Monday
Jul012024
The Conversation -- July 1, 2024
Marie: Donald Trump now has an Article II that lets him do whatever he wants. This is an embarrassing and shameful country. My generation and the next have so failed the nation that it probably will never recover. Even if recovery is possible, we won't climb out of this hole for a century. If the purpose in life is to leave the world better than it was when we entered it, we have failed spectacularly. Radical right-wingers have nothing to crow about; they are the perps, the barbarians who scaled the gates, the monsters in the horror story. Welcome to the World's Biggest New Banana Republic; we are all Carmen Miranda now.
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that ... Donald J. Trump is entitled to substantial immunity from prosecution, delivering a major statement on the scope of presidential power. The ruling will almost surely delay the trial of the case against him on charges of plotting to subvert the 2020 election past the coming election in November. The vote was 6 to 3, dividing along partisan lines. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, said Mr. Trump had at least presumptive immunity for his official acts. He added that the trial judge must undertake an intensive factual review to separate official and unofficial conduct and to assess whether prosecutors can overcome the presumption protecting Mr. Trump for his official conduct. That will entail significant delays, and the prospects for a trial before the election seem vanishingly remote. If Mr. Trump prevails at the polls, he could order the Justice Department to drop the charges.” ~~~
~~~ Here's the decision, concurring opinions and dissents, via the Court. ~~~
~~~ From the New York Times liveblog:
Charlie Savage: “The Supreme Court has ruled 6 to 3 that former presidents have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts in office.... The Supreme Court has remanded the case to the Federal District Court judge overseeing the matter, Tanya Chutkan, to determine the nature of the acts for which former President Trump has been charged — which are unofficial ones he undertook in his personal capacity and which are official ones he undertook as president.”
Alan Feuer: “... one of the practical effects of it on Trump’s federal election case in Washington is that he will now enjoy immunity from any allegation in the indictment concerning his dealings with the Justice Department. Recall that one of the main accusations was that Trump sought to install a loyalist, Jeff Clark, as acting attorney general in order, the indictment says, to do his bid in claiming there was fraud in the election.... Another practical effect on the ruling; The justices have ordered that the trial judge, Tanya Chutkan, will have to determine whether Trump is immune from prosecution on allegations related to his pressure campaign on his vice president, Mike Pence.”
Savage: “As Justice Sotomayor's appalled dissent makes clear, this ruling is a dramatic expansion of presidential power — not just for Trump but for all presidents. She cites the notorious World War II ruling that upheld the internment of Japanese Americans on the West Coast. '... The court effectively creates a law-free zone around the president, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the founding.... ”
Savage: “In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas questioned the legitimacy of the appointment of the special counsel, Jack Smith: 'If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people.' That is an issue that the judge in the Trump classified documents case, Aileen Cannon, just held a hearing about. Notably, none of the other eight justices joined his concurring opinion.”
Maggie Haberman: “Trump posted a victorious message on his social media site, Truth Social: 'BIG WIN FOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND DEMOCRACY. PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!'”
Feuer: “Chief Justice Roberts's ruling expresses skepticism that Trump could be prosecuted for the speech he gave on Jan. 6 or any of his tweets that day. Roberts notes that 'most of a president’s public communications are likely to fall comfortably within the outer perimeter of his official responsibilities.' But he leaves open the possibility that Trump could face charges for his words if they were delivered as 'a candidate for office'.”
Adam Liptak: “Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., rejecting calls for their disqualification, participated in the decision on the scope of ... Donald J. Trump’s immunity from prosecution. Experts in legal ethics have said that the activities of the justices’ wives raised serious questions about their impartiality.”
Simon Levien: “In a call with reporters, the Biden campaign is using the decision to sound an alarm. 'They just handed Donald Trump the keys to a dictatorship,' Quentin Fulks, the deputy campaign manager, said. 'We have to do everything in our power to stop him.'”
Feuer: “Here’s one of the sleeper holdings in the court’s ruling: The decision finds not only that a president can’t be charged for any official acts, but also that evidence involving official acts can’t be introduced to bolster accusations made about unofficial acts. If I’m reading this right, Chief Justice Roberts has reversed himself from his position during oral arguments.”
