oathkeepers acting to support the Police and quiet the crowd. Ashley Babbitt was also heard to be trying to quiet the crowd down. We haven’t had a true investigation of all aspects of Jan 6 so all one might know is what they are told, but that is disputed by actual video and audio.

          “There was no one there from BLM, Antifa or the “left”.

          That is what you were told and what you choose to believe. That is not reality.

          “Forget the French Revolution. It’s irrelevant to what happened on Jan. 6, 2021!”

          No, it is history, and history predicts the future. The leftist way of acting represents what happened in the French Revolution. As a history major, you should recognize that instead of lending your support to people who rioted and committed arson while killing people (Antifa and BLM). I am not fond of those on either side who are violent or who espouse a violent philosophy. Marxist Revolutionary attitudes are Marxist. Listen to what the founders of BLM have said.

          “Finally, I welcome “discussing policy in depth”. What “policy” do you have in mind?”

          I left that open to you, but I will choose the following; the law and restricting immigration to legal immigration set by law. Such discussions are much more productive than discussing Trump and Obama. As a disclaimer, I support Trump. He supports many basic policies I believe are good for the nation and the world. We need to end illegal immigration with all its associated problems (drugs, slavery, child abuse, death, etc.). Trump was doing that, but that ended with the new administration.

          In the past, my differences were mostly based on the means to the end. That has changed radically, causing my voting habits to change radically as well.

          1. S. Meyer: It’s nice to see we have something in common. When I was 20 I went to study in Mexico City on an exchange program. I spent a year learning Spanish and studying the wonders of Mexican art and archeology–thanks to a young guy who worked in the library of the National University where I had classes. We became fast friends and he took me to art galleries and museums and introduced me to the art of Rivera, Orozco, Tamayo, etc. I remember one night he took me to the Jewish country club where there was an exhibit of the work of a young radical artist (about 24) who was revolutionizing Mexican art. His name was Luis Cuevas. I was blown away by his small drawings and lithos of distorted figures. He liberated Mexican art–away from large paintings and frescos with Mexican revolution themes. There is now a museum off the Zocalo dedicated to his work. Fortunately, I was there when he first got started but had no idea what influence he would have on future generations of Mexican artists.

            My friend lived in an old colonial home with walls lined with Mayan art. On one visit to have dinner he introduced me to his houseguest–a noted archeologist from Stanford who was a visiting professor at the University–supervising the work of the archeological department. The professor invited me and my friend to join him on a trip to Mitla in Oaxaca where the school was doing a lot of exploration. I had two weeks of school vacation so we jumped at the chance to join the “dig”. The three of us took a train to Oaxaca and then a taxi to Mitla where the Arch. dept. had a large hacienda that was the center of their work. We got there late so we went to bed. The next morning I got up and looked out the door of my room onto a large courtyard with a fountain in the middle and peacocks wandering about. I immediately smelled freshly made tortillas. I looked down toward the end of the courtyard where the kitchen was and saw several women outside making tortillas on a large metal plate over an open fire. There’s nothing like “huevos rancheros” with tortillas just off the fire! I know, you are eating your heart out about now! Breakfast was followed by a tour of the facility where I saw a dozen students working at long tables carefully cleaning artifacts that had been discovered. Later in the morning a non-student (our translator who spoke Zapotec) arrived and told us about rumors by the locals of an undiscovered pyramid up in the mountains. The professor said: “Why don’t we take the pickup and take a look in the morning.” The next morning several students, my friend and me, the translator and the professor jumped in the pickup and drove toward the mountains. We climbed the mountain along narrow paths. Got stuck in the mud several times. After several hours we reached the top and saw off in the distance what was clearly a pyramid, covered with dirt over the centuries with corn growing on the sides. We were excited!

            As we got closer to the pyramid we saw a small village surrounding the pyramid. We stopped and the professor said: “Before we proceed here are the rules of the road. Some of us may be the first white men to be seen here. The villagers are no doubt wary of outsiders. So we leave all our tools in the truck. Don’t ask about the pyramid and even look at it. Stay quiet and follow my lead. Our translator will do all the talking and translate for me. From experience I can tell you some who have invaded communal lands have disappeared–never to be seen again!.” We got the message! We proceeded to the village and stopped in what appeared to be the main square. We all got out and stood quietly not knowing what to expect. After about 15″ a small group of villager–turning out to be the villagers–came out and approached us. Some were carrying rifles. Our translator spoke to the elders ( in Zapotec) and explained our presence and made introductions. One of the villagers spoke Spanish so communication became easier. The tension gradually eased as the villagers realized we were no threat. As my friend and I were standing around saying nothing a beautiful young woman (with a distinctive Mayan nose) walked by dressed in a colorful dress. She smiled at me and disappeared around the corner of a building. My first instinct was to follow her but my friend grabbed my arm and said: “Don’t even think about it!”.

