Listen to What Next:

Tweet Share Share Comment

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from covering Donald Trump, it’s that he doesn’t keep his agenda secret. Take abortion. Before he became president the first time, he was clear about the plan: appoint conservative Supreme Court justices, have them overturn Roe v. Wade, send the issue back to the states. And you know what? That’s exactly what happened.

Now that he’s running for a second term, it’s useful to listen in. In just the past few months, he’s pledged to “root out the communist, Marxist, fascist, and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country,” to “carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” and to end “automatic citizenship for children of illegal aliens.” He’s also said, “If I happen to be president and I see someone who’s doing well and beating me very badly, I’d say, ‘Go down and indict them.’ They would be out of business, out of the election.”

Susan Glasser say’s Trump is “the politician who’s famous for saying the quiet part out loud.” Glasser reports on politics over at the New Yorker. She’s been following along as day by day a Trump doctrine seems to be coming together. “His plans are very explicitly anti-constitutional, unconstitutional,” she said. “He already has a long list of people he wants to be targeted by the Justice Department, by the IRS, and on it goes.”

Advertisement

But are Americans paying enough attention? It’s pretty striking,” Glasser said, “that one year out from the presidential election, every national public indicator that we have suggests that Donald Trump is running dead even with [or better than] Joe Biden, despite this extraordinary flood of extremist promises and rhetoric coming from Trump, despite his radical record, despite Jan. 6, despite four criminal indictments.”

Advertisement

Advertisement

On Wednesday’s episode of What Next, we looked at the preview Trump is giving for what a second term could look like. Are you listening? Our conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Mary Harris: It’s worth asking what Trump learned from his first stint in office. Susan Glasser says, listening to Trump campaign, it’s clear he hasn’t learned the same lessons a milder candidate might have. For instance, while a phalanx of lawyers worked to protect Trump from some of his less democratic instincts last time around, it’s clear that should he move back into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., those advisers won’t be coming with him.

Susan Glasser: Donald Trump saw himself as needlessly constrained in his term in the White House by a whole category of officials, including his White House counsels, his attorney general Bill Barr, as well as his first attorney general, Jeff Sessions. It’s fascinating because both of those would be considered certainly by many independent observers and many Democrats to be quite radical Republicans in terms of their views about executive power, in terms of what they were willing to go along with. But both of them drew the line at certain kinds of conduct. And Trump’s approach to a second term seems to be much more grounded in loyalty-testing and assembling a cadre of like-minded officials who essentially will do whatever he wants, not even so much ideologically, but personally.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

His first time he was really supported and buffered by conservative lawyers who’d been brought up in the Federalist Society. And it was notable when I saw one of Trump’s allies quoted, basically saying, “The Federalist Society doesn’t know what’s up. We’re going to just blow them out of the water with how we proceed next.” It’s hard to get more conservative than the Federalist Society.

Advertisement

We’re in the revolution-eating-its-own stage of Trumpism, which is to say that the previous generation’s radicals are now deemed not radical enough. Trump already, from the very beginning of his time in public life as a politician, has talked about using and abusing instruments of federal power like the IRS and like the Justice Department to target his political opponents. Remember, “Lock her up, lock her up,” the chant in the 2016 campaign against Hillary Clinton. People forget this: In the 2020 campaign, he publicly ordered and lamented to Bill Barr, “Where’s the indictments? Where’s the charges against Joe Biden?” This was in the fall of 2020, before the election, before his effort to overturn the election, before Jan. 6. And so, again, is it new that Donald Trump would be seeking to personalize power? No. Is it much more threatening that he has four years of experience under his belt and a group of people around him now who seem much more focused on how to facilitate those desires should he get back into office?

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Washington Post had this reporting with people close to Trump speaking anonymously but saying they’re pretty clear that Trump wants to punish his enemies using the Department of Justice. Do we have any idea who those people are and how he might think about punishing the people who used to work with and for him?

Most of the most damning testimony against Donald Trump, either in court or on the public record, is from people who he himself appointed. There’s a long history of him ultimately causing people to break with him. And those are now the kinds of enemies that he wants targeted. I don’t think it takes a supersecret leak for us to know that he wants to go after people he considers to be traitors and betrayers. He’s called them that publicly—people like the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley. Trump literally called for his death in capital letters—D-E-A-T-H—in a social media posting about Milley. He’s on the list, presumably. John Kelly, the former White House chief of staff who has publicly opposed Trump and privately allowed very, very damaging things about Trump to emerge on the public record.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Reportedly, Trump also has pretty extreme plans for the Southern border if he assumes the presidency again. And this reporting really stood out to me because so much of it was on the record. Stephen Miller talked to the New York Times, and the things they were ticking off in this article were things like trying to get rid of DACA, which traditionally has been a bipartisan program; getting rid of asylum for people; sprawling detention camps; ending birthright citizenship; no more humanitarian visas; and even kicking out immigrants who protested against Israel. It was just one after another of these pretty shocking things that would be major changes. Did this shock you?