~~~ CNN's liveblog is here.~~~
From Justice Sotomayor's “scathing” dissent, joined by Kagan & Jackson: “Let the President violate the law, let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, let him use his official power for evil ends. Because if he knew that he may one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be. That is the majority’s message today. Even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do, the damage has been done. The relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.... With fear for our democracy, I dissent.'”
Marie: During oral arguments Justice Jackson worried the Oval Office could become a "crime center." Done.
Lindsay Whitehurst & Susan Haigh of the AP: “Longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon was taken into custody Monday after surrendering at a federal prison to begin a four-month sentence on contempt charges for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack. Bannon arrived at the Federal Correctional Institution in Danbury, Connecticut, around noon and was formally taken into federal custody, the Bureau of Prisons said. Speaking to reporters, Bannon called himself a 'political prisoner,' said ... Donald Trump was 'very supportive' of him and slammed Democrats, including Attorney General Merrick Garland. 'I am proud of going to prison,' Bannon said, adding he was 'standing up to the Garland corrupt DOJ.'”
Tim Miller in the Bulwark takes apart Democratic gaslighting of President Biden's debate performance. No, it was not "just a bad night" similar to those Presidents Obama & Reagan had in their first presidential debates of the year. thanks to laura h. for the link.
~~~~~~~~~~
Presidential Race -- No Job for Old Men
Jim Rutenberg & Adam Nagourney of the New York Times: “Barely seven weeks before Democrats gather in Chicago to formally nominate [President] Biden for a second term, the Democratic Party is in crisis.... [How that happened] is a complicated mix of historical circumstance and structural deficiencies, a party struggling with ideological and generational fissures, and an aging Democratic president who spent his life battling for this job.... Interviews with top party strategists, office holders and people close to Democrats seen as possible presidential hopefuls suggest that, just as crucially, party leaders were lulled into complacency or pressed to step in line at crucial moments when they might have persuaded Mr. Biden to step aside.... Candidates who might have considered challenging Mr. Biden, after reviewing his weaknesses, yielded in the face of the threat of backlash from a party united behind its president.”
Katie Rogers & Peter Baker of the New York Times: “President Biden’s family is urging him to stay in the race and keep fighting despite last week’s disastrous debate performance, even as some members of his clan privately expressed exasperation at how he was prepared for the event by his staff, people close to the situation said on Sunday. Mr. Biden huddled with his wife, children and grandchildren at Camp David while he tried to figure out how to tamp down Democratic anxiety. While his relatives were acutely aware of how poorly he did against ... Donald J. Trump, they argued that he could still show the country that he remains capable of serving for another four years.... One of the people informed about the situation said 'the entire family is united' and added flatly that the president was not getting out of the race and had not discussed doing so.... The anger among Democrats was made evident on Sunday when John Morgan, a top Democratic donor who is close to Mr. Biden’s brother Frank, publicly blamed the advisers who managed the president’s debate preparations, citing by name Ron Klain, Anita Dunn and Bob Bauer....
“A new poll by CBS News found strong sentiment among Democratic voters for Mr. Biden, 81, to cede the way to a younger nominee. Forty-five percent of Democrats said they wanted a different candidate to take on the battle with Mr. Trump. Among voters overall, just 27 percent think Mr. Biden has the mental and cognitive health to serve as president, down from 35 percent before the debate.”
~~~ Marie: Sorry, but the Biden family and his close advisers are living in some kind of fantasy world where they refuse to see what's right in front of them. And they're engaging in what amounts to elder abuse as they push Joe to perform beyond his abilities. Anybody can have a cold and a bad night, but not like what we saw and heard. Shame on all of them. ~~~
~~~ A Family in Denial. Jonathan Lemire & Lauren Egan of Politico: "Members of Joe Biden’s family privately trashed his top campaign advisers at Camp David this weekend, blaming them for the president’s flop in Thursday’s debate and urging Biden to fire or demote people in his political high command.... Among the family’s complaints about the debate practice: that Biden was not prepared to pivot more to go on the attack; that he was bogged down too much on defending his record rather than outlining a vision for a second term; and that he was over-worked and not well-rested. The blame was cast widely on staffers, including: Anita Dunn, the senior adviser who frequently has the president’s ear; her husband, Bob Bauer, the president’s attorney who played Trump in rehearsals at Camp David; and Ron Klain, the former chief of staff who ran point on the debate prep and previous cycles’ sessions." ~~~
~~~ Marie: Wait, Wait. You think he's capable to run a nation of 333 million people, but he can't run his own debate prep? Nearly everybody close to Joe Biden shares the blame for this disaster, and the family is perpetuating the crisis.
