the edit, vol. 18
the reckoning: how the republican party abandoned its principles and what it means for america
we're living in two americas now. not the red state/blue state division that political commentators love to discuss, but something far more fundamental: two entirely different realities, occupying the same geographic space, consuming completely different information, and reaching incompatible conclusions about basic facts.
this isn't about policy disagreements. americans have always argued about taxes, foreign policy, and the role of government. this is about whether we can agree on what's actually happening.
on january 20, 2025, as donald trump was sworn in for his second term as president, he granted blanket clemency to nearly 1,600 people convicted of or awaiting trial for offenses related to the january 6 capitol attack. among them were men who had committed acts of shocking violence against police officers — the very people republicans once claimed to champion unconditionally.
michael fanone was dragged into the crowd by rioters, beaten with a flagpole, and repeatedly tased with his own stun gun. fanone testified that he heard chants of "kill him with his own gun" and thought about using his firearm on his attackers but knew if he did, he would be quickly overwhelmed. he decided to appeal to their humanity by saying as loud as he could, "i've got kids," and was eventually rescued by fellow officers after being beaten unconscious for more than four minutes. at the hospital, doctors told him he had suffered a heart attack, and he was later diagnosed with a concussion, a traumatic brain injury, and post-traumatic stress disorder.
daniel hodges was crushed against a door by a frenzied group of rioters and could be heard screaming as blood dripped from his mouth. aquilino gonell was dragged into the crowd by his shoulder straps as he tried to fight people off and almost suffocated. gonell testified about injuries to his shoulder and foot that still bother him to this day.
trump pardoned the men who did this. all of them.
trump defended his pardoning of violent rioters who assaulted police, saying they were "very minor incidents" — a statement directly contradicted by the documented violence. the fraternal order of police and the international association of chiefs of police condemned the mass pardon in a joint statement, saying it sends a dangerous message that consequences for attacking law enforcement are not severe.
this is the story of how we got here — how a political party abandoned its stated principles, how millions of americans came to inhabit incompatible realities, and how the fractures that began in 2016 have widened into chasms that now define american life in ways that touch everything from family relationships to basic trust in democratic institutions.
the party that was
for decades, the republican party built its identity around specific principles: law and order, fiscal responsibility, strong national defense, family values, free trade, and institutional respect. these weren't just campaign slogans — they were the organizing framework that distinguished republicans from democrats.
republicans were the party that "backed the blue." they supported police funding, defended law enforcement from criticism, and championed tough-on-crime policies. they were the party of personal responsibility and accountability, arguing that individuals must face consequences for their actions.
they were the party that claimed to revere the constitution, respect institutions, and prioritize stability over disruption. they positioned themselves as the adults in the room — the ones who understood that governing requires compromise, that democratic norms matter, and that there are lines you don't cross even in pursuit of political victory.
that party no longer exists.
the transformation is complete
in 2020, the republican party decided not to write a platform; instead, the party simply expressed its support for donald trump's agenda — a move critics described as the party becoming a cult of personality.
this wasn't gradual evolution. it was wholesale transformation. the principles that republicans claimed to hold dear for generations were discarded the moment they conflicted with loyalty to trump.
consider the pardons. according to court records, around 140 police officers were injured during the january 6 attack, with some facing cracked ribs, smashed spinal disks, and brain injuries. the violence was documented extensively. body camera footage, security video, and testimony from dozens of officers paint an undeniable picture of what happened.
fanone testified before congress saying, "i feel like i went to hell and back to protect them and the people in this room, but too many are now telling me that hell doesn't exist, or that hell actually wasn't that bad". fanone slammed his fist on the table and said, "the indifference shown to my colleagues is disgraceful".
yet the republican response has been largely silence. most republicans vocalizing disagreements with trump are retiring, represent competitive districts, or are perennial centrists. the rest have fallen in line or stayed quiet.
the party that once championed law enforcement now excuses attacks on police. the party that demanded accountability now shields wrongdoers. the party that warned against lawlessness now celebrates it — when committed by the right people.
