When the attack on the Capitol occurred on January 6th, the world was shocked. In the basement of the household, we sat on the couch as we watched on TV. "This is history," my father emphasized, "people are going to look back on this in fifty years as we look back on other major events today." And he was right: the attack on the Capitol was history, and if I wasn't so young at the age of thirteen, I might've even been able to see it.
It's been four years since then. And looking back, I can see just how right my father was. But I also see something else, how terrible it could have been.
On January 6th, at a "Save America" rally, Trump mobilized his supporters with a speech that seemed to emphasize the existential terror this country would face if they allowed such perverted notions like fair elections. He told his voters to "fight", and "if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." He said that their "election victory" was "stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats." He told his supporters to "never give up", "never concede", especially not "when there's theft involved." He told his voters to "show strength", "to be strong", and said that they could "not take it anymore." They had to "stop the steal." He even tells them he knew "that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building." He ends it telling them to "take back our country."
In his speech, Trump notes that he knew those who would be marching would be doing so "peacefully and patriotically." This, of course, was the only mention of peace in his hour-long speech. But to his staff, Trump's words were very different. Trump himself knew his supporters were armed, saying "I don’t fucking care that they have weapons, they’re not here to hurt me. They’re not here to hurt me. Take the fucking mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here, let the people in and take the mags away." If anyone knew what was going to happen, it was him.
As Congress began certifying the electoral votes, thousands stormed the Capitol building. Rioters assaulted Capitol police and journalists, and looted offices of key Congress members, chanting "Hang Mike Pence!" The bulk of these were of course confused far right rioters and MAGA patriots, but some had much more clandestine plans. Alongside the many extremists and conspirators were the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, two far right organizations. The Oath Keepers had "plotted for months to violently disrupt the peaceful transfer of power." The leader of the Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes was recorded four days later saying he'd "hang fucking Pelosi from the lamppost." The Proud Boys on the other hand, mentioned to each other how they needed "war", "revolution", and "firing squads" for "traitors."
As the attack commenced, Trump's first message was to tweet the following, "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!" But why the hatred for the Vice President? And what was Pence supposed to do?
In the weeks and months preceding the counting, with the assistance of John Eastman, Trump had wanted to employ a dubious legal argument to change the outcome of the presidential election. The idea was that the Vice President could swap official electors with fraudulent ones; this would either be Mike Pence or Senate Pro Tempore Grassley if Pence recused himself. Trump had persuaded loyalists in seven states to sign documents falsely claiming they were the lawful electors, to be used as replacements. It was then likely that the insurrection on Jan 6 would buy the time needed for Pence to choose the fake electors when they reconvene. But Pence, perhaps out of courage, chose not to, despite the indignation he would suffer at the hands of Trump and his allies for it.
Congress was evacuated outside the Capitol building after a group of rioters breached the building, and the two extremist organizations were unable to reach the members of Congress as they had planned, partly due to the amount of MAGA crazies who were in the way, and partly due to poor planning. But what if they didn't? If the Proud Boys got their way, and if even a couple members of Congress were killed, it would have thrown this country into a monumental crisis. Or what if Pence played along with Trump's fake electors scheme? Either way, the country would have been traumatized, Trump would have never seen a second term, and the notion of free, safe American elections might have been laid to rest. The violence of Clodius and Milo changed Roman politics and contributed to the Roman Civil War, so what would have happened to America?
As intolerable as the events on January 6th was, it doesn't seem like it will be forgotten. Trump's decision to pardon and commute the sentences of even the most heinous actors on that day, including the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers themselves, calling them "hostages", has sent a clear message of how the U.S feels about such extremism. Those groups have taken it as a sign that such violence is, if not acceptable, at least tolerable in the new American political order, and many others have taken inspiration. And unlike his first term, Trump is off the guardrails this time, with control over all three branches of government, and with only yes-men around him. With Trump's abuse of the federal government through DOGE, persecution of minorities through ICE, abuse of the FCC to pressure the free press, abuse of the DOJ to burden political enemies, abuse of pardons to condition his followers even more so towards extremism, and commodification of the presidency itself, the respect for the rule of law is clearly not something that holds Trump back.
Given that... what's next? With the midterms looking to be a sweeping victory for Democrats, Trump's popularity low and going lower, and a new generation of American political figures with bold moves from Gavin Newsom and the rise of Zohran Mamdani, who have built names for themselves as enemies of Trump, almost baiting him for a response, it's only clear that U.S politics wants desperate correction. 2028 will be the year for Democrats, and Trump couldn't want anything less. So what will he do?
Is another Jan 6 on the table? It might seem so, especially with how little Trump seems to care about approval or rule of law, but don't get so arrogant. That's to be expected. And although Trump toys with the idea of a third term, even he isn't so bold, especially given how he'll be 83 by the time that's done, and he's not quite as sharp as he was then. So it seems a lot more likely that some other figure will try to take the Republican primary, possibly J.D. Vance as seems hinted at, or possibly someone else entirely (although it would be quite funny if Trump had to drop out after a debate and run Vance, a mirror of Biden and Harris.) Either way, given the current state of U.S politics, the drastic impact of Trump's tariffs, and his very blatant abuses of power to even average U.S citizens, it's clear that 2028 will be a Democrat win.
But what if this time Vance actually refuses to certify the election, doing what Pence failed to do? Of course, the Vice President lacks the power to certify the votes themselves, but they can refuse to open the certificates. And even then, Trump did ask Pence try to reject the electoral votes of certain states in the fake electors plot!
We've seen conservatives do this on a lesser scale when they refused to vote on Garland, and it wouldn't be unexpected for Vance to do the same. They'll say there's no law that says they can't do this. So who has to preside over this constitutional crisis? The Supreme Court, of course, which just so happens to be stacked with Trump loyalists. It's undemocratic, but the Republican Party has been grooming their followers to care more and more about getting what they want at the expense of the law. And once again, they'll claim election fraud, perhaps pinning the blame on figures like Newsom. Trump did it before, and that was before he was let off the leash.
I mean, Vance did say that if he was vice president in Pence's place, he would have told them "that we needed to have multiple states of electors" to address "a lot of problems in 2020." To him, "that is the legitimate way to deal with an election." Read: the fake electors plot. And Vance did say he wanted to replace "every civil servant in the administrative state." He's never been one to hide the quiet part. Of course, The Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022 is meant to clarify how the VP's power is solely ministerial. And even before then, the intent of the laws was pretty clear, right? But if the Supreme Court uses its power of judicial review to declare that unconstitutional, what then?
At the end of the day, one thing is clear: these next three years will be decisive in deciding whether or not Americans still care about the rule of law in their country. Whatever happens next, the Republican Party has made it clear they have no qualms with breaking the rules. But the Democrats haven't. So what will the Democrats do? Will they reverse the precedents of Trump... or abuse them? Because America has crossed the Rubicon, and the game is on.