;)
The Conversation -- November 7, 2023
Marie: Earlier I linked NYT & NBC News stories about Jack Smith's filings in the D.C. election interference case. Rachel Weiner, et al., of the Washington Post make an important point that the other stories do not: "Special counsel prosecutors said Monday ... they don't need to prove whether Trump believed he lost the race.... The Justice Department ... [said] that what they need to prove is not that Trump believed the 'Big Lie' of the election being stolen but that he knowingly spread associated lies in a criminal scheme to stay in power.... Prosecutors said they will point to several specific claims made by Trump and his unindicted co-conspirators to prove the 'deceit' that is necessary to prove fraud against the United States, one of the four charges he faces in D.C. Those include various baseless allegations that dead or ineligible voters cast ballots, that voting machines changed votes from Trump to Biden or that election workers added fake ballots for Biden to vote totals. In each case, prosecutors said in the indictment, Trump and his allies had been informed the claims were false. Prosecutors say deceit can also be shown through co-conspirator Rudy Giuliani's false assurances to 'fake electors' that they would only be deployed if litigation changed the election results."
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court seemed ready on Tuesday to rule that the government may disarm people under domestic violence orders, limiting the sweep of last year';s blockbuster decision that vastly expanded gun rights. Several conservative justices, during a lively if largely one-sided argument, seemed to be searching for a narrow rationale that would not require them to retreat substantially from a new Second Amendment test the court announced last year in giving people a broad right to arm themselves in public. Under the new standard, the justices said courts must look to history to assess the constitutionality of gun control measures. But conservative justices seemed prepared on Tuesday to accept that a judicial finding of dangerousness in the context of domestic violence proceedings was sufficient to support a federal law making it a crime for people subject to such orders to possess guns -- even if there was no measure from the founding era precisely like the one at issue in the case." This is an update of a story linked before the Court heard arguments.
Stephen Collinson of CNN: "The judge in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial despairingly pressed the ex-president's lawyer: 'I beseech you to control him if you can.... And the answer, as always, was no, Trump cannot be controlled. No mere lawyer could impose the kind of discipline that two-and-a-half centuries of constitutional checks and balances could not provide during Trump's time in office or since.... Trump's combative defense ... revealed insights into Trump's relentless refusal to give an inch to his enemies and showed why voters who despise East Coast authority figures and liberal societal codes adore him."
~~~~~~~~~~
Jonathan Weisman of the New York Times: "Voters in Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia, Mississippi and elsewhere head to the polls on Tuesday for off-year elections that will offer clues to the continued potency of abortion against the drag of President Biden's low approval ratings as politicians prepare for the coming presidential election year....
All 140 seats in Virginia's General Assembly are on the ballot Tuesday, with the Democratic-leaning state's relatively popular Republican governor, Glenn Youngkin, hoping to capture the State Senate and secure total Republican control of Richmond. That feat would propel Mr. Youngkin's national ambitions. But Democrats are running on abortion rights, warning that G.O.P. control would end abortion access in the last state in the Southeast....
A similar dynamic is playing out in Kentucky, where Democrats have leaned heavily on the abortion issue, especially to tarnish the Republican challenger for governor, Daniel Cameron, who, as the current state attorney general, has had to defend Kentucky's total abortion ban. The incumbent Democratic governor, Andy Beshear, remains popular, with a family name (his father, Steve Beshear, was also a governor) and a moderate reputation....
Texans will decide the fate of 14 constitutional amendments, including one that would bar the state from imposing a "wealth" tax, or a tax on the market value of assets owned but not sold."
Mississippi Governor's Race Is All Shook Up. Molly Hennessey-Fiske of the Washington Post: Democrat "Brandon Presley, a former small-town mayor and state utilities regulator, has run a surprisingly strong campaign against Republican Gov. Tate Reeves, who is seeking a second term. Presley also happens to be a cousin of Elvis Presley.... Presley, 46, has focused his campaign on championing populist issues and battling corruption. Reeves, 49, has found himself on the defensive, tangled up in the state's largest public corruption investigation over misuse of millions of dollars in welfare funds while he was lieutenant governor. Reeves is still favored to win -- Republicans hold all of the top statewide offices and control both chambers of the legislature -- but strategists and grass-roots activists on both sides say activity on the ground suggests a close race."