            After about an hour we left and went back down the mountain. Back at the hacienda we jubilantly told the other students about our find. They were beside themselves. I asked the professor about the next step. He said: “We will probably spend the next few months visiting the village, taking them gifts and trying to make the village elders comfortable with our presence. It may take six months, a year or even longer before we raise the issue of their pyramid. We may never get them to cooperate. Who knows? It’s a long process”.

            I learned a valuable lesson from that experience. Indigenous communities have a long historical memory about the Spanish–how they plundered and took what they wanted. We weren’t about to repeat that sad legacy. It has been 62 years since I visited that Zapotec village. I remember it like it was yesterday. I often fondly remember that young beautiful Zapotec woman who passed and smiled at me. What happened to her?

            Never got to the points you raise. We will just have to agree to politely disagree.

            1. “S. Meyer: It’s nice to see we have something in common.”

              Yes. Very much so, Dennis.

              I have traveled to Mexico many times and also studied at the National University in Mexico City for a summer. I liked the people and remember the different strata of society. I developed a strong liking for Rivera, Orozco, and Siqueiros who were the three great masters of muralism. All of them were communists but had a passion for people, so I understand the emotional desires while faulting their desires because such desires don’t work.

              I loved the people, including the poor I talked to in the marketplace. That led me to develop a liking for an artist called Zuniga. My collection of Zuniga’s swelled with his original art, lithographs, and sculpture. He took the poor from the marketplace and beautifully dignified them. Simple, but beautiful.

              Looking at these women made me feel grateful to have what I did. The solution of the great muralists was faulty, and then I asked myself why is Mexico so poor and America so rich. Mexico; has bicoastal, oil, minerals, and agriculture with a hard-working population. That led to my discussion with you.

              I recall you saying: “Finally, I welcome “discussing policy in depth”. What “policy” do you have in mind?” I was willing to leave the choice of discussion open to you, but when you deferred to me, I said, “I left that open to you, but I will choose the following; the law and restricting immigration to legal immigration set by law.”

              I thought that discussion was most appropriate to our experiences since the people and the art is in common with us. That is why your last statement is confusing. “We will just have to agree to politely disagree.”

              I thought you were here for discussion based on different opinions and perspectives. I came away from the communist art I still love with one perspective, and you came away with another. The common link is people, so instead of the arguments of personalities, I thought you would enjoy a discussion of substance.

        2. ‘Now to the points you raise. You say “the rage we see comes from the left”. Then you lump in BLM ”
          Can you clarify whether you think BLM is or is not on the left ?
          They are certainly not on the right or in the center.

          “and then claim the “left has moved politics away from hating the politicians to hating people”. Really? Please name one Dem politician or a person on the “left” who has said anything that could be construed as “hating the people”. ”

          I would refer you to the Presidents Reichstag speech. That was more that attacking and hating politicians. It was hating people.

          “Unless, you mean by the “people” Donald Trump and his supporters.”
          Yes, nor is this new – Obama spoke deprecatingly clinging to their guns and bibles.
          Hillary talked of the deplorables, and now Biden is hating on americans who want to “Make America Great Again”.

          This is not the tiny membership of the KKK or the miniscule numbers of neao-nazi’s – Who BTW do not seem to have committed any particularly significant hateful acts in a long time. Nor is this about the slightly larger militia’s and proud boys – who during the “summer of love” in 2020 provided the police accross the country with assistance in controling the riots and looting and arson.
          These groups took over traffic control and other non-confrontational and non-controversial tasks so that the police could focus on rioting and violence.

          Regardless the left’s, the democrats attacks are not combined to these. But include anyone who thinks the 2020 Election smells rotten. Who grasps that once again those on the left used a crisis to bend, warp. pretzelize and break our loaws to their political advantage.

          Apparently anyone who questions election results is an existential threat to democracy – despite the fact that a higher percentage of democrats do not beleive Hillary won in 2016 than Republicans who beleive Trump won in 2020.

