The Conversation -- January 11, 2025

Ben Protess, et al., of the New York Times: “Mr. Trump appeared virtually at his criminal sentencing on Friday from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, more than 1,000 miles away from the chilly Manhattan courtroom where his case was called for a final time. Projected on a 60-inch screen, his image loomed over the gallery as a prosecutor recounted his crimes and a judge imposed his sentence. Mr. Trump once faced up to four years in prison for falsifying business records to cover up a sex scandal, but on Friday, he received only a so-called unconditional discharge. The sentence, a rare and lenient alternative to jail or probation, reflected the practical and constitutional impossibility of jailing a president-elect.... 'It is the legal protections afforded to the office of the president of the United States that are extraordinary, not the occupant of the office,' said Justice Merchan.... Once the sentencing concluded, it cemented his status as the first felon to occupy the Oval Office.” Here's NPR's report. ~~~

~~~ Ben Protess & Jonah Bromwich of the New York Times: “After months of delay..., Donald J. Trump’s New York criminal case culminated on Friday with the nation’s former and future president avoiding jail, but becoming a felon.” This is livebog, also linked yesterday. It's kinda worth reading; if you don't have time or a subscription to the NYT, see yesterday's Conversation, which includes a few of the entries: ~~~

~~~ You can listen to audio of the proceedings, via a CBS news YouTube video here. It's about 32 minutes long. Justice Juan Merchan's remarks, which come at the end of the proceedings, are worth hearing. In effect, he makes clear that the punishment fits neither the crime nor the criminal but is necessitated by of the rights of the American people to have a president* unencumbered by criminal procedures & the consequences of his criminal behavior. (MSNBC's audio was linked yesterday.) ~~~

     ~~~ (Marie: And yet. And yet. The sentence reflects the bad judgment of the majority of American voters. It is an indictment of us.) ~~~

     ~~~ For his part, Trump either does not understand or pretends he does not understand what Merchan was talking about: ~~~

