Why subscribe? Note the kind words of Debra, a new paid subscriber: "You are a well informed voice of reason." And Wendy, who says, “I like reading your writing.”

---

This Climate of Violence

After yesterday's assassination attempt, the need for thoughtful leadership that renounces violence could not be clearer

STEVEN BESCHLOSS JUL 14

Donald Trump was taken from the stage by Secret Service agents after shots were fired and he was injured at his Butler, Pa. rally yesterday. (Photo by Rebecca Droke/AFP via Getty Images)

In one of the television interviews soon after the assassination attempt on Donald Trump in Butler, Pa. yesterday, a shaken mother who attended the rally expressed her hope that this violent event could lead to less hate and more unity among Americans. It was an encouraging comment, one that was echoed by President Joe Biden who quickly came on camera after learning that Trump had been hit and expressing gratitude that he was safe and doing well

"Look, there's no place in America for this kind of violence. It’s sick. It’s sick," said Biden, who has asserted many times over the years that political violence has no place in America. "It’s one of the reasons why we have to unite this country…We cannot be like this. We cannot condone this.”

This is a time when we need two responsible presidential candidates who renounce violence. But, sadly, there’s little reason to expect that in the coming days during the Republican National Convention that starts tomorrow or in the coming months as the election continues to heat up. While we don’t know how the convention may be adjusted for these new circumstances, I worry that there’s more likely to be a ramping up of anger for their near-martyred nominee rather than calls for peace and unity.

In the first hours after shots were fired, at a time when the country sorely needed calm and prudent leadership, there were already plenty of disturbing assertions on social media by elected Republicans quick to blame the rhetoric of President Biden and other Democrats identifying Trump as a danger to democracy. This includes Ohio senator and VP hopeful, J.D. Vance, as well as Georgia Rep. Mike Collins who outlandishly but dangerously claimed “Biden sent the orders.” (Additionally, many Democrats were quick to assert that the event was staged.)

Over and over, Trump has exploited his position both as president and ex-president to advocate for and incite violence, no where more clearly than on the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection that led to the injuries of over 140 police officers. In virtually every rally held in the 2016 campaign, there was an undercurrent of violence encouraged by the candidate. That has continued to play out more explicitly ever since as Trump’s attacks on court officials, election workers, political rivals and so many others have led to them facing death threats and other forms of harassment and abuse.

It’s hard to forget Trump’s amused mockery last year of Paul Pelosi, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, after he was brutally assaulted with a hammer in their home. Even immediately following this assassination attempt, his ear bloody and his face streaked with blood, Trump stood above Secret Service agents to repeatedly pump his fist and mouth the word “Fight!”

We have yet to learn many details of the now-dead shooter’s background, although early information is that he was a 20-year-old registered Republican. We have every reason to worry that once his political views become known that they will exacerbate the impulse to escalate the violent rhetoric, particularly if he was strongly anti-Trump. The already-present danger of stochastic terrorism is almost certain to increase this year.

We should be grateful that yesterday’s violence, which tragically included the death of one rally attendee and the critical injury of two others, did not lead to a successful political assassination. That’s not just a human response, but also a recognition that an assassination would have likely led to widespread anger and triggered yet more violence across the country. The harm to our democracy would be incalculable.

It remains necessary to continue aggressively arguing the case against Trump, who yearns to be a dictator if he retakes the White House, promises to pursue retribution against his perceived enemies, and demagogically exploits his power to stir anger and violence. But we should be clear that there’s a difference between defining the grave threat to democracy of Trump and his party—and explicitly encouraging violence toward those with whom we disagree. Our collective future as a democratic and civil society depends on it.