          Yes, Democrats have chosen to hate a significant portion of the country.

          The purportedly unifying president has defined Unity – as we will accept you – When you agree with us.

          “I have been a severe critic of Trump because he represents an existential threat to our Democracy.”
          Which he obviously does not.
          Trump did not weaponize the FBI against his political enemies.
          Or against ordinary Americans.
          Trump did not cook the books on incidents of domestic terrorism.

          There really is little that Trump did that was not middle of the road conservative for most of the past 40 years.

          Conversely Biden Obama, and even Bush were far more of a threat. Bush expanded the surveilance state as never before,
          Obama used it, Trump did not, Biden is weaponizing it.

          “But I don’t “hate” his supporters. They have been misled and lied to by the Trumpster.”
          How so ? You do not seem to grasp that Trump is the reflection of his supporters – NOT the otherway arround.

          This is a ludicrously stupid claim that emerges constantly in politics.

          Obama did lie to his supporters – and many still beleive him.
          Obama was elected by people who expected him to close down Gitmo, get out of afghanistan and Iraq and quit starting foreign wars. Obama did not do or try to do any of this. Despite his campaign rhetoric Obama was a creature of the deep state, not its enemy.

          President Biden is Radically different from Sen. Biden. To some small extent he lied during the election trying to persuade the left he was one them, while trying to persuade moderates and the center he was still Good Ole Boy Joe.

          Regardless, as President Biden is a reflection of what he belives is his most important constituency.
          He has not duped them. He has made himself what THEY want.

          Trump is the same – Trump does not dupe trump supporters. He has made himself – what his supporters want.

          Trump supporters are not Trump’s dupes – anymore than Biden has mislead the left wing nuts who elected him.

          This is also why – whether 2016 or even more so 2020 – When you attack Trump, When you attack Make America Great Again.
          You are attacking people who have always thought what Trump is saying. they are not dupes.

          And when you say Trump is a threat to democracy – you are saying they are.

          Let me remind you that the people who showed up at the mall on Jan. 6th 2021 were police officers, soldiers, former police and former soldiers. These are the people who went into the capital, These are people who fought for this country in the foreign wars that Bush and Obama started, these are the people you are calling unamerican. These are the people who think that YOU and YOUR ilk are destroying the country. These are the people who want to “Make America Great Again”

          These people may re-elect Trump in 2024. Or maybe not.

          But they are not going anywhere.

          I have no idea how you think Trump is an existential threat to the country.
          But whatever it is about Trump that you think is an existential threat – is not going anywhere.

          These are the people you Hate.

          They are people who are tired of sacrificing FOR YOU, and then being called racist, mysoginst, sexist, transphobic, homophobic hateful hating haters.

          They are angry about the hate coming from YOU.

          1. People have difficulty living with doubt, but doubt is the method of advancement. Follows is a quote from Richard Feynman.

            “We are at the very beginning of time for the human race. It is not unreasonable that we grapple with problems. But there are tens of thousands of years in the future. Our responsibility is to do what we can, learn what we can, improve the solutions, and pass them on. It is our responsibility to leave the people of the future a free hand. In the impetuous youth of humanity, we can make grave errors that can stunt our growth for a long time. This we will do if we say we have the answers now, so young and ignorant as we are. If we suppress all discussion, all criticism, proclaiming “This is the answer, my friends; man is saved!” we will doom humanity for a long time to the chains of authority, confined to the limits of our present imagination. It has been done so many times before.
            It is our responsibility as scientists, knowing the great progress which comes from a satisfactory philosophy of ignorance, the great progress which is the fruit of freedom of thought, to proclaim the value of this freedom; to teach how doubt is not to be feared but welcomed and discussed; and to demand this freedom as our duty to all coming generations.”

            1. Pure libertarianism.

              Government is that part of our society where we are most constrained, where it is hardest to change if we are wrong.

              Everything Feinman says about preserving the freedom for posibilities in the future is inherently libertarian, and inherently begs to have as little government and as much that is not government as possible.

              Change outside of government may not be inherently easy, But it is only hard because the change must rapidly prove better than what already exists. Attempting change outside of government is easy – but failure is the norm.

              Within government change is supposed to be incredibly hard. There are many reasons for that.
              We should not willy nilly change how we use force.
              Change through government is not tested by the markets for success or failure.
              Even failed change within government easily becomes permanent – immutable.