     ~~~ Colby Hall of Mediaite: “In both predictable and strange fashion..., Donald Trump framed the occasion of his official sentencing as a convicted felon as a win against 'Radical Democrats.' He also claimed that Judge Juan Merchan’s ruling of 'unconditional discharge' was proof that 'THERE WAS NEVER A CASE.'... Shortly after the official sentencing procedure ended..., the president-elect took to social media to call the sentencing a loss for his political foes. 'The Radical Democrats have lost another pathetic, unAmerican Witch Hunt,' he posted, first on Truth Social. After repeating much of the same 'Witch Hunt' claims and alleging that the New York Southern District Court was working in coordination 'with the Biden/Harris Department of Injustice in lawless Weaponization,' Trump claimed the unconditional discharge 'proves that, as all Legal Scholars and Experts have said, THERE IS NO CASE, THERE WAS NEVER A CASE, and this whole Scam fully deserves to be DISMISSED.'” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

~~~ Are There Any Consequences for Felonious Don? Yes, a Few. AP: "... unless [Donald Trump's] conviction for falsifying business records is someday overturned, [he] will have felonies on his criminal record, which will affect some of his rights.... Under federal law, people convicted of felonies are not allowed to possess firearms.... By law, every person convicted of a felony in New York must provide a DNA sample for the state’s crime databank.,,, It’s a noninvasive process involving a swab along the inside of the cheek. State police analyze the cells and genetic material, creating a profile that is then entered into the databank.... Trump’s felony conviction could bar him from holding liquor licenses, but that doesn’t necessarily mean his golf courses and hotels will have to stop serving booze.... Trump’s company has said his properties are all owned through corporate entities, and that he is not officer or director of any entity that holds any liquor licenses.Trump’s conviction could also bar him from reentering the casino business, if he wanted, because people with criminal records are typically unable to obtain gaming licenses. Trump once owned three casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey...."

Trump Lowers the Bar. Peter Baker of the New York Times: “'What is extraordinary about Trump’s behavior and record is that the electorate does not care, as it once did, that a president pay public fealty to law and norms and other traditional expectations of the office,' said Jack Goldsmith, a ... former assistant attorney general under President George W. Bush.... Indeed, he has not only moved the bar for the presidency, but is attempting to do the same for senior cabinet positions and other top officials in government. He has picked Pete Hegseth ... to be secretary of defense despite the allegation that he raped a woman ... and a report that he was pushed out as head of two veterans organizations after being accused of mismanagement, drunken behavior and sexual impropriety.... Mr. Trump has selected other candidates for top positions who have been accused of sexual misconduct themselves or failure to stop it.” ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: In fairness to the voters, our old standards were fairly ridiculous. Not so long ago, a college student's taking a toke or a person's getting a divorce forevermore disqualified him from holding high public office. These standards changed as the 21st century loomed. Bill Clinton didn't inhale (right!) and John McCain had been divorced. In fact, so insignificant was McCain's divorce, I hadda look it up to see if he had been divorced;  was never a factor (as far as I recall) in any discussion in 2008 about his fitness for the presidency. But there's a helluva difference between (1) smoking an occasional joint when it was illegal & (2) being an incessant liar, a career grifter, an (alleged!) serial molester of women, an insurrectionist leader & a thief of classified material. There is no excuse for voting for someone like Trump.

Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post: “We should be more alarmed than grateful that the Supreme Court let the sentencing of Donald Trump go forward. The fact that there were four justices prepared to block the proceeding bodes ill for the high court’s willingness to act as a check on Trump once he returns to office.... 'President Trump is already suffering grave irreparable injury from the disruption and distraction that the trial court abruptly inflicted by suddenly scheduling a sentencing hearing for the President-Elect of the United States, on five days’ notice, at the apex of the Presidential transition,' [Trump's lawyers/DOJ officials-in-waiting] warned the justices. This argument took some nerve, since the delay in sentencing until after the election came at Trump’s behest.... The most outlandish of Trump’s claims was that the doctrine that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution during their time in office somehow also creates an additional category of pre-presidential immunity for presidents-elect.... A chilling question: What would have happened if the judge hadn’t announced his intention to impose the wrist-slappiest possible sentence?” ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: NYT reporters Susanne Craig made the same point yesterday about how Merchan's pre-sentencing announcement might have influenced the Supremes' decision. And I'll bet Merchan factored in a likely Supreme visitation before he announced his decision to impose an "unconditional discharge" sentence in hopes it would overcome a Supreme effort to shut him down. Personally, I would not want to get near any of the confederate Supremes because I'm sure their breaths smell like Trump's rear end.

Marianne LeVine of the Washington Post reports that the Trump Organization has an ethics plan that looks just like its old ethics plan, the one that allowed Donald Trump to repeatedly violate the emoluments clause of the Constitution.

Contemptible Rudy, Ctd. Eileen Sullivan of the New York Times: “A federal district judge found Rudolph W. Giuliani in contempt of court on Friday for continuing to defame two Georgia women after the 2020 election. In May, Mr. Giuliani agreed to stop repeating lies about the women, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, a mother-daughter team of election workers in Fulton County, Ga., during the 2020 race. That agreement, the judge, Beryl A. Howell, of the District of Columbia, said was 'clear and unambiguous.' In November, Mr. Giuliani repeated accusations against the women at least four times, after Donald J. Trump won the 2024 presidential election.” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~

     ~~~ Katelyn Polantz of CNN: “'Mr Giuliani engaged in the worst kind of defamation,' [District Judge Beryl] Howell said as she read her verdict, slamming him for continuing to portray himself as a victim in this case and not responding to previous court orders. 'It is outrageous and shameful,' Howell said. 'This takes real chutzpah, Mr Giuliani.' Following the hearing, Giuliani told reporters he believes Howell is 'not American' because she had her 'opinion written before' the hearing. He then compared her to Soviets and Nazis.”

Marie: Oh, I recall when we were all pulling for John Fetterman: ~~~

     ~~~ AP: "Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman will become the chamber’s first Democrat to meet with ... Donald Trump since the election and plans to travel to Trump’s private Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. The trip marks Fetterman’s continuing evolution from a leading surrogate for President Joe Biden into a Trump-friendly lawmaker since Trump won the premier battleground state of Pennsylvania in November. Fetterman since has shown surprising warmth to Trump, complimenting his political appeal, agreeing with him on some policies and embracing some of Trump’s would-be Cabinet nominees. Fetterman said in a statement Thursday that Trump invited him to meet and that he accepted." (Okay, I'll admit that if a president*-elect from the other party asked me to meet with him, I most likely would, although I would not travel out-of-state or out-of-District to do so.) (Also linked yesterday.)

Lisa Mascaro of the AP: “... Donald Trump is preparing more than 100 executive orders starting Day One of the new White House, in what amounts to a shock-and-awe campaign on border security, deportations and a rush of other policy priorities. Trump told Republican senators about the onslaught ahead during a private meeting on Capitol Hill. Many of the actions are expected to launch on Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, when he takes office. Trump top adviser Stephen Miller outlined for the GOP senators the border security and immigration enforcement measures that are likely to launch soonest.” ~~~