weaponizing justice
while trump pardoned his supporters, he simultaneously weaponized the justice department against his opponents in ways that would have been unthinkable in previous administrations.
trump ended the post-watergate norm of justice department independence, weaponizing it and ordering it to target his political enemies. new york attorney general letitia james received subpoenas from a federal grand jury investigating alleged mortgage fraud. senator adam schiff, who led trump's first impeachment, is under investigation by the doj for alleged insurance fraud. trump has called on the doj to investigate both james and schiff for mortgage fraud — allegations their lawyers call transparently false.
on april 24, 2025, trump directed the justice department to investigate actblue, the democratic fundraising platform, in an attempt to cripple the democratic party's political infrastructure. it marked the third time in three weeks trump ordered the government to target his perceived enemies and domestic opponents.
more than 100 prosecutors and career lawyers have resigned from the doj since trump returned to office—an exodus far exceeding normal turnover between administrations. many cited political interference, pressure to drop cases involving trump's allies, and threats of retaliation for refusing unethical orders.
former us attorney barbara mcquade summarized the transformation: "when trump is tweeting directions and demands to the attorney general that certain people be indicted because they're guilty as hell, that is a blatant violation of the limit on communications between the white house and the justice department". "the list of people that trump includes are clearly political enemies. he said so himself, that these are people who weaponized the justice department. he got indicted, and now it's payback time".
this isn't a bug in trump's approach to governance. it's the feature. loyalty matters more than law. power matters more than principle. and if you have money to help trump or allegiance to offer him, the rules don't apply to you.
the wealth transfer nobody talks about
while americans were consumed by culture war battles and personality-driven politics, a massive transfer of wealth from the working class to the ultra-rich was taking place — engineered by the very politicians who claimed to represent ordinary americans.
trump's 2017 tax cuts and jobs act gave the billionaire class a 6.6 percent reduction in their top marginal income tax rate, leaving them with even more money to cash in on stock market gains spurred by the law's 40 percent cut in the corporate tax rate.
the numbers are staggering. the effective tax rate for the wealthiest 0.0002 percent of americans fell from 30 percent to 24 percent after the 2017 tax cuts. as a fraction of wealth, taxes paid by the top 400 dropped from 2.7 percent prior to the 2017 tax cuts to 1.3 percent afterward.
as of october 13, 2020, the combined fortunes of the nation's 644 billionaires totaled a jaw-dropping $3.88 trillion — up 40.7 percent since 2017, the year before the tax cuts went into effect. while the wealth of the top 0.0002 percent was the equivalent of 2 percent of u.s. gross domestic product in 1982, it has hit 20 percent of gdp in 2025, with about three-quarters of the rise being attributable to the top 100 wealthiest people alone.
meanwhile, ordinary working families saw minimal benefit. trump administration economic officials claimed that "the average household would, conservatively, realize an increase in wage and salary income of $4,000" from the corporate tax cuts. that never happened. by contrast, ordinary working families saw only modest reductions in their irs bills after the trump reform.
over 80 percent of the 2017 tax cuts went to corporations, tax partnerships and high-net-worth individuals. the top 1 percent receiving 36.2 percent of the corporate provisions compared to 16.8 percent of the expiring individual provisions.
the corporate tax cuts didn't trickle down. a substantial fraction of corporations' savings went toward repurchasing their own stock, thus boosting share prices and the wealth of investors. american workers didn't see wage increases. corporations didn't invest dramatically more in expansion or hiring. instead, they enriched their shareholders and executives.
the afl-cio estimates that 51 percent of the corporate tax cuts went to business owners and 10 percent went to the top five highest-paid senior executives in each company, with 38 percent going to the top 10 percent of wage earners.
and now republicans want to extend these cuts. the new republican tax bill will give people making over $500,000 a tax cut of $47,000 in the first year alone, and will give people making over $1 million a year $114 billion in tax cuts for 2027 alone. while the 2017 tax law gave very modest tax cuts to the lowest income earners, the new bill will ask the lowest earners to pay higher taxes every year.
