We recently linked to a Jonathan Tobin column in which Tobin detailed how overreaction to some of Trump’s behavior prompted many to dismiss legitimate concerns over his worst behavior, the most recent instance at the time being his dinner with two anti-Semites. This past Saturday brought another outrage as Trump made the claim, fact-free and troubling in equal measure, that “A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.” Such a declaration would be appalling enough coming from a man howling on the street. Coming from someone who once swore to defend the Constitution, it’s unconscionable.

Today’s link is from political science professor Austin Sarat. Sarat offers two takes on Trump’s Saturday statement. The first is historical, delving into past moments when presidents have flexed powers in possible conflict with the Constitution. The second is legal, positing what damage Trump’s statement might do to his legal defense regarding January 6. Neither take offers Trump much hope, nor should it. Past presidents found acting in contravention of the Constitution ceded to its authority, and Trump’s nonsensical post about terminating the Constitution because it won’t cede to his will be used by prosecutors to establish his state of mind on January 6. If they were waiting for proof of criminal intent, now they have it.

During Donald Trump’s presidency, his opposition often accused him of trying to shred the Constitution. Whether or not they occasionally exaggerated at the time, Trump openly favors shredding the Constitution now. There’s no getting around it. He’s put it out there in his own words for everyone to see. Don’t dismiss it.