~~~ Hamed Aleaziz of the New York Times: “Illegal crossings along the U.S.-Mexico border have slowed significantly as President Biden prepares to leave office and as ... Donald J. Trump ... is days away from retaking power. More than 46,000 people crossed the border illegally in November, the lowest number during the Biden administration. Though overall crossings ticked up slightly in December, the daily averages were the lowest since summer 2020, according to a senior U.S. Customs and Border Protection official.... January is on track to have even fewer monthly crossings, the official said....”

Hamed Aleaziz & Miriam Jordan of the New York Times: “The Biden administration on Friday issued sweeping extensions of deportation protections for hundreds of thousands of people from Sudan, Ukraine and Venezuela in a move that makes it almost impossible for ... Donald J. Trump to swiftly strip the benefit when he takes office. The extension of Temporary Protected Status, as the program is called, allows the immigrants to remain in the country with work permits and a shield from deportation for another 18 months from the expiration of their current protection in the spring. Late last year, Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken recommended the protections be extended in a series of letters.... President Biden has expanded who could receive the status, as war erupted in Ukraine and instability gripped countries like Venezuela and Haiti.... About 600,000 Venezuelans who currently have the protection will be allowed to renew and remain in the United States until October 2026, and approximately 232,000 immigrants from El Salvador will be able to do so. More than 100,000 Ukrainians will also be able to remain in the United States until October 2026. Some 1,900 people from Sudan will also be allowed to renew their status.” (Also linked yesterday.) Politico's story is here.

Michael Shear of the New York Times: “President Biden criticized Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Meta, on Friday for deciding to abandon its fact-checking program on Facebook and Instagram, calling it a 'shameful' decision that undermines America’s commitment to telling the truth.... The president’s comments came during a news conference on economic issues that was followed by a wide-ranging Q&A session in which Mr. Biden defended his policy agenda as his term ends.... The president appeared tired during the Q&A session. He fumbled his words several times and at one point misunderstood a question.... [He] insisted that he could have beaten ... Donald J. Trump if he had continued to run for re-election, but added that he had stepped aside from the race in the belief that it was 'important to unify the party.'”

Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post assesses Joe Biden's presidency.

Tracey Tully & Benjamin Weiser of the New York Times: “Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York have recommended a sentence of at least 15 years for Robert Menendez, New Jersey’s former senator who was convicted of trading his political clout for bribes. The U.S. attorney’s office is requesting a similarly long period of incarceration for Mr. Menendez’s two co-defendants, Wael Hana and Fred Daibes. The government asked the judge, Sidney H. Stein, to impose a sentence of at least 10 years for Mr. Hana and nine years for Mr. Daibes.” (Also linked yesterday.)

Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The Supreme Court seemed inclined on Friday to uphold a law that could effectively ban TikTok, the wildly popular app used by half of the country. Even as several justices expressed concerns that the law was in tension with the First Amendment, a majority appeared satisfied that it was aimed not at TikTok’s speech rights but rather at its ownership, which the government says is controlled by China. The law requires the app’s parent company, ByteDance, to sell TikTok by Jan. 19. If it does not, the law requires the app to be shut down.” ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: To millions of young users, there was no life before TikTok. But of course there was. So although it will be an inconvenience for hundreds of millions of U.S. TikTok users to find other online accommodations (or do without!), life will go on -- and new alternatives to TikTok will arise.

Christopher Flavelle of the New York Times: “... California [is] the state best equipped to deal with wildfires.... Yet the events of this week demonstrate the limits of those efforts, raising uncomfortable questions about whether any part of the United States — even the wealthiest, best prepared and most experienced — can truly adapt to wildfires made worse by a hotter climate.” Flavelle reviews the steps California has taken & identifies more aggressive steps government might take to reduce the risk of destroying homes.