No. And it shouldn’t shock you either, because whether people were paying attention or not, these are all things—with the exception of the current protests around Israel, which are new—that Stephen Miller advocated and pushed for, and Trump, in many cases, advocated and pushed for even when Trump was in the White House. They’re not shocking in the sense that this is literally what his agenda was. He was unable, for various reasons to enact parts of this agenda, but with some notable exceptions, if you want to know what Donald Trump wants to accomplish that’s extreme and radical and disruptive in his second term, just look to the unfinished agenda of his first term.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Talk to me about Trump’s foreign policy, because you’ve highlighted that as a major change that would come should Trump assume the presidency. Talk to me about how that would look different, because we’re already seeing how Republicans are having second thoughts about funding Ukraine. And there’s been trouble even getting funding for sending aid to Israel. So how do you think a Trump presidency would change the dynamic here?

Advertisement

It would be quite a radical shift again. If you look back to the unfinished radical agenda of the first term, you’ll see things like a preference for adversaries over allies—strongmen and dictators like Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and even Kim Jong-un of North Korea. Those are the kinds of people that Trump publicly praises. But it’s not just rhetorical. Trump was quite serious about undermining or even possibly pulling out of NATO, which takes on a whole different context and meaning now that there’s this extraordinary Russian invasion of Ukraine. He talked very seriously and pushed the military very seriously in the direction of withdrawing from South Korea, where the United States has had troops for literally decades and is a key cornerstone of regional as well as international security there.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Trump is serious about things like that and would be pursuing those very actively in his second term. Presidents have a much freer hand to act directly when it comes to foreign policy and national security in our system. So, in some ways, that’s where you can see Trumpism in its most undiluted and pure form.

Part of what you’re saying is that if the last presidency was like the Terminator, the next presidency would be Terminator 2. And we all know that in Terminator 2, the Terminator was much harder to kill.

There was a really indelible image that stuck with me when we were doing interviews for the book. I spoke with a former very senior U.S. national security official who spent a lot of time in the Oval Office with Trump personally. And I asked about a Trump second term. And this person said to me, “Trump, looking to a second term, it’s like the velociraptors in the first Jurassic Park movie.” And you remember, of course, when the children run away from the dinosaurs, and they think they’re safe when they get into the kitchen, and they lock the door, and they hide under the cabinets there, and then click, you hear the velociraptors turning the door handle. They learned to open the door.

Advertisement

Advertisement

It was a pretty scary moment for me to have a very senior U.S. national security official use that image for what a Trump second term would be like. And by the way, this person wasn’t talking about Donald Trump learning the keys to health care policy. They were talking about Trump learning how to operate the machinery of government on his own behalf.

“The velociraptors have learned how to open the door.” — Susan Glasser

Donald Trump isn’t the only one laying out his plans for his second term. Other groups are also working to support Trump—or, really, any Republican should they reach the Oval Office. Notably, a group of conservative think tanks, led by the Heritage Foundation, launched a plan called Project 2025. It lays out specific conservative policy goals, including executive orders, that could be enacted if a Republican becomes president. They’ve also created a database of potential hires and appointees—think right-wing LinkedIn.

Advertisement

The Heritage Foundation, which has been around for a long time, operating out of Capitol Hill, a key conservative Republican bastion, became famous for providing the intellectual framework behind the Reagan revolution back in the 1980s. Well, flash forward: Project 2025 is this modern, even more radical project that Heritage has now undertaken.

So if this isn’t new, what makes it more alarming?

Advertisement

Advertisement

First of all, it’s with the prospect of a Trump presidency. Again, he’s outlining in public for us all to hear that this isn’t even an ideological agenda so much as a personal agenda of grievance and retribution and a series of personal loyalty tests that ultimately are the main factor that Trump seems to want to impose on those who would serve in his government.

Advertisement

No. 2, Trump already, late in his term in office, issued an executive order that would transform thousands of U.S. government civil service employees into political employees who could be hired and fired at the will of the president. Those surrounding him have said that they would seek to immediately reimpose this executive order were Trump to become president. So in and of itself, that is a radical shift that was not contemplated by George W. Bush or Barack Obama. And that would be a huge difference in the politicization and personalization of the federal government around the whims and preferences of Donald Trump and his advisers.

Advertisement

If Trump wins, it’s not going to be a secret, the things that he wants to do. The question will only be how far will the system allow him to take it?

Advertisement

When he was transitioning the first time to the presidency, it was chaotic. He didn’t anticipate winning, so he didn’t have a transition team in place. What I think is catching my attention this time is that there’s a transition team in place. In fact, there are a whole lot of transition people who are just getting ready to get back into office.

The velociraptors have learned how to open the door.

Subscribe to What Next on Apple Podcasts

Get more news from Mary Harris every weekday.

View Transcript

So now that we have this information, what do we do with it? Do Democrats have a clear countermessage they’re offering—an argument for why the Department of Justice should be run not as the president’s personal law firm or why aggressively turning back immigrants is not in American’s best interests. Are they seeing this and responding in a way that’s useful?

