Escaping Trump’s revenge A horrible question is being asked ROBERT REICH MAR 4 Friends, When I served in Bill Clinton’s Cabinet, one of my favorite progressive lawmakers was Jim McDermott, who represented Seattle from 1989 to 2017. Jim had a long and distinguished legislative record. In his final year, he became one of the most trenchant critics of Donald Trump. He’s still criticizing Trump — from his safe house. Soon after Trump was elected in 2016, Jim blasted him for issuing inflammatory tweets, such as claiming without evidence that millions of people had voted illegally in the presidential election. Jim said on the House floor: “What we have right now is a president-elect running around the world with his [Twitter account] making statements that are disruptive and distractive for the American public.” Jim also openly worried about future sessions of Congress. “I think it’s going to be a very tough … helping the new president understand how a democracy actually works.” Jim is now living in Civrac-en Medoc, a town of a few hundred people in western France, north of Bordeaux. In a recent interview with Elizabeth Becker, a former Washington Post correspondent, Jim said he’s getting calls from former colleagues in Congress who fear what a vengeful Trump might do if reelected. They wonder how to gauge the seriousness of Trump’s increasingly dire threats to American democracy and potentially to them and their families. “They are scared to do what I did — [to expatriate from the U.S.] — but are scared to stay,” Jim said. He tells them: “If you can afford it, buy a second home in France, or Spain, or Portugal, wherever … a second home that could become a safe house.” I’ve heard similar concerns in recent months from lawmakers, officials, prosecutors, journalists, and celebrities who have been publicly critical of Trump. They worry about Trump’s promise of “retribution” if reelected, his intention to direct the Justice Department to investigate “every Marxist prosecutor in America,” his claim that his indictments have “released the genie out of the box” that would allow him to weaponize the government against his opponents, and his vow to “root out … the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country.” They’re also concerned about the apparent willingness of Trump’s followers to resort to violence against his opponents. A third of Republicans agree with the statement that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.” Among Republicans with a favorable view of Trump, 41 percent now agree that violence may be necessary. (By contrast, 22 percent of independents and 13 percent of Democrats agree.) “It only takes one crackpot, like the guy who tried to kill Paul Pelosi,” one former lawmaker told me. I never thought this nation would get to a point where critics and opponents of a potential United States president begin to wonder whether to leave the country to keep themselves and their families safe. That’s standard for critics of bloodthirsty dictators like Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un, but in America? Elizabeth Becker asks, rhetorically: Is the United States facing a situation so dangerous that you would be foolish if you didn’t have a backup plan? Is it hyperbole to imagine the country sliding into authoritarian rule that would unleash violence, retribution, and repression? I hope not. But the mere fact the question is being posed is itself a frightening commentary on where we’ve come — and may be heading. Every American, including Jim McDermott, has a right to live where they feel safe, of course. And if they can afford a “backup plan,” they may be wise to consider one. But I hope people with Jim’s principles and abilities remain here to defend America against Trump’s threats to democracy, even if he’s defeated in November.