The Republican Fixation on the "No Kings" Protests

Following the murder of Charlie Kirk, there were outcries from many Republicans to “turn the temperature down" and to stop the use of heated rhetoric that had become commonplace. Republicans were particularly enraged that some Democrats referred to them as "fascists" or even “Nazis," and Republicans demanded an end to the use of such language. In response, some Democrats suggested that ending the practice of masked, unidentified Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents grabbing individuals — including American citizens — off the street and detaining them in concentration camps would be a better way to halt such comparisons. Republicans, however, have now changed their tune and are now apparently in favor of using the type of language they so recently criticized.

Things reached a pinnacle this week when White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt went before television cameras to assert that "The Democrat [sic] Party's main constituency is made up of Hamas terrorists, illegal aliens, and violent criminals." Republicans have spent years whining about Hillary Clinton claiming that "half of [cult leader, convicted felon, and failed President Donald] Trump's supporters" could be put into a "basket of deplorables". Yet, saying that essentially all Democrats are terrorists, undocumented foreign migrants, or violent criminals is completely acceptable these days. This is how Republicans lower the temperature. For reasons that I will leave to the reader to deduce, Democrats will not spend the next decade feeling sorry for themselves because of Leavitt's remark. In fact, it will be almost entirely forgotten by next week.

But Leavitt's remark did not simply come out of the blue. To the contrary, it appears to have been the culmination of a strategy that Republicans adopted to shift blame for the government shutdown to the Democrats. Factually stating, Democratic senators caused the shutdown by not voting in favor of cloture, which would have allowed a vote on a continuing resolution to provide funds to keep the government open. Democrats, however, argued that they were withholding their votes in order to negotiate the extension of health care premium tax credits that will expire this year. Republicans appear to have expected the public to blame the Democrats for the shutdown. Instead, opinion polls showed Republicans being held primarily responsible. Instead of debating the issues — there are legitimate arguments against extending the tax credits, even if I personally don't agree with them — Republicans chose a different strategy. This was to claim that Democrats were refusing to reopen the government before planned "No Kings" rallies that are scheduled for tomorrow. Various Republicans began to suggest that they had heard — from where was never revealed — that Democrats wanted to keep the government closed to provide more motivation for the rallies. For example, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said on Wednesday that "We shouldn't have to wait until the Hate America Rally or whatever it is this weekend that's driving Chuck Schumer to keep this going on." I am not aware of a single Democrat ever saying such a thing, and certainly the Republicans have failed to document an example. To the contrary, Democrats have been repeatedly arguing in favor of negotiations. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has refused to even return the House to session.

Suddenly, as if they were instructed, Republicans across the board began misrepresenting the "No Kings" rallies. It is important to remember that an earlier round of "No Kings" rallies was held in June. According to the organizers, rallies were held in more than 2,100 cities, and there were at least 5 million participants. These went off without a hitch and received a much better reception than Trump's military parade that was held the same day. The rallies were peaceful and were attended by families, union members, older folk, and students.

Now, with even larger crowds likely to attend the nationwide protests, Republicans have engaged in widespread mischaracterizations of the events. For example, on Wednesday, Speaker Johnson stood in front of a microphone while surrounded by other members of the House Republican leadership and claimed:

We call it the Hate America Rally that will happen Saturday. Let's see who shows up for that. I bet you'll see Hamas supporters, I bet you'll see Antifa types, I bet you'll see the Marxists on full display, the people who don't want to stand and defend the foundational truths of this republic.

Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, who I truly hope is better at finance than he is at speaking to the press, claimed that "This crazy No Kings rally this weekend, which is going to be the farthest left, the hardest core, the most unhinged in the Democratic Party, which is a big title...No Kings equals no paychecks." There is really no way to interpret this other than Bessent either being in favor of kings or opposed to paychecks. Of course, this is the same guy who believes that being "America First" means giving $20 billion to Argentina, which he then increased to $40 billion in order, I guess, to be doubly America First. Meanwhile, Argentina is selling soybeans to China while American soybean farmers are not making a single sale to China. If Bessent is running the Treasury like he runs his mouth, we are headed for the biggest financial disaster of all time.