Tyler Pager of the Washington Post: “President Biden’s debate prep went fine. In the sessions, the president still spoke haltingly. He sometimes confused facts and figures. He tripped over words and meandered. Debate prep would not fix his stutter or make him appear any younger, aides knew... The president, they said, was prepared and would perform well.... So aides were bewildered by his performance. Many felt they had never seen him collapse so dramatically.... The president did not just stumble over words. He appeared to lose his focus and often was unable to finish sentences. His voice was raspy and thin, and when the debate concluded, first lady Jill Biden appeared to help her husband down the stairs.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: I do not find it believable that a gang of seasoned politicos spent a week prepping President Biden for the debate and none of them noticed that he was far from able to perform. If some hadn't seen him for a while so didn't realize how much he'd slipped, they surely knew it several days into debate prep. There is no excuse for their pushing that old man out on the stage where they had to no he would fall flat on his face.
Fritz Farrow, et al., of ABC News: "President Joe Biden's campaign on Saturday night, in a fundraising appeal to supporters, said the president dropping out would only 'lead to weeks of chaos' and leave the eventual replacement weakened ahead of a November faceoff with ... Donald Trump. 'The bedwetting brigade is calling for Joe Biden to "drop out." That is the best possible way for Donald Trump to win and us to lose,' Biden deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty argued in the email to supporters." MB: An ignorant, partisan, shortsighted, negative POV. The Democratic convention could be the most exciting party convention in our lifetimes, and it would turn into "chaos" only if Biden and other party leaders and convention organizers planned it to be chaotic. The eventual winner should be ushered in like a hero on a white horse, saving the country from disaster. If Democrats can do anything right. (Also linked yesterday.)
Alex Thompson of Axios: "Joe Biden's close aides have carefully shielded him from people inside and outside the White House since the beginning of his presidency.... Current and former White House aides are feeling whiplash — and now questioning whether Biden could fulfill a second term.... Biden's behavior stunned many in the White House in part because Biden's closest aides — often led by Jill Biden's top aide, Anthony Bernal, and deputy chief of staff Annie Tomasini — took steps early in his term to essentially rope off the president. Even the White House's residence staff, which serves the first family in the mansion's living quarters, has been kept at arm's length."
Alexandra Marquez of NBC News: “Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., on Sunday acknowledged that there are 'very honest, and serious and rigorous conversations taking place' in the Democratic Party following President Joe Biden’s dismal performance at the presidential debate on Thursday. Raskin’s remarks are a break from what most top Democrats have said publicly in their defense of the president.... But privately, NBC News reported Saturday, top Democrats are concerned about Biden’s campaign. 'We’re having a serious conversation about what to do,' Raskin said in an interview with MSNBC’s Ali Velshi on Sunday morning....”
~~~~~~~~~~
Nevada. Isabelle Taft of the New York Times: “Nevada residents will vote on whether to protect the right to abortion in the state this November, as abortion rights groups try to continue their winning streak with measures that put the issue directly before voters. The Nevada secretary of state’s office certified on Friday the ballot initiative to amend the State Constitution to include an explicit right to abortion after verifying the signatures required. The group behind the measure, Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom, submitted 200,000 signatures in May, nearly 100,000 more than needed.”
