Perhaps you missed it? Someone tried to shoot Donald Trump. From the Associated Press:
“A British man arrested at a weekend Donald Trump rally in Las Vegas tried to grab a police officer’s gun so he could kill the presidential candidate after planning an assassination for about a year, according to authorities. U.S. Secret Service agents said Michael Steven Sandford approached a Las Vegas police officer at the campaign stop to say he wanted Trump’s autograph, but that he then tried to take the weapon.”
1. Wow. Talk about being incompetent at your chosen avocation! This guy has been “planning an assassination for about a year” and the big plan was “try to get a police officer’s gun”?
Assassins, like everything else, just aren’t what they used to be.
2. Remember, however, that the only difference between a failed assassination attempt and a successful one is moral luck.
3. The Washington Post asks why the incident didn’t provoke more news coverage. Isn’t that a strange question to come from one of the news organizations responsible for the lack of coverage? Why doesn’t Callum Borchers just ask his own editors at the Post?
The answer seems clear to me: the news media doesn’t want any public sympathy going Trump’s way, or to give him what would amount to positive publicity. This is the double standard we are being told that we need to get used to. Does anyone want to make the case that an assassination attempt on Hillary’s life would be a multi-day story, with a repeat of the U.S. Representative Rep. Gabrielle Giffords shooting mass accusation, now holding that Republican “hate speech” and anti-Hillary rhetoric nearly resulted in a tragedy? Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin were being fingered as the reason why a deranged man went on a killing spree in Tucson. Why not blame a Trump assassination attempt on Paul Krugman or Elizabeth Warren? Or me?
4. The Post article justifies the non-coverage by noting that Trump hasn’t mentioned the incident. Three guesses why that is. (The first two don’t count.)
5. Some conservative pundits, like Instapundit’s Glenn Reynolds, are suggesting that the media hate toward Trump sparked the attempt. Considering how vehemently they condemned the same accusation when it was leveled at them in the Giffords shooting, this is classic hypocrisy.
6. Should the news media and punditry cool its attacks on Trump to avoid seeding anti-Trump hysteria? No, of course not.
A dangerous, unqualified, unstable and unfit scam artist is dangerously close to becoming President following a failed Presidency that will leave the nation with an unstable economy, an unaddressed terrorist threat, a crumbling educational system, an government-led erosion of civil rights, hyper=partisanship, dysfunctional journalism, a horrific international situation, unprotected borders and the most divided society since the Civil War, with a public that no longer trusts its democratic institution or those who lead them. What could go wrong? The news media needs to be truthful and direct, and being truthful and direct means scaring the hell out of the public about the prospect of a Donald Trump in the White House.
7. However, they news media is also obligated to scare the hell out of people about the prospect of President Hillary Clinton too….truthfully, of course. I doubt that it is capable or inclined to do that.
8. The future of the United States would look much brighter if Donald Trump would just disappear, like the unwanted and unloved little boy in the DirecTV commercial. (And that kid was just defacing a wall, while Trump is defacing an entire culture.) Of course, as civilized, law-abiding, ethical people, we do not advocate violent, illegal solutions to problems, even existential ones.
There are still ways to stop Trump and send him back to reality TV and running fake universities, if the Republican Party would get smart and responsible, and do its duty. See, I got through that sentence without giggling.
9. Is assassination ever ethically defensible as a last resort? I don’t think anyone who watched Tom Cruise as failed Hitler assassin Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg in the film “Valkyrie” thought he was the villain.
In another thread, I expressed satisfaction that Huey Long, the most dangerous populist con man U.S. history has ever produced, was stopped as he bid to become a national leader and probable dictator. He was shot. One can ethically deplore the means of a dangerous individual’s demise while being glad that he’s dead. It’s a difficult moral tight-rope to walk though.
10. Would I have been sorry if Donald Trump had been assassinated?