households in the lowest income decile, making $24,000 a year or less, lose about $1,200 every year, mostly due to deep cuts to medicaid and food assistance— cuts designed to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy.
this is republican policy in action: transfer wealth upward, then cut social programs for the poor to pay for it.
the information divide
understanding how we reached this point requires understanding how millions of americans came to inhabit completely different informational universes.
trump's constant barrage on the "lamestream media," science, policy experts, and long-trusted election systems left an information vacuum, meaning his supporters had nowhere to turn but to him and to themselves.
trump started with journalism, referring to news outlets that disagreed with him collectively as the "lamestream media" in order to plant the seed of doubt in his followers' minds that the news sources they normally trusted were no longer reliable. he had to do this if he wanted to maintain their loyalty, because news outlets that were ordinarily neutral with regards to political candidates — ap news, abc news, npr, bbc — had begun openly fact-checking and reporting on trump's lies.
the result is an epistemic crisis. sixty-seven percent of trump voters believe that unemployment has gone up under president obama's administration, when it hadn't; up to 52 percent believe that trump won both the electoral college and the popular vote in the 2016 election, when he didn't; and 74 percent of trump supporters believe that fewer people are insured now than before the implementation of the affordable care act, when more are.
but this isn't just about republicans being misinformed. fifty-four percent of democrats believe that russia either "definitely" or "probably" changed voting tallies in the united states to get trump elected — something that hasn't been demonstrated to have occurred.
both sides inhabit information bubbles. but the asymmetry matters. poll after poll finds that approximately three in four republicans believe there was widespread voter fraud in the presidential election — that the contest was actually stolen. it was this combustible belief — seeded by the president and cultivated by his media backers — that led to the insurrection at the capitol.
the right-wing echo chamber constitutes a lifeworld, existing in a state of epistemic closure where facts and reality are rejected in favor of lies and myths. in this most recent iteration, the right-wing echo chamber is now trumpworld, revolving around its high priest and cult leader, with doctrines including fascism, authoritarianism, white supremacy, christian nationalism, ignorance, and a veneration of violence.
the personal toll
the political has become deeply personal. one in six americans report having stopped talking to a family member or close friend because of politics. forty-three percent of democrats and 38 percent of republicans report they have become more distant from a family member since trump first ran for president in 2016.
thanksgiving dinners are minefields. family reunions are canceled. lifelong friendships dissolve over facebook arguments. parents and adult children stop speaking. siblings become strangers.
michael fanone expressed holding the american people responsible — "not just those that supported donald trump, but those that sat out the last election and, quite frankly, those who didn't do enough in their own communities, didn't fight hard enough". fanone asked, "why is it that the ideals that we all have come to associate with ourselves as americans like courage, honor, integrity have been replaced by indifference and cowardice?"
this is what the divide costs: not just political dysfunction, but the erosion of the basic social bonds that make community possible. when you can't agree with your brother about whether an insurrection happened, when your mother believes your news sources are part of a global conspiracy, when your closest friends think you're either a fascist or a communist based on how you voted — what's left?
the institutions under assault
trust in american institutions has cratered. trust in the media has fallen to historic lows, with only 31 percent of americans expressing confidence in mass media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. trust in government is near all-time lows, with only 20 percent of americans saying they trust the government in washington to do what is right most of the time.
this isn't accidental. it's the result of a deliberate strategy to delegitimize any institution that might serve as a check on power. courts that rule against trump are "rigged." journalists who fact-check him are "fake news." intelligence agencies that investigate him are the "deep state." scientists who contradict him are part of a conspiracy. elections he loses are "stolen."
trump's supporters often don't measure him by policy outcomes, but rather by his emotional resonance; they view him as a symbol of defiance, dominance, and disruption, meaning results sometimes fall by the wayside, and broken promises aren't failures but rather part of the process of fighting "the swamp".
when reality conflicts with the leader's claims, reality must be rejected. when institutions check the leader's power, institutions must be destroyed. when facts contradict the narrative, facts must be denied.
this is how democracies die — not through military coups, but through the gradual erosion of the shared reality that makes democratic governance possible.
