TIO Public Square
Seeking Vengeance is Weak
by Robert P. Sellers
At Charlie Kirk’s Memorial Service, his widow Erika Kirk – with great emotion – said: “I forgive [that young man who took Charlie’s life]. On the cross our Savior said, ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’ That man, that young man, I forgive him. I forgive him because it was what Christ did.” The massive crowd rose to their feet, applauding Erika’s generous display of personal forgiveness. CNN reported:
It was called a memorial, but what unfolded in Arizona was unlike anything the United States had seen before. … [It was] a political rally, a spiritual revival, and a state funeral all rolled into one. … President Trump called [Charlie Kirk] an American martyr. … This was another instance where Trump ignited fire.
VENGEANCE INSTEAD OF FORGIVENESS
The president, who spoke soon after Erika, did not talk about forgiving his political enemies. “I am sorry, Erika,” he said before contradicting her. “[Charlie] did not hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them. That’s where I disagreed with Charlie. … I hate my opponent, and I don’t want the best for them.”
Asked why the president’s message was so different from Erika’s, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt explained that the president was just being “authentically himself.” She concluded, “I think that’s why millions of Americans across the country love him and support him, including Erika Kirk.”
Leavitt’s response was perhaps more revealing than she intended when she told the journalist that Trump was being “authentically himself.” Indeed, being hateful and wishing harm on those who oppose him is exactly who the president has repeatedly proven himself to be. Maybe he has sought revenge against his enemies for so many years that the habit of retribution is now impossibly ingrained, rendering him incapable of showing forgiveness to another.
A PERSONAL CAMPAIGN OF RETRIBUTION
The most recent target to feel the threat of presidential retribution is James Comey, the former FBI director whom Trump has hated ever since the FBI launched an investigation of possible Russian ties to the 2016 campaign. After pressuring Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute Comey and his other political enemies, the president fired interim U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert for refusing to seek an indictment of Comey because of insufficient evidence. He then replaced Siebert with Lindsey Halligan, one of his former personal attorneys. Despite having no previous prosecutorial experience, she somehow succeeded in securing a grand jury indictment against Comey, charging him with lying to Congress and obstructing its work. The charges, if proven, could send the FBI director to prison for up to five years. Trump has claimed Comey’s indictment is about justice, not revenge, stating that he is one of “the sick, radical people” on the left and “they can’t get away with it.”
Journalist Rachel Leingang, writing for The Guardian, comments about Trump’s campaign of retaliation:
Comey is not the first person to be targeted by Trump, who promised on the campaign trail that he would retaliate against his political enemies and has spent his first year in office doing just that. …
A host of people, including a former president and other high-ranking officials, have seen their security clearances revoked, and some have had secret service security details withdrawn. He has gone after entire law firms and universities, issuing rightwing demands and extracting free legal work or policy changes on campuses.
He has also targeted specific people, claiming they have committed crimes and directing his administration to investigate them. Some have been called out by name in presidential memos.
Trump claims he has “a list” of political opponents against whom he wants revenge. Those “enemies” include Leticia James, the New York Attorney General; Lisa Cook, the Federal Reserve governor; Gavin Newsom, Democratic governor of California; Gen. Mark Milley, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; John Bolton, former National Security Advisor under Trump; John Brennan, former CIA director under President Obama; Jack Smith, special counsel who investigated Trump for several federal crimes; Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader; and Sen. Adam Schiff, who led an impeachment proceeding against Trump and served on the January 6 Committee. Others in Trump’s crosshairs are former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama; Hillary Clinton, Trump’s opponent in the 2016 presidential election; late-night comedians like Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, and Seth Meyers; television networks and especially their news departments, as well as journalists like Jonathan Karl, ABC’s White House correspondent – whom Trump feels are not favorable to him.
MSNBC, one of those networks Trump would like to force off the airwaves, discusses the surprising similarity between James Comey and Jimmy Kimmel. Symone Sanders Townsend writes:
Other than their first names, Jimmy Kimmel and James Comey have little in common.
But the late-night talk show host and the former FBI director are both in the news [recently] because President Donald Trump decided they were his enemies and sought retribution.
In reality, both were just doing their jobs. Kimmel made jokes at the president’s expense, much like he did with the other three presidents since his show started. Comey refused the president’s requests in his first term to undermine the FBI’s traditional independence.
Neither man set out to be political, but Trump’s conduct has made them unlikely figureheads in a growing pro-democracy movement. Their stance isn’t about opposing the president as a person; it’s about resisting efforts that threaten free speech, the rule of law and the institutions that safeguard American democracy.
IS SEEKING REVENGE SIMPLY AMERICAN?
