What Happened to the Party of Lincoln?
By: Melissa Janda
Tags: Abraham Lincoln, Trumpism, Election 2020, Republican Party, Supreme Court

What Happened to the Party of Lincoln?

Photo by Maarten Brakkee on Unsplash

When I poked fun at Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for his absurd lawsuit, I initially assumed no other states would jump on his bandwagon. The suit referred to “Plaintiff States” several times, and one news outlet reported that it most likely indicated that Texas had tried to get more states to join the lawsuit and failed. It seemed to be a reasonable assumption at the time, but that was not the case.

After the news went public about the Texas lawsuit, Twitter users wondered which, if any, state attorneys general would be joining the suit. They tagged the state attorneys, stated things like “we the people demand it.” Trump retweeted these posts and lauded Texas for their “courage and brilliance.”

It didn’t take long for the digital mob to persuade them. On the evening of December 8th, less than twenty-four hours after Texas filed their suit, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt announced he would join the fight. The Republican attorneys general of seventeen states called out on social media joined Schmitt in showing support for the Texas lawsuit by filing an amicus brief asking the court to hear the case.

The next morning, Trump announced he would be “INTERVENING in the Texas case,” because “our country needs a victory!” Trump continued tweeting about Democrats cheating in the election, that he “won by a landslide, and they stole it from him!” by manufacturing votes in the middle of the night that would erase his election-night lead. He continually repeated these and other false election fraud claims tossed out of lower courts for lack of evidence and lack of merit. He believed the Supreme Court would “OVERTURN” an obviously “RIGGED ELECTION” to “save our Country from the greatest Election abuse in the history of the United States.”

Many Republicans went on Twitter making similar statements that perpetuated these unfounded claims of election fraud, which were retweeted and praised by Trump. Here’s a sampling of what was echoed by many of them:

“The unconstitutional actions and fraudulent votes in other states not only affect the citizens of those states, they affect the citizens of all states — of the entire United States.” ~ Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall “Elections matter and election integrity matters. I will fight to ensure our votes are not diluted.” ~Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge “Voter fraud elsewhere dilutes the votes of Mississippians and it makes a mockery of the very foundation of government.” ~Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch

Some tempered their statements:

“Louisiana citizens are damaged if elections in other states were conducted outside the confines of the Constitution while we obeyed the rules.” ~Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry “While the odds of the U.S. Supreme Court accepting Texas’s belated lawsuit…are slim at best, the case raises important constitutional questions about the separation of powers and the integrity of mail-in ballots in those defendant states.” ~Montana Attorney General Tim Fox

Some joined the amicus brief but didn’t announce it on their Twitter or web pages. Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson tweeted about joining the Facebook monopoly lawsuit but was silent on these platforms about his support of the Texas lawsuit. And lone Republican Attorney General for Ohio, David Yost, played Switzerland by supporting neither side, but publicly stating that Texas’s plea would “violate, not honor, the Elector’s Clause.”

Eventually, 19 states and 126 Republican Congress members joined the battle in support of the Texas case. In response, over 25 states and territories filed their opposition to the claims. By late Friday, December 11th, the Supreme Court dismissed the Texas case for “lack of standing.” The Republican tone ( set by Trump months earlier) that the court would deliver justice, changed.

After hearing the news, Trump tweeted, “The Supreme Court really let us down! No Wisdom, No Courage!” and claimed that “within a flash, it is thrown out and gone, without even looking at the many reasons it was brought. A Rigged Election, fight on!”

Republicans joined Trump in rebuking the Supreme Court with statements such as this from Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, “It is incredibly disappointing that #SCOTUS decided to hide behind discretion in a dispute between states.” Some in the party are even calling for secession.

Our elected representatives are supposed to represent the best and brightest of us: educated, thoughtful, and deliberate in their decisions. Yet, from the president on down, many have been a HUGE, BIGLY disappointment.

I wonder, did those Republicans in support of the Texas lawsuit even bother to read it? Have they examined the cases the lower courts dismissed? Maybe that has become the modus operandi of our Republican Congress. Do they read the legislation put before them or do they just go with the flow?

Since the Republican Party prides itself on having one of the most beloved and respected presidents in our nation’s history as one of its members, I wondered what Abraham Lincoln would make of all this were he alive today.

So, let’s harken back to a time when our great leaders could construct an intelligible sentence with proper grammar and punctuation. Uncle Abe communicated with thoughtful, deliberate, educated, insightful, articulate words of wisdom to a country he loved. He composed his speeches from such a deep well of mental acuity and moral clarity that leaders down through the ages have turned to his words for guidance. Those who’ve admired his writing are at times almost moved to tears by his eloquence. Damn, the man could write!

So, what would Honest Abe have to say to the Republican party today? Here are the words that came ringing through the ages to admonish a party that has severely gone astray.

On the failure to impeach Trump or stand up to his authoritarian tendencies:

“In my present position, I could scarcely be justified were I to omit raising a warning voice against this approach of returning despotism.”

On ignoring the election results and the will of the people:

“In a great national crisis like ours, unanimity of action among those seeking a common end is very desirable — almost indispensable; and yet no approach to such unanimity is attainable unless some deference shall be paid to the will of the majority…The most reliable indication of our public purpose in this country is derived through our popular elections.”

On joining Texas in suing the battleground states over election integrity:

“My countrymen, one and all, think calmly and well upon this whole subject. Nothing valuable can be lost by taking time. If there be an object to hurry any of you in hot haste to a step which you would never take deliberately, that object will be frustrated by taking time; but no good object can be frustrated by it.”

On perpetuating the mountain of lies beginning with the size of Trump’s inauguration crowd to election fraud:

“Now, in regard to his reminding me of the moral rule that persons who tell what they do not know to be true, falsify as much as those who knowingly tell falsehoods.”

On allowing the Trump mob to direct their actions:

“That there are persons in one section or another who seek to destroy the Union at all events, and are glad of any pretext to do it, I will neither affirm nor deny; but if there be such, I need address no word to them. To those, however, who really love the Union may I speak? “There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law. In any case that may arise…one of two positions is necessarily true — that is, the thing is right within itself, and therefore deserves the protection of all law and all good citizens, or it is wrong, and therefore proper to be prohibited by legal enactments; and in neither case is the interposition of mob law either necessary, justifiable, or excusable…”

On allowing Trump to erode our faith in a free press, our intelligence agencies, our electoral process, and now our courts:

“Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of our national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its hopes, would it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it? Will you hazard so desperate a step while there is a possibility that any portion of the ills you fly from have no real existence?”

On allowing the party to discuss secession because the Supreme Court failed to cast out millions of legally cast votes:

“It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void; and that acts of violence, with any State or States, against the authority of the United States, are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.”

And what would Lincoln have to say to those of us who stand in opposition to all of this?

“Be sure you put your feet in the right place, then stand firm,” and “with malice towards none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us finish the work we are in.”

Image by Author

Source: The Words of Abraham Lincoln: Speeches, Letters, Proclamations, and Papers of Our Most Eloquent President, Black Dog & Leventhal Publishers, Inc.(2005)