~~~~~~~~~~
France. Roger Cohen of the New York Times: “The National Rally party on Sunday won a crushing victory in the first round of voting for the French National Assembly, according to early projections, bringing its long-taboo brand of nationalist and anti-immigrant politics to the threshold of power for the first time. Pollster projections, which are normally reliable and are based on preliminary results, suggested that the party would take about 34 percent of the vote, far ahead of President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Renaissance party and its allies, which took about 22 percent to end in third place. A coalition of left-wing parties, called the New Popular Front and ranging from the moderate socialists to the far-left France Unbowed, won about 29 percent of the vote boosted by strong support among young people, according to the projections. Turnout was high at about 67 percent.... The two-round election will be completed with a runoff on July 7 between the leading parties in each constituency.” The BBC's story is here.
17 Comments
Reader Comments (17)
https://balloon-juice.com/2024/06/30/sunday-night-open-thread-were-ridin-with-biden-harris/
I found this interesting for a different aspect of the situation.
https://balloon-juice.com/2024/07/01/stark-grey-dawn-open-thread-drop-out-djt/
This too.
And yet, we don't see articles opening: "Barely seven weeks before Republicans gather in Milwaukee to formally nominate a convicted felon who lied his way through a debate, the Republican Party is in crisis" No. They are firmly behind the convicted bully who is ready to destroy the government as we know it and turn it into an institution of the bullies, by the ignorant, for the donald.
@NiskyGuy: Right on. Although, to be fair, I did see several articles, a few of which I linked, noting that Trump had a bad debate, too. And the Philadelphia Inquirer editorial said Trump's performance was so bad he should drop out of the race (linked yesterday, I think).
Historian who correctly predicted the outcome of 9 of the last 10
elections says don't drop Biden.
I'd be more confident if he had predicted 10 out of 10 correctly.
He also states that a debate has nothing to do with the outcome.
Maybe not, but to me it seems like the 'news and reporting' of a
debate might have something to do with that outcome.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/election/2024/06/30/
lichtman-dems-replace-biden/74260967007/
https://digbysblog.net/2024/06/30/another-view/
One more and then I'm done for the day.
I ain't no lawyer but...
Seems that the SCOTUS has decided presidential criminality is OK as long as the criminal act is "officially criminal."
That certainly clarifies things.
Two quickies on the SCOTUS/Immunity decision:
1. In the syllabus, the writer refers to "the two political branches" of the government, executive and legislative, seemingly unaware that for all purposes there are now three political branches. The judicial is now a member of the political club.
2. SCOTUS remands separate items in the indictment back to the district court for decision on whether the actions are "official" (immune) of "unofficial" (chargeable). They instruct that the material developed in making such determinations cannot be used at a subsequent trial. WTF? How do you deal with the remand without developing the facts necessary for prosecution?
I have to drive this afternoon, else I'd be reaching for the Gordon's for lunch G&T.
Only a ruthless fuckwad who doesn't give a damn about our country would take advantage of the immunity granted by the supreme court, but there is a ruthless fuckwad running for president as the the republican candidate.
The supremes are counting on President Biden to be an upstanding citizen and not take advantage of the power they just served up to the other guy.
How is trying to overturn an election an official act?
I don't even know if it is worth it to campaign. Although I was not surprised by this disgusting turn of events (which one, you say-- and I concur--) I was surprised that the highest court in the land DID NOT decide which things Fatso did for which he is "immune from prosecution" and which things which can be used to prosecute this now monarch. I thought that was their job-- to interpret a 250-year-old document to use as a guide and law for the country. I thought a lot of things...I wonder if it is simply all too monumental to contemplate. How in the world do the three liberal women get up to come to work in the morning? And in a bigger thing to think about: how do WE!? How do we move forward with our whole country practically destroyed by one party? Would this all have happened if one of the other Rs had been elected in 2016? It's hard not to argue that one useful idiot has been used to bring on the worst of that political party. I know we are all exhausted and tired of sharing a country with people who only want their own way all the time. A country of spoiled toddlers run by a mad king...
Tim Miller in The Bulwark substack notes six ways Biden allies are spinning his poor debate performance, writing:
"FOR EIGHT YEARS progressive activists, democracy-dies-in-darkness media types, and self-important podcasters have righteously bombarded Americans with clarion calls about the danger of Trumpian gaslighting. We’ve certainly done our fair share of that here.