    2. Thank you, Dennis. Turley continues to demean his own credibility by his efforts to try to equate the lawlessness of Trump with Biden’s valid criticism of the MAGA mavens who refuse to even consider actual facts. Neither Biden, nor any other Democrat, has ever encouraged people to “fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”,AFTER going on a campaign to stir up anger and rage based on the lie that the 2020 election was stolen. Trump has never spoken against those who invaded the Capitol, did property damage, threatened Pence and undermined our democracy, much less apologized for lying to them. There can never be any comparison with the egregiousness of Trump and his endless lying, and Turley’s efforts to equate Joe Biden’s valid criticism of the MAGA crowd falls flat.

    3. The American an people are not there. We are Americans In The first instance and know who we are. No ya will ever get civil war long a I’m alive. Like fauci is science…..I am america. .and my people are pure. And we own this country. And our first round is denying you troops. This round one.

      1. And I think we are winning denying troops in the first instance….and we will continue to deny troops while in our fields we plant for our selves to watch you starve….you’ve taken advantage of feudal america far too long.

  2. “Federalist newspapers predicted that if the Jeffersonians prevailed, then ‘murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest will be openly taught and practiced, the air will be rent with the cries of the distressed, the soil will be soaked with blood, and the nation black with crimes.'” Is this not what is happening and more under Democratic leadership?

  3. Off Topic. (but this one is passed, all fleshed out.

    Trumps latest filing is pointing out the govt has failed to support any of its conclusion. Trump pointing out to the judge, the govt has not provided anything in its filings to support their assertion that documents at MAL are classified. Also the Govt is refusing to acknowledge the PRA controls the documents in question. NOT the intelligence community.

    1. 40 subpoenas dropped from DOJ yesterday in trump investigations. Trump and advisors, seemingly on a whim, went to play golf in Sterling, Va. but actually didn’t play much golf. Looks a lot like formal meetings with DOJ about inevitable indictments is kicking into a higher gear. Reality beckons, probably best to leave the world of denial and realize your cult leader will be spending the rest of his life in one courtroom or another.

      1. So your going to ignore completely the latest filings, and move on to speculation about guesses, concerning motivations, of a man traveling from home to home.

        Got it.

          1. For others. Trump has pointed out the judge, the govt has never provided evidence, documents in questioned are classified. The govt is ignoring the PRA. Claiming the Past President cannot be in possession of the documents in question, but the Intelligence community can be in possession.

            You call the filings trash, because the filling prove you are ignorant of the facts. Exactly what facts does the Judge have in the filings presented to her, proving the govt has a supportable position of classification.
            Lacking that evidence, the PRA allows the Past President can posses those documents.

            1. The DoJ has already told the truth. Referring to the documents in question as “marked” Classified. The DoJ is attempting to place the document as residing in two states of being and the same time, depending on what they are arguing.

      2. Aninny:
        Well, in the courtroom until he’s back in the WH and issuing the pardons. No prohibition on voting for a guy who’s been indicted or even convicted in the Dims latest iteration of a kangaroo court. The Dims have been unindicted co-conspirators for years. It’s just they were guilty of sedition. Trump is being charged with the equivalent of an overdue library book.

      3. “40 subpoenas dropped from DOJ yesterday in trump investigations.”

        Which, of course, is motivated by the Biden administration’s fascist desire to purge the Republican party of its leadership.

        Somewhere in the depths of hell, Lenin is smiling.

    1. “And from Adams, his final words: “Thomas Jefferson survives.”
      ****************************
      And like so many things about Adams as compared to Jefferson, the New Englander was wrong about that, too.

  4. “Not surprisingly, polls show more than 40 percent of voters now believe we are heading into a civil war. Not only are more columnists discussing the approach of a possible civil war,”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCHKYNFH9Lk
    0:27 – 0:55

    Well-played(?) columnists, politicians, and anonymous commenters. Egad. The relentless attempts of persuasive suggestion are getting tedious.

    1. America needs to laugh. But ‘comedy’ is at death’s door here in America. Saturday Night Live ran with endless material mocking Trump when he was president. Why aren’t SNL and all the other so-called comedians exploiting the obvious now? America is ‘dying to laugh’ at all that is going on. Exploit the obvious! There is endless sketch material with which to mock President Biden. But they won’t do it. Why not? “Nothing against the state.”

      This is why Gutfeld is killing it in the late night ratings.