Merriam-Webster, recognized as “America’s most trusted dictionary,” defines “revenge” as a verb, meaning “to avenge (oneself or another) usually by retaliating in kind or degree” or “to inflict injury in return for” and as a noun, meaning “a desire for vengeance or retribution” or “an act or instance of retaliating in order to get even.” The president is driven by revenge, both as an action and an act, a verb and a noun. During his campaign, he gave full warning that revenge was on his mind and in his heart.
As one “democracy watchdog” has reported,
At a political conference in Maryland two years ago, Trump told hundreds of his supporters that he would be a tool of vengeance should they return him to the White House.
“I am your retribution,” Trump said, before repeating it again for emphasis.
Trump’s now returned to the White House, and he is fulfilling his promise. …
The use by Trump of the massive resources of federal law enforcement against his political opponents threatens fair elections and aims to intimidate public officials out of using their positions to hold Trump accountable. As such, it represents perhaps his most chilling move yet to undermine democracy.
Seeking revenge is an accepted theme in American culture, not only in times of national sorrow – for example, following 9/11 – but also in our cultural amusements. Two movies illustrate the popular acceptance of getting even, The Brave One (2007) and John Wick: Chapter 1 (2014).
The Brave One “stars Jodie Foster as Erica Bain, a New York City radio host whose fiancé is beaten to death by criminals. Terrified for her safety, she buys a pistol and undergoes a personality transformation, becoming a vigilante.” In John Wick: Chapter 1, “a legendary assassin (Keanu Reeves) retired from his violent career after marrying the love of his life. Her sudden death leaves John in deep mourning. When [a] sadistic mobster [and his men] steal John's prized car and kill the puppy which was a last gift from his wife, John unleashes the remorseless killing machine within and seeks vengeance.”
How is it, I wonder, that many Christians, while committed to Jesus as the Prince of Peace, have nonetheless helped to popularize these movies which are based upon themes of vengeance? Could it be that our national tendency to equate strength with revenge has programmed us to respond positively to such episodes of retaliation? More concerning, perhaps, when the example of retaliation is real and not simply fictional the damage to our common psyches is even greater, numbing our sensitivity to violence and pain.
RETALIATION AND THE PUBLIC SQUARE
Karoline Leavitt justified Donald Trump’s remarks at Charlie Kirk’s memorial by saying that “millions of Americans across the country love him and support him.” Looking at the stark divisions in our country and how political disagreements so often spiral into hate speech and even violence, one must ask how the president’s commitment to seeking revenge is harming us all.
During his presidential campaigns, Christian supporters of Trump would sometimes say that “we are not electing a pastor-in-chief.” Famously, in a 2016 interview with NPR, Robert Jeffress – the senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas – exclaimed: “I’ve said I want the meanest, toughest SOB I can find to protect America. And so that’s why Trump’s tone doesn’t bother me.”
Pastor Jeffress must be very satisfied.
For generations, statements of our presidents have been used to help shape the behavior of American school children, as well as adults. Though it is a fictional account of young George Washington cutting down his father’s cherry tree boy’s admission of guilt, claiming “I cannot tell a lie,” has been used to encourage youngsters to be honest. Teddy Roosevelt inspired moral action when he said, "It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed." During the devastation of the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt promoted courage with the words: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." John F. Kennedy stirred hearts to dream of service when, in his Inaugural Address, he suggested, "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country." In a speech to school children, Barack Obama encouraged self-determination with the admonition: "Where you are right now doesn't have to determine where you'll end up ... [for] here in America, you write your own destiny.”
It is difficult to put Trump’s assertion, “I hate my opponent, and I don’t want the best for them,” alongside these others, but his rhetoric motivates behaviors as well. This president’s words and actions have emboldened some people in the Public Square to be hateful too. His unbridled emotions have caused many of his admirers to become unrestrained also – for example, his encouragement for followers on January 6 to march on the Capitol.
Perhaps the words of another national leader can be instructive. He was not wealthy, yet his peasant’s loincloth and shawl, made of homespun cloth, and his simple spinning wheel galvanized the loyalties of the rural poor. He was not a warrior, but was a peacemaker – nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in five different years. He did not escape the assassin’s gun, dying – with hands folded – as he was preparing to lead a multi-faith prayer service. He was not the president of his country, but millions of mourners lined the streets as his funeral bier, adorned with saffron petals, passed by on the way to the cremation grounds. He was Mahatma Gandhi, the “Great Soul.”
Commenting on his own divided nation, where many from the overwhelming Hindu majority – including his own assassin – were angry that he advocated Hindu-Muslim unity, Gandhi said: “The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.”
I think Gandhi was right. We have seen proof recently. Erika Kirk’s expression of forgiveness was much tougher than Donald Trump’s declaration of hatred and retribution. As we engage with others in the public square, may we remember that vengeance is weak and compassion and forgiveness are strong.