On-air Trump meltdown reveals 'widespread awareness' of his unmistakable 'mental illness'

On Sunday, President Donald Trump stormed off from a Meet the Press Interview after correspondent Kristen Welker noted that he had presented “no evidence” to support his claims that Democrats have been stealing elections. While he was primarily focused on the 2020 election he lost, he also asserted that the election underway in California is in the process of being stolen. When pushed for evidence, he began shouting about the “crooked” media before saying abruptly, “Let’s call it quits because I’ve had enough,” then tearing off his microphone and stomping from the set.

According to political reporter Brian Beutler, Trump’s eruption offers “something that could help us beat back his election lies more thoroughly,” as the president made the allegation when he had already “toppled the firewall separating the White House and Justice Department.”

“The lie rests incongruously alongside federal inaction,” Beutler explains. “If there were evidence of fraud, this Justice Department would collect it aggressively and bandy it about for the whole world to see. It would raid counting facilities and seize ballots and air allegations at press conferences. The fact that nothing of the sort has happened is a tell. It confirms widespread awareness, even in Trump’s orbit, that his lies are just what they appear to be. And it should mark a change in how the political establishment grapples with Trump’s addiction to promoting election conspiracy theories.”

In this context, Beutler argues that the media and others should change how they frame these matters, because it’s not merely that Trump has “no evidence” — “it’s that the election was not stolen.” While it may be prudent for a journalist to admit their own lack of certainty by raising that there is “no evidence,” it leaves Trump a door open because he can say there’s no proof that it wasn’t stolen, “because proving a negative is impossible.” So Beutler suggests that the inquiry shouldn’t end at lack of evidence, but should take into account that there is “substantial evidence that Trump knows his claims aren’t true.” As he notes, there have been plenty of examples of the president admitting his loss.

With all this in mind, says Beutler, a journalist’s response to Trump’s claims should be, “A thorough investigation established that you know you lost and are being dishonest about it.”

Beutler says that it could be that Trump’s “mental illness may have weakened his grasp on reality” to the point where he’s actually convinced himself he’s won to protect himself from “ego injury.” But now, when he tells such a lie regarding the election in California and his DOJ does nothing more than make a vague statement about investigating without providing evidence, not only of a crime, but even that an investigation is happening at all, it suggests that he and his allies don’t really believe their own allegations. If the conspiracy they assert is underway, “Where are the FBI agents executing search warrants? Where’s the urgency to get to the bottom of it?” But in all likelihood, writes Beutler, Trump won’t be able to find allies willing to carry out such an effort because it would constitute “severe crimes” for which they could be punished.

Therefore, Beutler suggests that “this should be the end of the line for playing cute with Trump’s election lies. People who care about the truth should call his bluff, here and now, in order to have it out over something less consequential than a federal election. It would not be good, exactly, for Trump et al to incite a mini insurrection in southern California, but it might force the rest of us to improve our civic hygiene. Less eye rolling, fewer weasel words, more fighting to vindicate the truth.”

To that end, prescribes Beutler, journalists should stop saying Trump has “no evidence” or that he “believes” Democrats rig elections. Instead, they should say outright that “he has a habit of lying about elections when he or his friends lose.” At the same time, whenever he tells such a lie, House Democrats should raise the issue of impeachment as “it’s hard to imagine a more clearly impeachable offense or grave violation of the presidential oath than Trump’s years-long concerted conspiracy to mislead the public about the integrity of elections.”

“We should thus stop trying to race past Trump’s lies as though dwelling upon them would be rude, like pointing at someone’s acne or mocking their nervous tic,” Beutler concludes. “We should work as hard to vindicate reality as he does to deceive, and maintain that energy until he leaves office or the lies stop.”