As serial sex abuser Donald Trump (SSAT) becomes increasingly embroiled in legal troubles, he is lashing out more and more at the prosecutors who have brought indictments against him, the witnesses who have testified or will testify in the cases, and the judges overseeing the cases. It is therefore not surprising that some of his cult followers will see his rants as a call to take up arms on his behalf, such as this woman.
A Texas woman has been arrested and charged with threatening to kill the federal judge overseeing the criminal case against the former US president Donald Trump in Washington DC, and a member of Congress.
Abigail Jo Shry of Alvin, Texas, called the federal courthouse in Washington DC and left the threatening message, using a racist term for the US district judge Tanya Chutkan, on 5 August, court records allege. Investigators traced her phone number and she later admitted to making the threatening call, according to a criminal complaint.
In the call, Shry told told the judge, who is overseeing the election conspiracy case against Trump: “You are in our sights, we want to kill you,” according to the documents. Prosecutors allege Shry also said: “If Trump doesn’t get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you.” She also threatened to kill Sheila Jackson Lee, a Texas Democrat representative running for mayor of Houston, according to court documents.
Shry seems to be not very bright and was thus easily caught and is now in jail. But others may be better able to cover their tracks and carry out their threats.
But what really concerns me is the following plausible scenario. It is that SSAT wins the Republican nomination despite all the court cases he has to maneuver through during the primary process and that while those cases will undoubtedly increase the intensity of the loyalty of his die-hard supporters, it will also cause him to lose some support among the less committed and independent voters so that as it gets close to the general election on November 5, 2024, it looks very likely that he will lose. What could happen then?
It is unlikely that they will face that this possibility stoically. It is always possible that he and his supports will hope that there is a repetition of what happened in 2016, when he won despite the polls right up to election day predicting that Hillary Clinton would win. But SSAT and his supporters may not want to leave that to chance this time. Their experience after the 2020 election shows that trying to overturn an election loss after the fact is not going to work. In fact, it will be even harder the next time because people will be prepared for such an effort in ways that they were not in 2020.
So in the period leading up the election, SSAT and his followers may decide to act preemptively, seeking to make sure that SSAT is declared the winner, irrespective of what the voters say. How will they do that? It is hard to predict how far fanatics will go but putting their own people in charge of running the election and counting the votes, extensive measures to disrupt voting is Democratic leaning areas, using threats of force and actual violence to intimidate people, and even more drastic measures that I cannot even envisage, are possible. In other words, I can see an increasingly volatile and violence-prone period leading up to election day. I do not know what exactly to expect except that all the institutions of democracy will be sorely tested.
How will those institutions respond to these challenges? One hopes that they will be able to adequately prepare for them. The US managed to conduct elections and maintain its institutions in 1864 even during the Civil War so one hopes that it will be able to do so in 2024. But that is not a given since this time those institutions are being challenged by someone who is a former president and is willing to do anything to regain the presidency since that may be his only hope of avoiding prison time and who is supported by a fanatical groups of hard core followers who are willing to take any action on his behalf. And, like Shry above, some of them are very angry but also not very bright, which is a dangerous combination that can lead to irrational and violent actions that may make the events of January 6th, 2021 look like a picnic.
What I am saying may sound unduly alarmist and I hope I am wrong. But it is good to prepare for the worst.
… putting their own people in charge of running the election and counting the votes, extensive measures to disrupt voting is Democratic leaning areas, using threats of force and actual violence to intimidate people, and even more drastic measures that I cannot even envisage, are possible.
You left out the Russians.
…and the Freikorps.
Unlike Putin, SSAT does not have access to the kind of organisation that can arrange a Reichtag fire or useful bomb explosion, so that is something we can all be grateful for.
What I fear is that we’re becoming a third-world country, and I certainly hope that I’m wrong as well.
Billseymour @ 4
In the eighties and nineties the Democrats were content to lean back and not worry enough about long-term trends, instead being content to run on ‘Republican Lite’.
If they had worried a lot more- especially about the supreme court- USA would not be in this situation.
So worrying is a virtue, especially today.
I started a long comment, then realized that no one was going to want to read it. So, here is a summary of my thoughts.
Is there a reason to be concerned? Yes. But while there may be violence and deaths, the elections will occur, voting will be (mostly) accurate, and the results will (eventually) be certified.
As far as local municipalities, it is certainly likely that we might see repeats of the Baltimore Election Riot of 1856, or the Philadelphia Election Riot in October 1836 (not to be confused with the Philadelphia Race Riot in August 1836). In both cases members of one party tried to intimidate voters who might oppose them. In both cases shots were fired, and people died. While those events may recur in 2024, and cause widespread anger, they are likely to occur in only a few municipalities around the USA.
Refusal to certify results could occur, but that just extends the time votes are counted. A certifying board refusing to certify will trigger investigations into the possibility of fraud. But if no fraud is found and the certifying board still refuses to certify they will be ordered to do so by courts.
The false electors gambit will not be tried again. People are starting to go to jail for that attempt, and one things lawyers hate is going to jail.
Finally, there is bound to be greater preparation and vigilance by non-MAGAts. Election officials and law enforcement will look for, and attempt to thwart ahead of time, any plans of election interference. The MAGAts are not known for their reticence. And because of what happened in 2020, the public announcement of their plans will be heeded. Precautionary and preventative measures will be taken. Not everywhere, but in enough places to ensure fair elections. It may get ugly in places, but I don’t currently foresee any successful attempt to subvert the 2024 election. Of course, I could be wrong, and I may change my mind over the course of the next year.
birgerjohansson @ # 3: … SSAT does not have access to the kind of organisation that can arrange a Reichtag fire or useful bomb explosion…
See my # 1.
Economically, I don’t think you need to worry, but as far as the quality of your “democracy” goes, “becoming a third world county” would be a step up. At least they’re trying…
@3 birgerjohansson: Trump isn’t the sort to organize or command a Reichtag fire anyways. He is much more the “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” type. Setting the stage for violence but trying to keep his hands clean by not quite directly calling for violence.
During the 60s, several thousand bombs were set off within the US, by various radical groups. There were multiple urban crackdowns like the LA riots, in which the military hit the streets and basically shot people. There were the Kent State murders, FBI-sponsored church bombings, and more. Back in the 1800s there were huge riots around labor lockouts, like the battle of Homestead, or the battle of Blair Mountain in which the air national guard dropped WWI surplus gas bombs on civilians and uparmored trains with Hotchkiss water-cooled machineguns drove about shooting into miner encampments. There was the Wall St bombing, and the Haymarket bombing. That’s not even counting the various “race riots” and protests that turned bloody.
American politics is the replete with violence. This guy Trump and his followers are chump change.
Imagine if law enforcement had complained that it was afraid to arrest Al Capone because he had mobsters with tommy guns. The response would have been “you have tommy guns, too.” America’s uparmored police can (in principle) handle Trump’s throngs easily. Without a civil war.
The rounding up and processing of Jan 6 protesters has taken a lot of the sand out of the others. Look how few gun toting goobers have shown up outside of Trump’s last arraignment: zero.