Then Donald Trump came along and he took a different strategy. Trump embraced the rhetoric of his base, which was itself heavily influenced by the far-right sources and misinformation that his base and Trump consumed. The far-right was already a problem for Fox, but Trump was a bigger problem. Hannity did a quick temperature check and went all in on the soon-to-be president.
That was some time ago. Since 2016, Trump has grown more confident in his ability to navigate politics. He is more sensitive to negative feedback than many would think, but at the same time, he acts (rightly so) as if the risks he faces come from a shrinking base, not from a failure to grow it.
But Hannity hasn’t fully adapted. He continues to play the role he did with past Republicans, and even with Trump in his early days, helping to reduce or rephrase arguments by providing them with easier-to-understand language and common ground. As the 2024 election progresses, Hannity has repeatedly tried to distance Trump from what outsiders would see as his most dangerous statements. But unlike in years past, Trump has been less willing to do so because dangerous rhetoric is what his base wants.
Before this week, the best example of this dynamic was Trump and Hannity’s town hall debate in December, in which Hannity denied that Trump intended to subvert democracy and seize power, hoping to win over worrying left and old guard figures who were raising alarms about a second Trump term.
“Under no circumstances, you are making a promise to America tonight,” Hannity blasted Trump, “that you will never abuse your power in retaliation against anybody.”
“Except on the first day,” Trump said cheerfully, entertaining the crowd. Trump has since insisted it was just a joke, a whim to seize absolute power for a short time and make a difference, a la Julius Caesar. But this wasn’t the answer Hannity was looking for. The Fox News host had been trying to keep his eye on Trump, with decades of antennae tuned in to figure out what candidates should and shouldn’t say. And he’d failed.
And so began the interview that aired Wednesday, with Hannity again openly asking Trump to assure his viewers and the American people that he would not target his political opponents if re-elected — in effect, an assurance that the stable door would be closed, even though the horses were far over the horizon.
“My question is a very serious one,” Hannity said. “People are saying you want retaliation. People are saying you want the same thing that happened to you to happen to Democrats. Would you do that?”
“Look, what happened to me has never happened in this country,” Trump responded, “and it has to stop, because…”
“Wait a minute!” he interjected. “I want to hear it again. We have to stop now.”
Yes! Trump said something that gives him plenty to excuse for the next few months. Phew. But, as he did when asked about Jeffrey Epstein this month, Trump kept going.
“Focus on the people who want you to retaliate, who want people to believe that you’re going to use the justice system to go after your political opponents,” Hannity repeated after Trump digressed and said he was a “very legitimate man.”
They’re wrong, Trump said, repeating Hannity’s favorite line that it has to stop. Oh, but!
“I have every right to go after them,” Trump continued, “and it’s easy, because he’s Joe Biden, and he knows all of the criminal activity, he knows all of the money that’s flowing to his family and to him, all of this money from China, Russia, Ukraine.”
Another story, this time accusing the Bidens of accepting money from a Russian woman, is untrue. (“It turned out to be true,” Trump said of the story, and Hannity did not dispute it.)
Trump riffed some more, before Hannity tried again.
“Do you pledge to restore equal justice and equal application of the law and to end the practice of weaponization?” he asked. “Is that your promise?”
“Well, I have to,” Trump responded, “but it would be awful.”
Then he abandoned the game.
“Look,” Trump continued, “I know you guys want me to say something nice.”
“No, I don’t want you to say it!” Hannity countered, but you can judge for yourself: “I’m just listening.”
“But I don’t want to seem naive,” Trump continued, “What they’re doing to the Republican Party is trying to arrest someone for nothing. They’re trying to arrest someone who won the nomination by an overwhelming margin.”
He was popular, and the charges were bad, and he had been for a while.
“I will do everything in my power to stop them from doing this, but there is tremendous criminality here,” Trump said. “If they continue to do what they’re doing to me, there will be very little left in this country. This is weaponization. You call it ‘loafing.’ You call it, some people just call it ‘war.'”
He argued that the public doesn’t want Biden to leave office and then be indicted two days later, any more than they want Hillary Clinton to be the target of legal action. But as president, Trump pushed his first attorney general to investigate Clinton and watched as his second actually investigated her. His allies have promised to prepare, and are preparing, a conduit for a criminal response against Biden. The sharpness with which Trump describes his situation may say more about his intentions than his tacit agreement with the points Hannity wants him to make.
Trump is undoubtedly aware by now that his political strength comes from his base, which responds when he positions himself as the victim of powerful deep-state oppressors. Hannity is used to cajoling Republican candidates to turn to moderates and some Democrats, or applying a modicum of establishment sensibilities to rough-edged upstarts. But Trump has gone beyond that, as evidenced by his dismissive agreement. And his base is one that believes Biden should be criminally charged for having classified documents in his home.
Asking Trump to deny retaliation because it would be politically advantageous is a misreading of Trump’s relationship with his supporters and the intensity of their anger toward Biden (who, of course, is not the reason Trump is being indicted). By now, Hannity must understand that the situation has changed.
