TRUMP THINKS IT'S ALL A GAME

Dana Milbank believes that there'll be violence again after Donald Trump's inevitable acquittal:

House impeachment managers closed their prosecution Thursday with a warning to Republican senators: If they vote to acquit former president Donald Trump, the blood will be on their hands when he unleashes political carnage again.

“When” is the proper word, for, given Trump’s long pattern of inciting violent threats and actions, the next brutal outburst is not a question of “if.”

“If we don’t draw the line here, what’s next?” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the lead impeachment manager, asked the senators. “Is there any political leader in this room who believes that, if he is ever allowed by the Senate to get back into the Oval Office, Donald Trump would stop inciting violence to get his way? ... If he gets back into office and it happens again, we will have no one to blame but ourselves.”

Milbank finds a telling quote from a Washington Post interview with then-candidate Trump in March 2016:

It has been five years since Trump marveled at his own ability to incite. “I bring rage out,” he told The Post’s Bob Woodward and Robert Costa. “I always have.”

It's interesting to read that quote in context:

BW: In the Republican party, I mean....there is a lot of angst and rage and distress.

Trump: A lot. Record-setting.

BW: Record-setting.

Trump: I bring...

BW: And you have to tame that rage, don’t you?

Trump: Yes, yes, but I bring that out in people. I do. I’m not saying that’s an asset or a liability, but I do bring that out.

BW: You bring what out?

Trump: I bring rage out. I do bring rage out. I always have. I think it was ... I don’t know if that’s an asset or a liability, but whatever it is, I do. I also bring great unity out, ultimately. I’ve had many occasions like this, where people have hated me more than any human being they’ve ever met. And after it’s all over, they end up being my friends.

Woodward asks about Republican rage -- and Trump responds as if Woodward had just praised one of his properties. ("Record-setting.")

But then he acts as if the rage he inspires can't possibly have any serious consequences. ("I do bring rage out.... I also bring great unity out, ultimately. I’ve had many occasions like this, where people have hated me more than any human being they’ve ever met. And after it’s all over, they end up being my friends.") Don't worry if there are angry people at my rallies! Don't worry if I viciously attack people! It'll all work out fine!

That's how I think Trump looked at the campaign to overturn the election results, and it's also how I think he looked at January 6. From the first time he argued that the election would be fraudulent if he lost through January 5, he wasn't worried about the damage he might do to democracy in America -- hey, he's been a disruptive force all his life! And nobody got hurt, right? The same for January 6: Even as rioters rampaged through the Capitol, I don't think he genuinely believed that anything was happening that was bad in a consequential way.

Trump spent most of his life in nonviolent battle with other guys in expensive suits, so to some extent his inability to imagine profound consequences from his actions is understandable. He's used to dealing with people who can take what he dishes out.

But he didn't have the right to be unserious about this. He had a responsibility to grasp the potential impact of what he did as a candidate and as president. It mattered what he did. And I'm sure he still doesn't understand that.