Intolerable Leaders

Welcome to Celebrate Poe - episode 319 - Intolerable Leaders

This should be episode 319 - Baudelaire, De Quincey, and Poe - Part Two.  But while I was looking through some past transcripts on my web site, I ran across one that addressed the invasion of the Capital in Washington. It was an issue that I strongly felt needed to be addressed 4 years ago when it happened, and our recent President has taken actions that just pour salt on the wounds.

Thank you for experiencing Celebrate Poe.

Transcript

Welcome to Celebrate Poe - episode 319 - Intolerable Leaders

This should be episode 319 - Baudelaire, De Quincey, and Poe - Part Two.  But while I was looking through some past transcripts on my web site, I ran across one that addressed the invasion of the Capital in Washington. It was an issue that I strongly felt needed to be addressed 4 years ago when it happened, and our recent President has taken actions that just pour salt on the wounds.

I was horrified by the images of the rioters invading the Capitol building 4 years ago, as well as the potential for national disaster that it poses.  So I am including a portion of that episode, as well as updating it because of some extremely poor decisions from the President.

I seriously thought about writing about unity for this episode - and there certainly is a real need for unity in the United States.  The concept of unity is a topic that can be tied in with Poe’s great work about unity in the universe, Eureka, but I think it would be better to save that for the future - we are going to need a lot of work to be a unified nation again.  

I feel that as podcasters, it is our duty to be socially conscious - that’s why I go out of my way to try and be social responsible. In addition to Poe, I want to touch on such relevant subjects as racism, homophobia, income inequality, and especially climate change.

Now back when Edgar Allan Poe was still a young boy - you know I had to get Poe in there somehow - the British invaded the United States during the War of 1812.  

When Dolley Madison, wife of the President, realized that the British were coming in August, 1814, she became determined to leave nothing of value for the enemy.  Among the treasures were a copy of the Declaration of Independence and boxes of presidential papers.  She told her servants, 

If you can’t save them, destroy them

The story is told that she refused to leave without Gilbert Stuart’s portrait of George Washington.  So she had it pulled down, taken out of its frame, rolled it up, rolled it up like a scroll, and personally carried out of the White House.

Later she wrote:

It is done … the precious portrait placed in the hands of two gentlemen of New York for safe keeping, And now, dear Sister, I must leave this house, or the retreating army will make me a prisoner in it, by filling up the road I directed to take. When I shall again write you, or where I shall be tomorrow, I cannot tell!!

One thing I did not mention was that the British also invaded and burned the Capitol building.  The American people at the time were outraged, and deeply resented the burning of the Capitol. Destroying such a cultural edifice was against the basic laws of civilized warfare 

Once the British captured Washington, they set about destroying the public buildings.  The British set fires in the Capitol just after nine in the evening. In the south wing, some rooms in the office area were vandalized and set ablaze.  Papers and furniture in the clerk’s office were used as combustible material. Among the items destroyed were the secret journals of Congress kept by the clerk of the House -  a loss that could not be replaced.

The heat was so intense that the glass in the skylights melted, and the wooden ceiling collapsed.  Within minutes, the building was completely destroyed.

After the White House was destroyed, the President did not move back in the White House until 1817 - three years later.  Members of Congress also waited for several years before meeting again in the Capitol building after its was destroyed.

Donald R Hickey, in his The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict writes that  “President Madison, in an opening address to Congress upon meeting back in the Capitol buildling, brushed aside British victories in order to focus on American triumphs. But he could not deny that a crisis was at hand. “It is not to be disguised,” he said, “that the situation of our country calls for its greatest efforts.” Appealing to the spirit of ’76, Madison expressed confidence that the American people would “cheerfully and proudly bear every burden of every kind which the safety and honor of the nation demanded.”

And if you are wondering where Congress did meet when most of the government’s buildings were destroyed, - it met in the relatively small Patent Office because it was one of the few government offices spared - although meeting there was cramped - to say the least.

Fast forward to 2020.