the republican party's complicity
the republican party didn't have to become this. at multiple junctures, republicans could have drawn lines. they could have rejected trump's most authoritarian impulses. they could have defended institutional norms. they could have put country over party.
they chose not to.
after january 6, republicans had an opportunity. the attack was undeniable. the violence was documented. many republicans initially condemned it. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said trump was "practically and morally responsible" for the attack.
but when it came time to vote on trump's second impeachment, only 10 house republicans voted to impeach. only 7 senate republicans voted to convict. the rest chose party loyalty over accountability.
three republican witnesses at a senate hearing in october raised their hands when asked by senator peter welch whether they supported trump's pardons of the rioters, including for those who injured officer hodges.
the pattern is consistent: whenever republicans face a choice between defending democratic norms and maintaining power, they choose power. whenever they face a choice between truth and party loyalty, they choose loyalty.
traditional republican beliefs and ideology shifted into a new leadership style and political agenda referred to as trumpism. the transformation is so complete that questioning trump within the party is now political suicide.
what this means for you
if you're an american trying to live your life, navigate your relationships, and understand the world around you, here's what this transformation means:
your family relationships are at risk. political disagreements that once could be resolved with a change of subject now fracture families permanently. the divide isn't about tax policy anymore—it's about whether you can agree on basic reality. when your uncle believes the 2020 election was stolen despite all evidence, when your sister thinks january 6 was a peaceful protest, when your parents get their news exclusively from sources that tell them everyone else is lying—how do you maintain those relationships?
your economic future is being shaped by policies that benefit the wealthy. while americans argue about cultural issues, the tax code is being rewritten to transfer wealth upward. without the tax cuts of 2001, 2003, and 2017, the u.s. would have a fully sustainable fiscal situation today and roughly $500 billion on top of that each year to spend on socially useful public investments. that's money that could have gone to infrastructure, education, healthcare, or deficit reduction. instead, it went to the richest americans and corporations.
your trust in institutions is being weaponized. the delegitimization of media, courts, science, and democratic processes isn't accidental. it serves a purpose: when people trust nothing, they'll believe anything. when all sources of information are equally suspect, the leader becomes the only source of truth.
your democracy is fragile. fifty-two percent of trump supporters also believe that millions of votes were cast illegally in the 2016 election, a claim trump himself made to explain his popular vote loss. when a substantial portion of americans believe elections are rigged whenever their candidate loses, how do you maintain a democratic system?
the stakes nobody wants to name
here's what makes this moment so dangerous: both sides of the american political divide are partially right about what's happening, even as they reach opposite conclusions.
progressives are right that trump exhibits authoritarian tendencies, that he's undermined democratic norms, that he's weaponized government power against opponents, and that he's encouraged violence when it serves his purposes.
but trump supporters aren't entirely wrong that traditional media has become more openly opposed to trump, that some progressive activists do want to fundamentally transform american society in ways they find threatening, and that political and economic elites have often failed working-class americans of all races.
the tragedy is that these legitimate concerns on both sides have been weaponized to prevent any common ground. every legitimate criticism of trump is dismissed as "trump derangement syndrome." every legitimate concern from working-class americans is dismissed as racism or ignorance.
this makes resolution nearly impossible. how do you compromise with someone you believe is a fascist? how do you find common cause with someone you believe hates you? how do you build a functioning democracy when you can't agree on what's actually happening?
the pattern we're trapped in
american history is full of moments of intense division. the country survived a civil war, the civil rights movement, vietnam, watergate, and the clinton impeachment. each time, the conflict felt existential. each time, americans worried democracy might not survive.
and yet it did. the question is whether it will this time.
there are key differences. previous divisions, while intense, didn't involve the same level of epistemic fracture. during watergate, americans across the political spectrum could watch the same news broadcasts and, despite their different political preferences, agree on basic facts about what was happening. during vietnam, people disagreed about the war but agreed on the reality of what was occurring.
now, americans can't agree on whether an insurrection happened. they can't agree on whether elections are legitimate. they can't agree on basic facts about the economy, crime, or immigration because they consume entirely different information from sources that tell contradictory stories.