Ohio. Melissa Quinn of CBS News: "Ohio voters head to the polls Tuesday to weigh in on a closely watched proposal to establish a constitutional right to abortion in what will be an early test of whether Democrats can successfully use the issue to mobilize voters in next year's congressional and presidential elections.... Support from a majority -- 50% plus one vote -- is needed for Issue 1 to pass.... Ohio Republicans attempted earlier this year to raise the threshold for approving changes to the state constitution, which would've made doing so more difficult. Under the measure put to voters during a special election held in August, also called Issue 1, any proposed constitutional amendment would've required approval from at least 60% of voters, a supermajority. But Ohio voters definitively rejected the ballot measure, with 57.1% voting 'no.'"
The Trials of Trump, Ctd. Lying on the Stand Edition
Jonah Bromwich & Ben Protess of the New York Times: "Within minutes of [Donald] Trump’s taking the witness stand on Monday, his civil fraud trial in Manhattan devolved into a chaotic spectacle before a packed house. The former president lashed out at his accusers and denied their claims, even while conceding involvement in some of the conduct at the case's heart. Ranting and rambling as the courtroom pulsed with tension, Mr. Trump attacked New York's attorney general, Letitia James, as a 'political hack.' He derided the proceeding as 'a very unfair trial.' And he scolded the judge overseeing the case, Arthur F. Engoron, for having decided before the trial that he had committed fraud. 'He called me a fraud, and he didn't know anything about me!' Mr. Trump exclaimed from the stand, pointing at the judge, who flashed a grin....
"Mr. Trump ... acknowledged helping to assemble annual financial statements submitted to the banks. 'I would look at them, I would see them, and I would maybe on occasion have some suggestions,' said Mr. Trump.... Frequently, [prosecutor Kevin] Wallace drew Mr. Trump in with simple questions about whether he had depended on the banks to rely on his financial statements. Mr. Trump affirmed that he had, without seeming to realize that the question went to intent, a necessary element for Ms. James's lawyers to show. He also couldn't resist exaggerating in exactly the fashion that has left him vulnerable to the attorney general's claims.... By the time Mr. Trump got up to leave the stand at the end of the day, the judge appeared relieved. He turned to the former president and held up his left hand in a goodbye wave." MB: The defense opted not to try to rehabilitate Trump. My guess is they realized they could not control Trump's outbursts even during direct examination.
~~~ Marie: Yesterday I copied many (though certainly not all) of the reporters' entries in the New York Times' liveblog of what turned out to be nearly a full day of Donald Trumpery. If you don't have access to the NYT, you might enjoy scanning the entries I posted. Two favorites:
Susanne Craig: "Trump said the square footage on his New York City apartment may have been exaggerated in part because the elevator shafts were mistakenly included in the total." [MB: Hilarious: Can you imagine one appraiser saying to another: "Say, Charlie, run you tape down those elevator shafts, will you?"]
Jonah Bromwich: "Trump was just asked his involvement in the 2021 financial statement. He tried to answer saying that he was busy with the presidency, focused on 'China, Russia and keeping our country safe.' Wallace, the state lawyer, reminded him that he was not president in 2021." [MB: He's an old man; he can't remember when he was president*.]
I beseech you to control him if you can. If you can't, I will. -- Judge Arthur Engoron to Donald Trump's lawyers, in court Monday
In my 33 years, I have not had a witness testify better. -- Christopher Kise, Trump's lawyer, at the end of Trump's disastrous testimony Monday ~~~
~~~ Jill Colvin of the AP: "... Donald Trump vigorously defended his wealth and business on Monday, tangling from the witness stand with the judge overseeing his civil fraud trial and denouncing as a 'political witch hunt' a lawsuit accusing him of dramatically inflating his net worth. Trump's long-awaited testimony about property valuations and financial statements was punctuated by personal jabs at a judge he said was biased against him and at the New York attorney general, whom he derided as a 'political hack.' He proudly boasted of his real estate business -- 'I'm worth billions of dollars more than the financial statements' -- and disputed claims that he had deceived banks and insurers. 'This is the opposite of fraud,' he declared. Referring to New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat whose office brought the lawsuit, he said, 'The fraud is her.' The testy exchanges, and frequent rebukes from the judge, underscored Trump's unwillingness to adapt ... to a formal courtroom setting governed by rules of evidence and legal protocol." (Also linked yesterday.) Politico's report is here.
