impression the Justice Department was being weaponized against Trump. It made him appear as a victim, and confirmed to his base that overeducated urban liberals were hypocrites. Seen not as a loser but a victim, his contributions to his campaign surged and his
poll numbers solidified.
3.
An insightful take to say the least, one which resonates with election results. However, Zakaria’s second argument seems less sound than either the first or third. It may be true that multiple prosecutions give the appearance of overzealousness, but this misses the fact that these prosecutions resulted in convictions by peers – so there is a case to be made they were legitimately brought and prosecuted. Moreover, Trump presently faces at least a dozen lawsuits, only two of which – the federal cases relating to election interference – have been thrown out because of Trump v. United States (2024), the 6-3 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview, at least presumptive immunity for official acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibility, and no immunity for unofficial acts.
Ongoing cases include attempts to hold him liable for the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, and his appeals of a $454 million New
York civil fraud verdict and rulings that he
sexually abused and defamed writer E. Jean Carroll. And most recently, Trump lost a bid to overturn his criminal conviction stemming from hush money paid to a porn star on the basis of presidential immunity.7 If a person believes in the rule of law, which has been the basis of most conservative positions across the years, officials and lawyers cannot fail to bring charges solely on the basis the case/s may “appear” to be caused by overzealousness.
Zakaria is thus on much stronger ground when arguing, if there was a lesson to be learned from the election outcome, it was that “liberals cannot achieve liberal goals, however virtuous, by illiberal means.”8
Yet an Even More Interesting Take: Rahm Emanuel
Rahm Emanuel, former chief of staff to President Obama and Ambassador to Japan, presents an even more interesting argument about the causes underpinning the election results. Emanuel argued that election results needed to be viewed through three layers:
1.
What is missing from these cases is not what the Democrats did wrong but what Trump did right. Only then might it be possible to learn some lessons that prove valuable in understanding what happened.
38