When I first heard about the FBI’s raid on Mar-A-Lago, I merely hoped that there was a very, very good reason for it, and that the feds found what they were looking for. Days later, none of us knows the answer to either of those questions. Donald J. Trump knows, of course. But he won’t tell us — because appropriate official silence allows him to flood the zone with his own bullshit, gin up his fevered base, and burnish his case for returning to power as a triumphant victim of the Deep State (aka the rule of law). All I know is that he is a grotesque liar and will say anything if it wins him a few minutes of news-cycle attention. But look: I have no idea why the former president seems to have insisted on keeping boxes of highly classified documents he received in office, and then refused to give them all back. I don’t know why he resisted a subpoena on what seems like a routine request. It looks fishy — but with Trump, it always looks fishy. He acts like a criminal even when he isn’t committing a crime. He has never accepted the legitimacy of any legal authority if it is targeting him, and literally cannot submit willingly to it without some kind of psychic break. He could be guilty, but he could also be innocent; or guilty of something not-so-bad. Equally, I have no idea why the FBI really had no option but to do this — given its huge political risks. And it seems perfectly possible to me that the US government’s fanatical protection of its own secrets has led to another stupid overreach by clueless prosecutors. There is, of course, the rule of law; but there is also prosecutorial discretion. To go after a former president in such flamboyant fashion in a deeply polarized polity is an inherently political decision — and requires, above all else, prudence. Was Garland prudent? I guess we’ll see. But one thing we’ve learned from the Establishment resistance to Trump is that it has more often than not both empowered him and weakened liberal democratic legitimacy. It almost never works with a man as slippery and shameless as Trump. A few more rabid Twitter cycles and every minuscule facet of this story will be pored over, and, in all likelihood, the conclusion, if it ever emerges, will be what it has consistently been: messy, absurd, and without that cathartic “We got him!” moment every Resistance groupie has been dreaming of since 2016. But it does offer a snapshot of where the culture of this democracy is, and it isn’t pretty. The Pavlovian response on the right — instant shock! horror! rage! — exposes just how deep our crisis of legitimacy runs. When conservatives propose defunding the FBI, when a governor like Ron DeSantis uses terms like “the Regime” to describe a duly elected administration, and when calls to outright civil war flood the Twitterverse, you begin to see how far tribal hatred has completely eclipsed the notion of the rule of law in our teetering republic. And Trump himself, of course, sees no fire without instinctually reaching for his flame-thrower:
Yes, a former president is alleging the planting of evidence by the Deep State to destroy him. Cue the GOP spin:
Please. This is so much melodrama and so little politics. It’s 2016 - 2020 in an infinitely recurring loop. And the way out of this is not deeper into it. In fact, we’ve just begun to see a looming exit. This past month, we’ve seen real signs of incremental progress on the plane of reality. We have moved the dial on climate change in historic fashion; we’ve beefed up the semiconductor industry; we’ve secured lower drug prices for Medicare; and we’ve raised taxes on the very rich. In the last year, we’ve passed bipartisan infrastructure investment, withdrawn from the sinkhole of Afghanistan, and helped stymie a Russian invasion of Ukraine. And what’s striking about all this Dark Brandon energy is its pragmatism, moderation, and lack of polarizing melodrama. And, apart from climate change, the agenda is not that different than Trump’s — which suggests our deep cultural divides are not insuperable, our democratic politics not inevitably doomed, and our current president not as far off from what we hoped for than we may have recently feared. Which means to say: there remains a center. It shows signs of life. Its modest but palpable success reveals how politics can actually work in post-everything America. Let’s build on that. Let’s focus on it. And do all we can to keep Trump and his toxic minions from distracting us. (Note to readers: This is an excerpt of The Weekly Dish. If you’re already a subscriber, click here to read the full version. This week’s issue also includes: my philosophical take on why exceptions (e.g. homosexuality) prove the rule (e.g. heterosexuality); my discussion with Dexter Filkins about DeSantis and their home state of Florida; reader dissents over my views on DeSantis and several other topics; four notable quotes for the week; an Yglesias Award for a far-left TV personality giving props to far-right personalities; 15 links to other Substackers on a variety of topics; a Mental Health Break of a window view in northern Michigan set to music; window views from Dubrovnik and Bellevue; and, as always, the results of the View From Your Window contest — with a new challenge. Subscribe for the full Dish experience!) From a newcomer:
Exceptions Prove RulesHere’s something I’ve wanted to get off my chest for a while, and since our summer break is coming up — why not now? Exceptions prove the rule. Or, more precisely, exceptions do not disprove the rule. I don’t mean this as a trivially semantic question. I mean it as something quite profound about humanity. In a world as complex and varied and fast-changing as the one we live in, both in nature and in culture, almost every rule is going to have some kind of exception or other. But this does not invalidate the centrality or general reliability of the rule or rules in general. Au contraire. (Read the whole 1200-word piece here, for paid subscribers) New On The Dishcast: Dexter FilkinsHow to think about Ron DeSantis? We decided to ask Dexter Filkins, who recently wrote this super-smart profile of the man for The New Yorker, which the Dish discussed here. Dexter is an award-winning journalist best known for covering the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the New York Times. His book, The Forever War, won the 2008 National Book Critics Circle Award. He’s the best in the business, a native of Florida, and a longtime friend of the Dish. For two clips of our convo — on the encouraging record of DeSantis enforcing the rule of law in Iraq, and on how even GOP leaders are now turning against law enforcement — pop over to our YouTube page. Listen to the whole episode here. That link takes you to a bunch of listener comments and dissents over last week’s episode with Sohrab Ahmari. Browse the entire Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy. Dissents Of The WeekA reader prods my provisional support for DeSantis:
I made this exact point above — before reading this dissent. And I agree. It’s pretty close to disqualifying. Another reader adds, “Well, here’s more news regarding DeSantis’ dictatorial tendencies: removing an elected prosecutor (state attorney) because he doesn’t like what he’s saying.” “Dictatorial.” Please. The WSJ notes that “Florida’s constitution gives broad powers to the governor to suspend officers such as state attorneys.” Even the editorial the reader links to — which outlandishly calls the suspension a “putsch” — concedes that the state attorney “should have been more cautious in expressing how he would handle these cases” and “the wording should have been more nuanced.” Read another DeSantis dissent, along with one about BLM protests during Covid and another about my summer in Ptown, here. As always, keep the dissents coming, and Bodenner will select the strongest ones, as is tradition: dish@andrewsullivan.com. In The ‘StacksThis is a feature in the paid version of the Dish spotlighting about a dozen of our favorite pieces from other Substackers every week. This week’s selection covers subjects such as Republicans against contraception and IVF, death-row organs, and guinea pigs. Below is one example:
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 ContestWhere 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 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 last week’s window are coming in a separate email to paid subscribers later today. The contest always includes a ton of fascinating facts about the culture and history of the window’s location. Here’s an example:
See you next Friday. |