Taking Down Trump 2.0 - 12 rules for fighting the new administration

The beginning of a new set of pieces -- taking the rules for defeating Trump in court and applying them to the fights against the second Trump administration.

This is a set of pieces I hoped I would never have to write.

A year ago, as I was just getting the first copies of Taking Down Trump, I thought that prosecutors were finally following the playbook we developed at the New York AG’s office and applying them to the criminal cases against Trump.

They were following the playbook. But there was a fatal flaw — the senior-most leadership had broken Rule #1 by failing to align and act quickly enough, and by corollary, Rule #9 by failing to avoid delays caused by indecision or excessive caution. And as a result, those cases are now in a shambles, and the club of prosecutors and litigators who’ve defeated Trump remains depressingly exclusive.

Yet the playbook still remains as the best way to defeat Trump or other Trumpish figures. The New York AG continues to use that playbook to win against Trump (the $454 million civil fraud case) and others who corruptly try to defraud others and hold themselves above the law (like former NRA leader Wayne LaPierre).

So can we adapt that same set of rules for the fights to come against the administration? That is the mission of this new series, Taking Down Trump 2.0 — taking each of the original 12 rules and mapping it onto the political and legal battles ahead of us.

The total alignment and commitment needs to come from the top - and for Democrats this means strong leadership from Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer to lead the effort in Congress.

Rule 1 - Total buy-in from the top leadership.

Again, this rule was broken at the very beginning of the attempted criminal prosecutions against Trump: neither Alvin Bragg nor Merrick Garland ever exhibited the total buy-in that is necessary for a case against Trump to succeed.

How do we avoid such pitfalls in the future — especially in the different context of fighting an administration, which will involve multiple different political and legal conflicts at any given time, involving multiple different leaders and entities?

We need a clear and unswerving commitment and alignment from the top leaders in the Democratic Party — an absolute buy-in to stand together to oppose Donald Trump and his cronies firmly and resolutely, in constant cooperation and coordination to determine which fights to fight and then doing so swiftly and decisively. This must begin with the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate, plus the various Democratic governors and mayors of the largest cities — along with the leaders of the top advocacy organizations.

There can be debates over tactics, over the how and when and where of the various fights, but there must be total unanimity as to the big-picture strategy — and a commitment to move with speed and alacrity once a decision has been made. No half-measures. No wait-and-sees. No starting and stopping.

Right now, this means a clear understanding that the goal is to fight the administration to a standstill, avoiding the worst damage, until the midterm elections in 2026 will hopefully allow Democrats to take back the House, followed by taking back the White House in 2028. Our best defense is a strong offense: relentlessly attack the administration as too extreme, too radical, too out of touch with the American people; focus the brightest sunlight on exposing the darkest excesses of their policies and the deeply flawed individuals he has assembled to carry them out.

This coalition needs a target list (policies and nominees), a division of labor (who will be out front with messaging, who will be in the courts, who will be working on peeling off particular Republican members of Congress who fear for their political lives if their votes are too extreme), and then a strong modus operandi of total alignment on the mission and vision, picking the right people for the right jobs, and then letting everyone do what they do best. Once the alignment exists, there can be no micro-managing. For example, if AOC or Jasmine Crockett has been tasked with leading the public attack, don’t try to script them. As long as the alignment is there, let them cook.

This alignment will ideally also extend to the new structures that need to be built in the pro-democracy movement — particularly in digital media, where we need to invest in new messengers, new networks, new entities, to match and then exceed what exists on the far right.

All of this may sound simple — and it is — but it is easier said than done. If anyone wavers, if anyone thinks of appeasement, if anyone counsels caution or delay, if anyone focuses on their own survival ahead of the joint mission, then the effort will fail. Just ask Garland and Bragg.

---

Next, over the coming weeks, we’ll continue going through the other 11 original rules and adapting them into a playbook for 2025 and beyond.