Former Chief of Staff John Kelly who knows Mr. Trump well  - - said that 

Trump’s behavior in office proves Americans have to be more rigorous about whom they choose as their president.

“I think we need to look harder at who we elect,” he said. “I think we should look at people that are running for office and put them through the filter: What is their character like? What are their ethics?”

Kelly also said Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us”

Now, the Capitol building is generally viewed as a sacred symbol of our democracy, never again to be invaded by an foreign army or an angry mob 

- that was true until an mob egged on by the President of the United States - NOT the leader of FOREIGN country - invaded the United States Capitol. 
Metaphorically speaking, It is admirable to spend time trying to build a new house, but right now we have to put out the damaging fire. We have every right to be concerned and angry, and be sure that nothing like this ever happens again.

Mike Brawn, a senator from Indiana, originally objected strongly to the electors from the Presidential electors but now says, “We need to get this ugly day behind us” and has apparently changed his mind.”

Now, as of today, this podcast has had listeners from 93 countries around the world in almost 2,000 cities, and I want to stress that most Americans are decent, hard-working people.  Most  Americans consider places like the Capitol building to be sacred symbols of democracy.  When a group of rowdy thugs violently invades such a monument to democracy, most Americans are thoroughly disgusted.

This is not who we are as a country.

According to the Huffington Post, as the Capitol was being invaded, police found pipe bombs placed at the Washington headquarters of both the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee. A truck loaded with a semi-automatic long gun, ammunition and Molotov cocktails was found near the Capitol.

Now I don’t care if your political philosophy is liberal or conservative - or  apolitical - nothing is accomplished by violence.

Celebrate Poe is obviously not a news podcast - The Daily, Morning Joe, the Rachel Maddow Show, Way Too Early, All In with Chris Hayes, and Dateline White House with Nicole Wallace are among the many, many excellent news and political podcasts that have incredible analysis of current events.  They are all genuinely professional - drawing on talent and great minds from all over the world.  I certainly am not going to try and compete with them.

But I believe that as a citizen of the world, an American, and a new podcaster, I have a responsibility to speak out against evil.  This is especially true in a podcast that depends so much on examining history - exploring the lives of the great men and women who have positively shaped our country, as well as those who have attempted to destroy it for personal gain.

On Friday, January 8, 2021, the New York Times wrote that  Mr. Trump was “pleased” when his supporters first stormed the Capitol Building.  He ignored pleas from his aides to step in and defuse the situation.  Apparently several advisers tried in vain to convince him to take action.  When it became obvious that the coup attempt was damaging to his reputation and any goals - remember five people had already died - Mr. Trump released a short video in which he finally condemned the violence and acknowledge that his presidency was ending - though it was obvious he was reading from a script - saying words he did not feel comfortable with. According to the Times, that brief video came after Mr. Trump realized that he could be in serious legal trouble for fomenting insurrection. As the full fallout of the coup attempt became clear late— with five people dead, including a Capitol policeman - Mr. Trump released a video in which he finally condemned the violence and acknowledged that his presidency was ending (albeit while clearly reading from a script). But even that two-and-a-half-minute video did not come because Mr. Trump realized the full scope of the riots or was trying to be presidential.  According to the Times, he made the video when he came to realize that he could personally face legal trouble. He is said to have initially been against doing the video. He only agreed to do it after it became clear that prosecutors intended to scrutinize his comments to supporters before the coup. 

Now that Mr. Trump is in office again, he has declared a blanket pardon for ALL the protesters - those practicing free speech, as well as violent criminals who are a definite danger to society.  And having blanket pardons,  which included both non-violent offenders and those convicted of serious crimes such as assaulting police officers and seditious conspiracy, raise significant ethical, legal, and societal issues.

The pardons effectively nullify the largest investigation in FBI history, which resulted in over 1,500 charges and more than 1,100 convictions. By granting clemency to individuals convicted of violent crimes—including assaults on law enforcement officers—these actions undermine the judicial process and send a message that accountability can be bypassed when politically convenient. This erodes public trust in the justice system and diminishes the sacrifices of law enforcement officers who risked their lives to protect democracy on that day.