Mike Isaac, et al., of the New York Times: “Meta typically alters policies that govern its apps — which include Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Threads — by inviting employees, civic leaders and others to weigh in. Any shifts generally take months. But [Mark] Zuckerberg turned this latest effort into a closely held six-week sprint, blindsiding even employees on his policy and integrity teams. On Tuesday, [Mr. Zuckerberg] said [Meta] was overhauling speech on its apps by loosening restrictions on how people can talk about contentious social issues such as immigration, gender and sexuality. It killed its fact-checking program that had been aimed at curbing misinformation and said it would instead rely on users to police falsehoods. And it said it would insert more political content into people’s feeds after previously de-emphasizing that very material.

“In the days since, the moves — which have sweeping implications for what people will see online — have drawn applause from Mr. Trump and conservatives, criticism from President Biden, derision from fact-checking groups and misinformation researchers, and concerns from L.G.B.T.Q. advocacy groups that fear the changes will lead to more people getting harassed online and offline.... On Friday, Meta’s makeover continued when the company told employees that it would end its work on diversity, equity and inclusion.” ~~~

~~~ Sarah Ellison of the Washington Post: “When PolitiFact won a Pulitzer Prize for its work covering the 2008 presidential campaign..., the award felt novel at the time 'and really put fact-checking on the map,' said Bill Adair, who founded PolitiFact in 2007. 'It was a moment of promise when people really believed that the internet could be a positive force to empower people around the world with the information they need to make decisions about voting in good and powerful ways,' he said. It didn’t work out that way. Politicians attacked fact-checking as a partisan infringement on speech. And the internet and social media platforms spurred an ecosystem that prioritized viral content and capturing clicks over the lofty goal of providing accurate information.... [Mark] Zuckerberg’s statement [when he announced Meta was eliminating fact-checking] echoed language that ... Donald Trump and other Republicans have used for years to attack fact-checking and social media content moderation.” ~~~

~~~ Annie Palmer of CNBC: “Amazon said it is halting some of its diversity and inclusion initiatives, joining a growing list of major corporations that have made similar moves in the face of increasing public and legal scrutiny.... In 2020, Amazon set a goal of doubling the number of Black employees in vice president and director roles. It announced the same goal in 2021 and also pledged to hire 30% more Black employees for product manager, engineer and other corporate roles. Meta on Friday made a similar retreat from its diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. The social media company said it’s ending its approach of considering qualified candidates from underrepresented groups for open roles and its equity and inclusion training programs. The decision drew backlash from Meta employees, including one staffer who wrote, 'If you don’t stand by your principles when things get difficult, they aren’t values. They’re hobbies.'”

~~~~~~~~~~

North Carolina. Eduardo Medina & Michael Wines of the New York Times: “... Jefferson Griffin, a Republican candidate for the State Supreme Court, [is] trying to nullify more than 60,000 votes in his closely contested race, which three vote counts had already shown him to have lost ... [to] Justice Allison Riggs, the Democratic incumbent in the race.... On Tuesday, the State Supreme Court blocked state officials from certifying the outcome of the race. Later this month, pending the outcome of legal battles over whether the issue should be heard in state or federal courts, the North Carolina court could decide, in effect, whether a Democrat or a Republican will hold the seat.” What Griffin is contesting is the votes of voters who registered to vote on forms the state government provided to them but that did not contain all of the voter I.D. information that is required under the law. “Anne Tindall, a lawyer with Protect Democracy, a government watchdog group, said that 'you can’t allow people to vote with certain rules in place, and then after the election say, “Oops! Now we’re going to throw out your ballot.’” She added that it did not make sense to delegitimize voters’ ballots for only one race, but allow them to stand for other races.” ~~~

     ~~~ Marie: So here's how voting works in North Carolina. You realize you need to register to vote because you've just come of age or you've moved or whatever. So you go into your county clerk and s/he asks for some documents and s/he gives you a form to fill out. And you provide the docs & fill out the form & s/he checks it over & says it's fine, and s/he issues you a voter card. So on election day, you go in to vote & the poll workers check your creds, & they give you a ballot and you vote. Your vote is tallied and everything's all so democratic. Unless a Republican loses an election. In which case your vote doesn't count.