      1. Great point. They fear such humor because it contains truth. If they had nothing to hide, they would see the irony.

  5. Tucker Carlson’s show tonight, Sept. 12, 2022, is a MUST watch. If you are not absolutely enraged by the weak and feckless Republican political leaders and their utter and total silence, complicity and unwillingness to push back or fight back, loudly, on anything the Biden DOJ is doing to Trump supporters –or the J6 committee bullsh*t Stalinist showtrial –you need to be. Like, right now.

    1. “All within the state. nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” -Mussolini’s formula.

      All dissent must be suppressed. Until we reach the end of America as we know it, and that for which it stands. You. will. conform.

  6. The big difference in Biden’s rhetoric is that he demonized half the country while other rage politicians like Trump demonize Biden, his administration and the institutions that prop him up. That’s a huge difference and nobody’s like me notice that.

    1. Exactly. It is a HUGE difference. However, calling evil evil is not demonizing, It is truth telling. From the absolute corruption of Democrats and RINOs to abortion, enabling domestic terrorism (threatening judges, rioting, murder, arson, property destruction), endangering public health, foreign invasions and sexualizing the culture including children, is the picture of evil freely abounding in the nation.

    2. Ayn hu? That moniker speaks volumes. “while other rage politicians like Trump demonize Biden”? So, you actually believe that Donnie has NEVER demonized the “other half”! I love ‘um all, but you gotta admit, a majority of them are pretty much deplorable.

      1. Trump has attacked socialism. I beleive speaking officially as president – which is What Biden has been doing, that is the closest thing to a broad attack Trump has made.

        I am sure that the far too many people in this country who think fondly of socialism treat that as a personal attack.
        Regardless, the socialist ideology is an abysmal failure – that is the lesson of history. It is a bloody awful failure.
        Most people who buy socialism are not awful people, but the results are the same.

        Speaking politically as opposed to as president – Trump has attacked democrats – pretty much always meaning the DNC and democratic congressmen – this is expected.

        Long before Obama those on the left have been calling larger and larger portions of the rest of the country
        Hateful, hating haters.

        Democrats have compared every republican presidential candidate in my lifetime to hitler.

        While there permutations. we mostly know what socialism is. Trump is attacking something concrete.

        Biden and democrats are attacking “extreme Maga” – what is that ? How is that different from MAGA ?

        I am not a republican – yet I have no problem with “Make America Great Again”. I have a different view of that than Trump does. But that does not make my MAGA virtuous and Trump’s evil. We share some and disagree on others.
        Regardless, I have a pretty good idea what Trump MAGA means and I can live with it even if I am at odds on points.

        I have no idea what “extreme MAGA” is. I have no way of knowing whether Biden is targeting me – and I pretty much assume he is, because while I can live with Trump MAGA, I have almost no common ground with Biden.

        Further, I have little doubt that if Biden won the fight against “extreme MAGA” – I would be next.

      2. We here Biden, Garland, the FBI talk about the rising threat of right wing domestic violence.
        It is clear they are going to war against it.
        It is clear they are going after it like they went after Al Queda.

        If the KKK were roaming the streets burning churches bombing synagogues, and murdering people trying to register voters, the whole country would know what they were talking about and would be behind them.

        But there are no violent right wing groups roaming the streets.
        There has been a rise in violence over the past few years – but it is not from the right.
        The media and the left have to warp reality to make a handful of disturbed young men into right wing extremists to come up with a tiny actual threat.

        We all know of massive amounts of increasing non political violence. To the extent there is political violence it is a small fraction and nearly all of that is on the left.

        Yet the this administration – from Biden to Garland to Wray has declared the greatest threat – right wing domestic violence. The absence of evidence of any real threat that most of us can see leave us all with the reasonable assumption that this administration considers those who disagree with them as violent and dangerous.

        And given that they are hiring IRS agents to come after us. they are working with Social media to come after us,
        They are working with school board associations to come after us.

        It is quite reasonable for a signficant portion of this country to beleive that they are the “extreme MAGA”, the Domestic Terrorists that this administration is targeting.

        If there is confusion – that is not caused by those who feel targeted.

        But worse – most of us do not think there is any confusion. This administration is targeting a significant portion of the country for the crime of political disagreement.

        https://nypost.com/2022/09/14/facebook-spied-on-private-messages-of-americans-who-questioned-2020-election/

Leave a Reply