Experts warn that these pardons could embolden extremists by signaling that political violence may be tolerated or even rewarded if it aligns with certain agendas. The January 6 attack was not an ordinary protest but an attempt to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power—a cornerstone of democracy. Pardoning those involved in such acts risks normalizing political violence as a legitimate tool in American democracy.

The pardons effectively nullify the largest investigation in FBI history, which resulted in over 1,500 charges and more than 1,100 convictions. By granting clemency to individuals convicted of violent crimes—including assaults on law enforcement officers—these actions undermine the judicial process and send a message that accountability can be bypassed when politically convenient. This erodes public trust in the justice system and diminishes the sacrifices of law enforcement officers who risked their lives to protect democracy on that day.

Experts warn that these pardons could embolden extremists by signaling that political violence may be tolerated or even rewarded if it aligns with certain agendas. The January 6 attack was not an ordinary protest but an attempt to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power—a cornerstone of democracy. Pardoning those involved in such acts risks normalizing political violence as a legitimate tool in American democracy79

Blanket pardons for violent offenders sets a troubling precedent for future administrations. It suggests that crimes committed in service of a political figure or ideology may be excused, undermining the principle of equal justice under the law. This misuse of presidential pardon power deviates from its intended purpose of granting mercy in exceptional cases and instead transforms it into a tool for political self-interest.

And public opinion strongly opposes these pardons. Surveys show that a majority of Americans, including Republicans and military veterans, disapprove of pardoning individuals who committed violent crimes during the Capitol attack. Even some Republican lawmakers have expressed dismay at pardoning those who assaulted police officers or engaged in other violent acts.

The pardons are viewed as a betrayal by many within law enforcement. Approximately 140 police officers were injured during the Capitol attack, with some sustaining life-altering injuries. By absolving their attackers, these pardons disregard the sacrifices made by officers to protect democracy and enforce the law.

While President Trump framed these pardons as a step toward "national reconciliation," they have instead deepened divisions by excusing egregious acts against democratic institutions. True reconciliation requires accountability and acknowledgment of wrongdoing—not blanket forgiveness for actions that threatened the nation's democratic framework.

Granting blanket pardons to individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol attack is deeply problematic because it undermines the rule of law, emboldens political violence, sets a dangerous precedent, disregards public opinion, disrespects law enforcement, and hinders genuine national reconciliation. Such actions compromise the integrity of democratic institutions and weaken the foundational principles of justice and accountability essential to maintaining a functioning democracy.

Blanket pardons issued by President Donald Trump for individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack are widely seen as having significant implications for the future of political violence in the United States. Experts and observers have raised several concerns about how these pardons could embolden extremists and undermine democratic norms.

The pardons send a clear signal that political violence committed in support of a powerful leader can go unpunished - scary stuff. This message risks emboldening extremist groups and individuals to engage in similar acts, believing they may also receive clemency if their actions align with the interests of influential political figures. For example, far-right activists have celebrated the pardons, viewing them as validation of their actions and a sign of support from Trump. Some have even used the moment to call for future acts of retribution against perceived opponents. 

By pardoning individuals convicted of crimes such as seditious conspiracy and assaulting law enforcement officers, the move normalizes political violence as a tool for achieving political goals. Experts warn that this could lead to an increase in violent incidents around contentious issues like elections or policy disputes, further destabilizing the political landscape.

The pardons also undermine the rule of law by suggesting that accountability for politically motivated violence is negotiable. This not only weakens trust in the justice system but also creates a chilling effect on those who might oppose such actions—whether lawmakers, law enforcement, or private citizens—out of fear that they could become targets of future violence without recourse to justice.

And this really scares me - the sweeping nature of these pardons sets a dangerous precedent for future administrations. It signals that violent acts carried out in service of a political agenda may be excused, potentially encouraging more politically motivated violence during periods of political instability or transition.

