Veteran economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has been a blistering critic of Donald Trump’s presidency. And following a racially motivated terrorist attack in El Paso, Texas that left 22 people dead, Krugman stresses that the Republican Party in general — including President Trump — has become “a systematic enabler of terrorism.”
Trump’s racist rhetoric, the 66-year-old Krugman stresses, has been a source of inspiration to white nationalists. But Krugman quickly adds that Trump is only part of the problem, as other Republicans have been reluctant or unwilling to speak out.
“As far as I can tell,” Krugman asserts, “not one prominent Republican has even hinted at the obvious link between Donald Trump’s repeated incitements to violence and the upsurge in hate crimes.”
When Trump says something that is flat-out racist, Krugman writes, most Republicans lack the courage to criticize him. As long as Trump champions policies like tax cuts for the ultra-rich, Krugman laments, fellow Republicans won’t call out his overt racism.
“The party remains in lockstep behind a man who has arguably done more to promote racial violence than any American since Nathan Bedford Forrest, who helped found the Ku Klux Klan — a terrorist organization if there ever was one — and who was recently honored by the Republican governor of Tennessee,” Krugman asserts.
But Republicans, the Times columnist emphasizes, were “enabling” terrorism from white supremacists and white nationalists long before Trump ran for president.
“The party’s complicity started long before Trump came on the scene,” Krugman recalls. “More than a decade ago, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report warning about a surge of right-wing extremism. The report was prescient, to say the least. But when congressional Republicans learned about it, they went on a rampage, demanding the resignation of Janet Napolitano, who headed the agency, and insisted that even using the term ‘right-wing extremism’ was unacceptable.”
Krugman goes on to say that if the GOP had been more proactive in addressing the threat of white nationalist terrorism, many lives could have been saved.
“A different, better GOP might have been willing to acknowledge the growing threat and supported a crackdown on violent right-wing extremism, comparable to the FBI’s successful campaign against the modern KKK in the 1960s,” Krugman writes. “A lot of innocent victims would be alive today if Republicans had done so.”
Desperate conservatives unleash a torrent of misogyny to undermine Pamela Karlan’s devastating testimony
As soon as Pamela Karlan, a constitutional law professor at Stanford who specializes in voting rights, opened her mouth during Wednesday's impeachment hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, I knew she would become the prime if not exclusive focus of the entire right-wing response to the hearing.
Republicans were desperate to do anything to keep voters from paying attention to the actual substance of the testimony from the three law professors summoned to explain why Donald Trump should be impeached for his crimes, since the substance of their testimony is irrefutable. And while all three were articulate, intelligent and crystal clear in their arguments, only Karlan was female.
This conspiracy actually exists: Trump and the GOP are waging a war on reality
Donald Trump and his agents’ bribery and extortion plot to withhold congressionally approved military aid to force the government of Ukraine to “investigate” Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, with the goal of helping Trump win the 2020 presidential election, is a textbook example of a very real conspiracy.
Congress schooled in the Constitution: Impeachment hearing was less about the answers than about the questions
The opening of the new round of impeachment inquiries before the House Judiciary Committee was less about the answers than about the questions.
If you were a Democrat, you asked questions that prompted the constitutional scholars present to pin the available evidence about Team Trump to a rogue plot to trade Ukrainian recognition and military aid for Donald Trump’s personal political gain.
If you were a Republican, you asked about anything else, from historical precedents about elapsed time, about the meaning of bribery in the 18th Century, about non-existent testimony about Joe and Hunter Biden.