Yesterday, Mike Johnson again referred to the No Kings rallies as a "Hate America Rally" and argued that the attendees would be "Marxists, Antifa people, BLM remnants, the pro-Hamas wing of the Democrat [sic] Party" and that "they're gonna be out here screaming and wailing." Representative Dan Meuser was on Newsmax this morning describing the rallies as "this anti-American protest" and scoffed at claims that there would be "hundreds of thousands of people," saying "We shall see." The expectations are that there will be millions of participants.

For his part, Trump does not appear to buy the argument that Democrats are delaying the reopening of the government until after the rallies on Saturday. He told Maria Bartiromo that "some people say that but..." and then veered off to insist that he is not a king. As is normal for Trump, he is unable to focus on anything other than himself.

Clearly, Republicans were hoping to focus blame for the government shutdown on Democrats and came up with the pretext of Democrats delaying until tomorrow's rallies. But what are they going to do after the rallies? Surely, they don't expect Senate Democrats to immediately surrender once the rallies are completed? Frankly, Republicans couldn't be blamed for thinking such a thing given the Democrats’ history of capitulating, but that seems pretty unlikely now. Instead, the government will likely continue to remain closed, and Republicans will have to invent a new reason to blame Democrats.

Another question is why Republicans have engaged in such widespread mischaracterization of the rallies. One suggestion is that Republicans are scared of the rallies having a positive impact for Democrats. However, Republicans have probably provided the best publicity for the rallies imaginable. I have seen liberal after liberal say that they had not planned to attend, but after hearing Republicans describe the rallies, they now want to go. So, in terms of attendance, the Republican strategy will likely backfire.

Another possibility is that the Republicans are attempting their version of 3D chess — or since that might be beyond them, 3D checkers or 3D Chutes and Ladders — and don't actually care about increasing the turnout. Why would that be, you ask? The answer may lie in how the Republicans have been characterizing those they expect to attend the rallies. As Johnson puts it, they will be "Marxists, Antifa people, BLM remnants, the pro-Hamas wing...". Convincing others that this is the case has a couple of effects. For one, it might inspire counter-protests. What red-blooded MAGA would not want to confront a group of Marxists and Antifa people? Moreover, Trump recently declared Antifa to be a "domestic terrorist organization". That has no legal impact because, legally, no such designation exists. But it could provide permission for law enforcement agencies to act more aggressively against the crowds. Imagine a scenario in which "No Kings" protesters are violently confronted by counter-protesters and then police intervene primarily against the "No Kings" side? Just think of TV screens filled with scenes of "No Kings" rallies full of violent clashes, tear gas, and crowds resisting police attacks. This would be a fantastic outcome for Republicans.

Thinking about this even further, "violent" protests in cities across the country could provide justification for Trump to deploy National Guard units. He recently said that he intends to send troops to even more cities. Trump has also mused about invoking the Insurrection Act, which would be harder for courts to block. Nationwide protests that erupt in chaos could provide fodder for such a move. The ultimate end, of course, could be martial law being imposed on cities with large Democratic populations.

The evolution of Republicans claiming that the "No Kings" rallies are the reason that Democrats are refusing to vote to reopen the government, to suggestions that the attendees of the rallies are "Marxists, Antifa people, BLM remnants, the pro-Hamas wing...", to the entire Democratic Party being declared "Hamas terrorists, illegal aliens, and violent criminals" could just be Republicans flailing around attempting to find a strategy that will work for them. Or, it could be a coordinated plan aimed at leveraging the "No Kings" rallies as a pretext for further military intervention into Democratic areas. I sincerely hope that it is not the latter. The organizers of the rallies are not stupid people, and they will be well aware of the possibility of violent counter-protesters attempting to create chaos and provocateurs within the crowd. They surely have plans to address both prospects. With any luck, the protests will be large, loud, and peaceful, leaving Johnson and the others with egg on their faces and a need to start over with a plan regarding the shutdown.