Advertisement

Popular in News & Politics

  1. I’m South Asian. I’ve Already Met a Thousand Vivek Ramaswamys.
  2. Maybe Trump’s Not Trying to Win His Civil Trial in New York
  3. Only One GOP Candidate Seemed to Learn Something From Tuesday’s Elections
  4. How Republican Courts Could Sabotage the Ohio Abortion Vote and Future Ballot Measures

One of the critiques that we’ve heard articulated in recent weeks as these bad polls have come in for President Biden is a concern among many Democrats that he has been wary of focusing too much on Trump yet and too much on what Trump’s agenda for a second term would be. There is a view among many Democrats, and Biden seems to share it, that voters want to hear what your plans are for office, and that that was part of the reason for some of Democrats success in various midterm elections of the Trump era. Think about Nancy Pelosi focusing on health care in 2018 as a way of Democrats winning back the House, which they did that year. Or think about the many campaigns around the country that Democrats have been successful in, where they’ve emphasized the threat to reproductive freedom and abortion rights since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision. There’s this tug of war around what kind of strategy Democrats should have going into 2024. Is it about agenda and ideology or is it about the dangerous radical personality and challenges posed by Donald Trump?

Do you feel like Trump is basically daring them to shift strategies?

Donald Trump prefers nothing more than people to talk about him, even if it’s in the negative. He thrives on negative attention. He thrives on anger and enemies, and he seeks always to bait his foes into a punching contest. We know Donald Trump’s M.O. So, of course, the answer is Donald Trump wants the campaign to be all about him. But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t good reasons for why Democrats ultimately will have to make the campaign about him. Doug Emhoff, the second gentleman, was recently quoted at a private fundraiser as telling the audience that in the end, the 2024 campaign will be about the two D’s—Dobbs and democracy. And I suspect that’s about right.

Maybe there should be a third D, Donald.

Well, I guess he’s covered in the first two D’s as well.

Tweet Share Share Comment

QOSHE - What Trump’s Second Term Could Look Like - Mary Harris
menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

What Trump’s Second Term Could Look Like

2 21
16.11.2023

Listen to What Next:

  • Apple Podcasts
  • Spotify
  • Stitcher

Tweet Share Share Comment

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from covering Donald Trump, it’s that he doesn’t keep his agenda secret. Take abortion. Before he became president the first time, he was clear about the plan: appoint conservative Supreme Court justices, have them overturn Roe v. Wade, send the issue back to the states. And you know what? That’s exactly what happened.

Now that he’s running for a second term, it’s useful to listen in. In just the past few months, he’s pledged to “root out the communist, Marxist, fascist, and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country,” to “carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history,” and to end “automatic citizenship for children of illegal aliens.” He’s also said, “If I happen to be president and I see someone who’s doing well and beating me very badly, I’d say, ‘Go down and indict them.’ They would be out of business, out of the election.”

Susan Glasser say’s Trump is “the politician who’s famous for saying the quiet part out loud.” Glasser reports on politics over at the New Yorker. She’s been following along as day by day a Trump doctrine seems to be coming together. “His plans are very explicitly anti-constitutional, unconstitutional,” she said. “He already has a long list of people he wants to be targeted by the Justice Department, by the IRS, and on it goes.”

Advertisement

But are Americans paying enough attention? It’s pretty striking,” Glasser said, “that one year out from the presidential election, every national public indicator that we have suggests that Donald Trump is running dead even with [or better than] Joe Biden, despite this extraordinary flood of extremist promises and rhetoric coming from Trump, despite his radical record, despite Jan. 6, despite four criminal indictments.”

Advertisement

Advertisement

On Wednesday’s episode of What Next, we looked at the preview Trump is giving for what a second term could look like. Are you listening? Our conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Mary Harris: It’s worth asking what Trump learned from his first stint in office. Susan Glasser says, listening to Trump campaign, it’s clear he hasn’t learned the same lessons a milder candidate might have. For instance, while a phalanx of lawyers worked to protect Trump from some of his less democratic instincts last time around, it’s clear that should he move back into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., those advisers won’t be coming with him.

Susan Glasser: Donald Trump saw himself as needlessly constrained in his term in the White House by a whole category of officials, including his White House counsels, his attorney general Bill Barr, as well as his first attorney general, Jeff Sessions. It’s fascinating because both of those would be considered certainly by many independent observers and many Democrats to be quite radical Republicans in terms of their views about executive power, in terms of what they were willing to go along with. But both of them drew the line at certain kinds of conduct. And Trump’s approach to a second term seems to be much more grounded in loyalty-testing and assembling a cadre of like-minded officials who essentially will do whatever he wants, not even so much ideologically, but personally.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

His first time he was really supported and buffered by conservative lawyers who’d been brought up in the Federalist Society. And it was notable when I saw one of Trump’s allies quoted, basically saying, “The Federalist Society doesn’t know what’s up. We’re going to just blow them out of the water with how we proceed next.” It’s hard to get more conservative than the Federalist Society.

Advertisement

We’re in the........

© Slate


Get it on Google Play