people across the political spectrum are susceptible to misinformation and avoid threatening information when they feel like they don't have the close relationships and support system in place to respond to new problems. feeling like we lack the support and resources to deal with bad things makes us retreat into our old, comforting worldviews.
this creates a vicious cycle: polarization drives people into information bubbles, which increases polarization, which drives them deeper into bubbles, which makes polarization worse.
where we go from here
the republican party has fundamentally transformed. the party of law and order now pardons those who attacked police. the party of fiscal responsibility now cuts taxes for billionaires while exploding the deficit. the party of institutional respect now attacks any institution that constrains its power.
this isn't a temporary deviation that will self-correct once trump is gone. the republican party in 2020 decided not to write a platform and simply expressed its support for donald trump's agenda — demonstrating that the transformation is structural, not personal.
the question facing americans isn't whether they agree with republican policies. it's whether they can maintain a functioning democracy when one of the two major parties has abandoned commitment to democratic norms, embraced disinformation as strategy, and organized itself around loyalty to one individual rather than principles.
there are no easy answers. you can't fact-check someone out of an alternative reality when their information sources tell them your facts are lies. you can't appeal to shared values when you can't agree on what's actually happening. you can't compromise when one side views compromise as betrayal and purity as virtue.
but certain things are undeniable:
around 140 police officers were injured during the january 6 attack, with some facing cracked ribs, smashed spinal disks, and brain injuries. trump pardoned the people who did this.
the combined fortunes of america's billionaires increased 40.7 percent since 2017, the year before the tax cuts went into effect, while working families saw minimal benefit.
approximately three in four republicans believe there was widespread voter fraud in the presidential election despite no evidence supporting this claim and dozens of courts rejecting it.
these are facts. they're documented. they're verifiable. that a substantial portion of americans reject them anyway tells you everything about where we are.
the conversation we need to have
americans need to grapple with hard questions:
how do you maintain democracy when a significant portion of the population believes elections are only legitimate when their side wins?
how do you hold leaders accountable when their supporters view any accountability as persecution?
how do you have a shared national conversation when people consume entirely different information and trust completely different sources?
how do you maintain the social fabric when political disagreements destroy families and friendships?
how do you address legitimate grievances from working-class americans without empowering authoritarian leaders who exploit those grievances?
how do you critique power without feeding the narrative that all institutions are corrupt and therefore should be destroyed?
these questions don't have easy answers. but refusing to ask them won't make them go away.
the reality nobody wants to face
michael fanone said he finds fault and holds the american people responsible — not just those that supported donald trump, but those that sat out the last election and those who didn't do enough in their own communities.
he's right. this isn't just about trump. it's not just about republican politicians. it's about whether american citizens care enough about democracy to defend it — not just with votes, but with the harder work of maintaining relationships across divides, insisting on shared reality, and holding leaders accountable even when it's politically inconvenient.
the republican party's transformation didn't happen in a vacuum. it happened because millions of americans embraced it, millions more tolerated it, and millions stayed silent.
the party that once championed law and order now excuses violence against police. the party that claimed to value truth now embraces disinformation. the party that warned against tyranny now celebrates authoritarian strongman tactics—as long as they're directed at the right people.
this transformation is complete. it's undeniable. it's hiding in plain sight.
the question is whether americans — all americans, not just those who oppose trump — are willing to see it and confront what it means.
because the alternative is pretending everything is normal while the foundations of american democracy continue to erode. and that pretense is no longer sustainable.
the reckoning is here. what americans do with it will determine whether democracy survives this moment—or whether this is how it ends: not with dramatic collapse, but with slow disintegration as truth becomes irrelevant, institutions become worthless, and power becomes its own justification.
fanone testified, "i agreed to speak here today because i don't think our response to the insurrection should have anything to do with political parties".
he's right. this should be about principles that transcend partisanship: truth, accountability, democracy, and the rule of law.
the tragedy is that those principles now have a political valence. defending them has become a partisan act. and that might be the clearest sign of how far we've fallen.
