Ribeirão Preto, SP – (Opinion) In our “Unthinking the Unthinkable” essay, published early on January 6th, a few hours before the truly unthinkable occurred in Washington DC, we argued that President Trump’s antics after he lost the election in November showed him to be deranged.
What we (and almost everyone else on the planet) did not foresee was that thousands of pro-Trump thugs, many of them armed, and equally deranged, would invade the Capitol Building, the Senate Chamber and Senators’ offices, in an attempt to prevent the US Congress from fulfilling its constitutional duty to count the votes received from the Electoral College.
Yes, we had heard a deranged Trump falsely claim every day that he won the election “by a landslide” and that “the other party knows that.” Yes, we had heard every day about lawsuits that would supposedly prove a grand conspiracy between Democrats, unfaithful Republican officials, judges, prosecutors and the press, determined to “steal” the election.
Yes, we had heard Trump call for a “wild” march on Capitol Hill on January 6th. Yes, we had heard Trump exhorting his followers to be “strong” and to “take back our country”. [Our country? As Tonto never said to the Lone Ranger, “What you mean ‘we’, paleface?”]
Yes, we had heard Trump call both Vice President Pence and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell weak. Yes, we had heard Trump heap fulsome praise on Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley for their deranged plans to overturn voters’ decisions in some Senate cloakroom (as happened after the 1876 election).
However, we had not heard, nor seen, nor suspected, nor paid attention to, much less predicted, the rabid reaction of right-wing reactionaries, as they rallied to ratify Trump’s “victory” and save “their” nation – by force of arms if necessary.
The Capitol Building police had not heard this, nor had the local DC police force, nor (apparently) the FBI, nor the U.S. Secret Service whose job is to protect the President and the Vice President.
The unthinkable, violent invasion of the Capitol happened, for the first time since 1814, and claimed five lives. The fallout has now settled around Donald Trump, who blithely ignored the invasion, chose for hours not to call out the National Guard, and tweeted “I love you” to the protesters.
There are now three (formerly) unthinkable options for Trump: (1) Resignation, following Richard Nixon’s 1974 example; (2) Ouster, following the 25th Amendment to the US Constitution; and (3) Impeachment, following Trump’s prior impeachment last year.
Resignation would seem to be the most practical choice, since in theory a full pardon from Mike Pence would follow immediately, just as Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon. However, Mike Pence (whom one of the invaders was specifically targeting) has not spoken to Trump since Trump excoriated him for not exercising a non-existent power to overturn the Electoral College results. If you were Mike Pence, sitting as President, would you pardon Donald Trump for inciting insurrection?
Ouster of sitting presidents, temporarily or permanently, is licit when they are unfit, physically or mentally, to carry out the powers and duties of the office. The 25th Amendment is clear that if the President does not declare himself incompetent, the Vice President can do so, with the consent of 2/3 of the Cabinet. Once again, is this an opportunity for Mike Pence to stand up for what is needed, or will he once again kowtow to Trump?
Impeachment seems somehow fanciful, given that the Democrats tried last year and failed. But is it? Last year, although there was evidence of collusion between Trump and Putin, there was no smoking gun. This year, gunsmoke abounded inside the Capitol Building, and Trump is, at the very least, indirectly responsible.
The House of Representatives impeaches (meaning accuses) and the Senate judges the accusations. The Senate has never convicted any impeached President. There is no reason to believe this year would be any different, as the Senate is split 50/50 and 60 votes are needed to convict an impeached President.
Given this indefinite scenario, where President Trump will not resign, his cabinet will not oust him, and the Senate will not convict him after impeachment, what are the “unthinkables” that should concern us?
Most frightening is the domestic threat. We wrote in our last post, “On January 20th, President-elect Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. … will take office, ‘the Lord willin’ and the crick don’t rise.’”
On January 6th, as the entire world watched, horrified, the unthinkable happened: the crick did rise, overflowed its banks, and swept away five lives, while local and federal “security” forces watched, inert, from the sidelines.
Let us first ponder the worst possible unthinkable for Inauguration Day, January 20th, just ten days from now. What happens if pro-Trump fanatics egged on by his deranged rhetoric, decide to assassinate Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as they proceed to the White House after taking their oaths of office in the Capitol Building?
Ponder another unthinkable: What if Trump, still in office on January 19th, with Jared Kushner, Israel and Saudi Arabia cheering from the sidelines, decides to rain U.S. nuclear warheads down on Iran, as punishment for violating its commitment not to make weapons-grade nuclear material?
Ponder yet another unthinkable, closer to Brazil, where we live. What if Trump, with Bolsonaro cheering fom the sidelines, decides to rid Venezuela of Nicolás Maduro, and on January 19th orders massive American troops to invade Caracas?
“Unthinkable!” those who support Trump will cry, hoping against hope that their sociopathic, deranged, wannabe Führer will, somehow, some way, return to sanity before bringing the world crashing down around him as he is forced to leave office as a LOSER.
Nothing today is unthinkable. Nothing at all.
After Wednesday, January 6th, the safety of the entire world demands that the U.S. rethink the formerly unthinkable, and take, immediately, one of three concrete measures to avoid an impending disaster: the resignation, ouster, or impeachment of Donald Trump.