In the wake of Donald Trump’s first federal criminal indictment last summer, there was quite a bit of commentary about “testing.” Americans see a test of our political system. A test of our legal system. A test for the rule of law. A test from the courts. A test of the integrity of our democracy. A test of the nation itself.
Now that the former Republican president has been convicted of several crimes, the focus on “testing” is back. The New York Times reported last night:
There’s a dimension to this that’s easily overlooked in the commentary: this is a test we already know how to pass.
Looking back at our previous reporting, Trump is a scandal-plagued politician who has now been convicted of many crimes. But in the United States we have all kinds of experiences with scandal-plagued politicians who have been convicted of many crimes.
It happens all the time. It does not affect the fabric of our civic life. It does not open the door to political violence. It is, for lack of a better word, normal.
This is not to say that the former president’s conviction is unimportant. On the contrary, it is extraordinary, partly because of our history, partly because the Republican waited so long to avoid serious legal consequences, and partly because it could affect the outcome of the 2024 election.
But it’s not that Americans are unfamiliar with the broader dynamics at the intersection of politics and the criminal justice system. The fact that it involves a former president is unusual, but we have seen condemnations from governors, senators, members of the House of Representatives, state legislators, cabinet secretaries, mayors and city officials. Spiro Agnieuw, during his term as vice presidenteven pleaded guilty to a crime and resigned in disgrace.
None of these cases threatened our republic. The suspects were charged and their case went to trial. The United States survived without any problems.
In other words, our political system should be able to handle Trump’s conviction without breaking a sweat.
What would endanger our political system, however, would be if the former president and/or his allies rejected our justice system and insisted that Trump must remain above the law – because they say so.
For example, Elise Stefanik, chair of the House Republican Conference, responded to the jury’s verdict by telling the audience that “the American justice system” has become “corrupt and rigged.” The condemnation was not rooted in fact, but the former president himself, like many others, used nearly identical language.
Note: Trump and his sycophants are not only targeting the relevant players in the underlying case – the local prosecutors, the judge, members of the jury, et al. – they are also telling Americans not to use the “justice system” itself to trust.
The Republicans’ motivations are obvious: They want to delegitimize a core American institution — not because it has failed, but because it holds their leader accountable. If the justice system holds Trump accountable for his crimes, then the justice system must become a target as far as the Republican Party is concerned.
But the logic behind the unhinged attacks on a pillar of our system does not make this any less dangerous.
Rachel Kleinfeld, a senior fellow at the Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the Times: “This was a conviction from a jury of Americans who listened to the evidence and made their decision. If you undermine the courts the way elections have already been undermined, there is no peaceful way to resolve disagreements.”
The conviction of the presumptive Republican nominee is historic, but it is not a crisis – unless Republicans decide to make it a crisis.
This message updates our related previous reporting.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