The pardons granted to January 6 rioters risk emboldening extremists, legitimizing political violence, and undermining democratic principles. They send a troubling message that acts of violence in support of political leaders can be forgiven, potentially encouraging similar behavior in the future. This development poses significant challenges to maintaining public safety, accountability, and even basic trust in democracy.

It is important to remember that The blanket pardons issued by Donald Trump for individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol attack could significantly influence future political campaigns in many intended and unintended ways, particularly by reshaping norms around accountability, political violence, and campaign rhetoric.

Trump's pardons send a message that political violence may be excused if it aligns with a leader's agenda. This could embolden candidates or their supporters to use intimidation or violence as a strategy during campaigns, especially in highly polarized elections. By portraying the January 6 rioters as "patriots" and fulfilling a campaign promise to pardon them, Trump has reframed violent actions as acceptable forms of political expression. This risks normalizing such behavior in future campaigns, where candidates might feel incentivized to tacitly or explicitly encourage similar actions to rally their base or intimidate opponents.

The pardons could lead to more extreme rhetoric during campaigns, while candidates might seek to appeal to radicalized segments of the electorate. For example, far-right groups have celebrated the pardons, interpreting them as validation of their actions. This bolstered sense of legitimacy could translate into increased activism or even violence during election cycles. Candidates who align with these groups may use inflammatory language to energize their base, further polarizing the electorate and increasing the risk of violence.

By excusing those who sought to overturn an election through violence, the pardons undermine public confidence in the electoral process. This erosion of trust could fuel conspiracy theories and doubts about election integrity, which are often leveraged by candidates to galvanize support. Campaigns might increasingly focus on casting doubt over election outcomes before voting even begins.

The pardons may escalate threats against candidates, election workers, and voters during campaigns. The perception that violent acts will go unpunished—or even be rewarded—could embolden individuals or groups to target political opponents or disrupt campaign events or do ANYTHING that they believe will make their side win. This creates a chilling effect, where candidates and officials may feel compelled to self-censor or avoid contentious topics out of fear for their safety, as well as the safety of their families.  Imagine what a violent criminal might do if he or she knows that will be automatically pardoned.

The pardons deepen partisan divides by framing January 6 as either a patriotic act or an assault on democracy, depending on one's political perspective. This polarization could lead candidates to adopt more identity-based campaigning strategies, emphasizing loyalty to specific ideologies or leaders rather than broader policy platforms. Such tactics risk further alienating moderate voters and intensifying divisions within the electorate

Trump's January 6 pardons could reshape future political campaigns by normalizing political violence, encouraging extremist rhetoric, eroding trust in democratic institutions, increasing security risks, and deepening polarization. These developments pose significant challenges for maintaining fair and peaceful elections in an already divided political landscape.

In conclusion, while writing this podcast episode, I was torn between my responsibilities as a podcaster, the realization that there are probably listeners who violently disagree with me, and my responsibilities as an American who believes in decency.  And I encountered a quote that kinda sums it all up.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

This quote was attributed by President John Kennedy to Edmund Burke,  
In reality, Burke never actually used those exact words - the statement actually is closer to an idea expressed by John Stuart Mill, who in the 1860’s said “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”

Basically the same idea - that when we say or do nothing in the face of evil, we become enablers who are just as guilty as the person or persons committing the act.

And that is especially true when intolerable leaders perform intolerable actions.

Join Celebrate Poe for episode 320 - Baudelaire, De Quincey, and Poe, Part Two.

Sources include: perplexity.ai, History of the United States Capitol : A Chronicle of Design, Construction, and Politics by William C. Allen, The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict by Donald R Hickey, A Spiritual Heritage Tour of the Capitol by David Barton, Donald Trump Is An Urgent Threat To American Democracy. Congress Has 13 Days To Act, an article by Paul Blemenfied in the Huffington Post, Edgar Allan Poe: A Critical Biography by Arthur Hobson Quinn, and The Poe Log: A Documentary Life of Edgar Allan Poe by Dwight R. Thomas and David K. Jackson

Thank you for listening to Celebrate Poe.




.