Remind Me – Who’s The Problem?

Weekend Update

“[W]e must expand efforts to detain and deport Illegal Aliens in America’s largest Cities, such as Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, where Millions upon Millions of Illegal Aliens reside. These, and other such Cities, are the core of the Democrat Power Center, where they use Illegal Aliens to expand their Voter Base, cheat in Elections, and grow the Welfare State, robbing good paying Jobs and Benefits from Hardworking American Citizens. These Radical Left Democrats are sick of mind, hate our Country, and actually want to destroy our Inner Cities—And they are doing a good job of it! There is something wrong with them. That is why they believe in Open Borders, Transgender for Everybody, and Men playing in Women’s Sports—And that is why I want ICE, Border Patrol, and our Great and Patriotic Law Enforcement Officers, to FOCUS on our crime ridden and deadly Inner Cities, and those places where Sanctuary Cities play such a big role. You don’t hear about Sanctuary Cities in our Heartland!”

This is what the current Republican president posted on his social media platform the day after one of his ardent supporters killed two Democrats and seriously wounded two others on Saturday in an act of wanton political violence. Let that sit for a moment.

What exactly does he expect will happen when he casually suggests that violence is a legitimate political strategy?

We can all cite the instances where Trump suggested that his followers respond violently to his critics. Here are a few reminders:

• At a 2016 Iowa rally he said this about a protester, “If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. OK? Just knock the hell—I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.”

• On January 6, 2021, he encouraged his supporters to “fight like hell” and march to the Capitol.

• In September of 2024, he urged the police to engage in “one really violent day . . . one rough hour” to demonstrate toughness.

• In January of 2025, he pardoned about 1,500 people involved in the Capitol attack. Experts in counterterrorism said this would encourage future political violence.

• Just in the past week, he ramped up his rhetoric.

  • At Fort Bragg, he warned that protests during his planned military parade could meet with “a very big force,” and advocated jailing those who burned flags.

  • He deployed National Guard and Marines to LA; most observers believe that the presence of these forces exacerbated rather than tamped down potential violence.

  • In response to the protests in LA over immigration raids, he labeled demonstrators “animals” and “a foreign enemy,” and wrote that those who spit on officers would be “hit.” He also called for the arrest of California Governor Gavin Newsom for some yet-to-be-defined crime.

• At the end of last week, Senator Alex Padilla was wrestled to the ground and handcuffed after attempting to ask a question of Homeland Security Secretary Kristy Noem’s press conference. The current Republic administration and GOP members of Congress immediately jumped to Noem’s defense, saying that Padilla was a threat to the secretary and had to be taken down – even though the very available video doesn’t support that conclusion. The GOP Speaker of the House Mike Johnson called for the Senate to censure Padilla.

In her Substack Civil Discourse essay today, Joyce White Vance wrote about her effort to get her Senators (she lives in Alabama, so her Senators are Tommy Tuberville and Katie Britt) to respond to the attack on Padilla. Now, she recognizes that it’s the weekend, and that the lack of response may just simply mean that a reply is in the works and she will hear from them later.

But she goes on to put this in context by citing the rules of discovery in a federal civil lawsuit. Discovery is the process by which parties in a lawsuit ask for and receive information from the other side. The television trope of surprise evidence turning a case around is rare; justice is not gained from suppressed evidence and courtroom ambushes. But she goes further into this topic by citing a portion of the rule that provides that when a party fails to respond, the court can take the “designated facts . . . as established for the purposes of the action.” In other words, the parties can make a negative inference from the failure to hand over evidence or answer questions in discovery – the negative inference being that the answers would show guilt. The logic goes this way: the parties would turn over evidence if it were exculpatory. Hiding or refusing to turn over evidence means that it would be bad for their client.

She extends this logic to her Senators. If they had a good response to make, they would make it. Their failure to respond suggests two things: they are afraid to say anything critical of the current Republican administration, yet they are afraid to go on the record as approving violence against political opponents. I’ll add one thing that Joyce didn’t include in her essay: you can bet that Tuberville, Britt, and their staff know her name. Her question should get their attention. Because staffers are asked to scour news outlets for any mention of their bosses, you can bet that they know about her essay in which she calls them out.

Joyce has promised to let us know if and when she hears from her Senators. I’m writing my Republican Congressman today to ask him the same question. When I get an answer, I’ll let you all know.