Which is why it has been so dismaying over the past few days to see an unending stream of gaslighting from the very same people in the days following President Biden’s disastrous debate performance."
The debate spin isn’t working. And Joe Biden is losing.
My problem is that I don't know who I can trust for real information on what is going on and how serious an issue it truly is. The performance in the the debate was terrible and alarming. If Biden cannot do the job then he should obviously step aside. But I've also seen how much Biden has accomplished against incredible headwinds. He and his team have made tremendous accomplishments and Biden has been at the center of most of it. Kevin McCarthy talked about how formidable a negotiator Biden was just last year. We have seen him on the campaign trail all year doing a normal job. Person after person has come out and publicly vouched for Biden's mental acuity. They could be lying or seeing him only on good days or trying to put up a united front against the creeping authoritarianism, or maybe this is a new development, I don't know. But I can't put my faith in most of the reporting right now because their credibility on the subject has been shreaded from without and within. They have been pushing this age agenda against Biden nonstop for years now. We have reporting that says the New York Times deliberately pushed the age issue because Biden scorned their advances for a sit down interview. The bothsiders mentality has caused reporters to jump on this subject like they did with the Afghanistan withdrawl. Drowning out most other news and looking to take down the Democratic Party a peg or ten for not being exciting enough or equally as bad as the Republicans. This is a serious situation and mostly I'm just seeing hot takes and shallow reporting. Many of the reporters also seem to be dismissing the fact that it was the Demoratic electorate that chose Biden to be the nominee. I will vote for whoever is on the Democratic ticket, whether that is Biden or someone else. Frankly if Biden is on the ticket and wins I don't expect him to last four more years in the job, but I'm comfortable with Harris taking his place now or then and think Biden could still accomplish a lot in a second term. According to my understanding Harris would be the only one who could use the $200 million that their campaign raised if Biden stepped aside. I'm going to wait for the gossip columns to stop or slow and the serious journalism to do it's thing before I completely freak out about things out of my control. Hopefully sooner rather than later.
Thank you, RAS. You expressed how I feel exactly. If we really have been lied-to for years by Biden's peeps, that is massively awful. But what with the spin and the vast array of people who don't care if they stab Biden in the back, it is impossible to really tell. I think you probably read more sources than I, so I appreciate your postings every day. I guess we will see. But it sure is just another body blow today. Was there ever anyone as LUCKY as the horrible Fatster?? I'm sure it isn't his brain (or heart) keeping him on top of everything.
Based on today's news it's apparent that Joe now has the legal authority to call for the assassination of 6 SCOTUS "justices" and 1 former *president. I hope that he doesn't waste any time.
Unwashed, bite your tongue. The publisherr has exposure.
BUT: officers and enlisted men are drilled that they are required to disobey unlawful orders, and are culpable when they don't (after WW2 there were hangings to underline that principal.)
But now the SCOTUS says that a prezdet speaking in his official capacity is immune from prosecution.
So, he is immune if he orders an illegal act within the proper chain of command.
But those given the order are still required to disobey it. They do not have immunity.
But he can pardon them.
Tyrants used to solve that problem by shooting each one who said "no" until one said "yes." That is definitely DiJiT's style.
Welcome to the reign of Genghis Khan.
Unwashed
I can appreciate your feeling but agree with Patrick’s warning.
How about wishing for someone at the IRS to leak to Propublica, NYT, & WP all of the Justices (and their benefactors) returns going back to 5 years before appointment.
While they are at it they could include Trump and all his cronies for a start. This might stimulate some appropriate political action against our oligarchs.
Then President Biden with the new broad rulings could issue the Pardons to the leakers and participants.
As long as it is done with a wink wink and nod nod I’m sure it is all on the up and up under the new rules. That is provided the “gratuity” is not given until after the deed is done!
P.S. Dear Marie,
Thank-you for the work you do keeping this site up and running. Your commentary and others here has been indispensable to not just keeping me informed but sane; some days the news just leaves me feeling shell shocked and only a dose of realitychex does the trick. May good things come your way!
Oops, should be Julia.