Aaron Blake of the Washington Post: "Trump told the judge he knew 'nothing about me,' before referring to [AG Letitia] James: 'You believe this political hack back there.' Trump ridiculed the prosecution's case against him as being part of the purported 'weaponization' of the government and courts. He repeatedly tried to invoke defenses that the judge had already decided weren't valid, including the 'worthless clause' defense. He called the trial 'very unfair' and a 'crazy trial.' He was repeatedly admonished for delivering political talking points rather than answering questions.... Yet again, putting Trump under oath was no match for his propensity for hyperbole and falsehoods. He continued to claim that his Mar-a-Lago property was worth between $1 billion and $1.5 billion. Experts find that claim highly dubious, and the county values it in the tens of millions.” (Also linked yesterday.)
Marianne LeVine of the Washington Post reports more of Trump's unresponsive asides uttered during his testimony in what he himself called a "crazy trial."
Michael Luciano of Mediaite: "CNN chief legal analyst Elie Honig was unimpressed with ... Donald Trump's testimony in his civil fraud trial in New York on Monday.... '... there were a couple of key moments that stood out to me where Donald Trump really made important concessions.... He literally doubled down [on the overvaluations]. He said, "No that's actually worth a billion dollars," which is a surprising legal tactic. The other thing he did was, he simultaneously tried to distance himself from the valuations.... But at another really key point, to me, the most important sentence of the day, Trump said something like, "I saw those statements, I reviewed them, and at times I gave input."...' Honig concluded, 'I think his testimony was inherently contradictory and a mess, but there's some real useful pieces in there for the AG's office.'" ~~~
~~~ Marie: On MSNBC, Lawrence O'Donnell noted that when the prosecutor asked Trump who in the Trump Org was responsible for the valuations, Trump answered, "Everybody." Thus, Trump threw under the bus "everybody" in the Org, including himself. Some expert (can't recall who) noted that Trump's rambling non-answers to the prosecutor allow Justice Engoron to conclude that Trump didn't have an answer that helped himself. On O'Donnell's show, Donald's niece Mary Trump said she wished she could have told her uncle that "pouting is not an affirmative defense."
CNN's liveblog yesterday of Trump's civil fraud case is here: "... Donald Trump on Monday was posting on Truth Social ahead of his expected testimony in his New York civil fraud case and continued to try to undermine the premise of the case brought against him by the New York attorney general. 'Getting ready to head to the Downtown Lower Manhattan Courthouse to testify in one of the many cases that were instigated and brought by my POLITICAL OPPONENT, Crooked Joe Biden, through agencies and surrogates, for purposes of ELECTION INTERFERENCE,' Trump posted on Truth Social. The former president said the case has 'zero merit' and called it a 'witch hunt.'" (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: dbtexas pointed out at the end of yesterday's thread something I missed: "NO WAY Trump wrote this. His propensity for gobbledegook would never permit a words like '...through agencies and surrogates...!'" Good catch!
Alan Feuer of the New York Times: "Federal prosecutors on Monday asked a judge to reject a barrage of motions filed last month by ... Donald J. Trump that sought to toss out the indictment charging him with plotting to overturn the 2020 election and said his claims were full of 'distortions and misrepresentations.' In a 79-page court filing, prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith, went one by one through Mr. Trump's multiple motions to dismiss the case.... 'The defendant attempts to rewrite the indictment, claiming that it charges him with wholly innocuous, perhaps even admirable conduct, -- sharing his opinions about election fraud and seeking election integrity,' James I. Pearce, one of the prosecutors, wrote, 'when in fact it clearly describes the defendant's fraudulent use of knowingly false statements as weapons in furtherance of his criminal plans.' When Mr. Trump first filed his motions to dismiss the case, they represented a breathtaking effort to reframe the various steps he took to remain in power after losing the election as something other than crimes." ~~~
~~~ Daniel Barnes & Zoe Richards of NBC News: "Donald Trump is responsible for the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 because they were the 'culmination' of his conspiracies to overturn the 2020 presidential election, special counsel Jack Smith's office says in a new filing in the former president's federal election interference case.... The special counsel's office also filed separate memos opposing Trump's effort to dismiss the case. Trump previously filed two motions to dismiss based on various constitutional grounds and a failure to state a claim."
Glenn Thrush & Luke Broadwater of the New York Times: "David C. Weiss, who negotiated an ill-fated plea deal with President Biden's son Hunter, is set to defend his investigation before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, the first time a special counsel has agreed to field queries from Congress before concluding an inquiry. Mr. Weiss, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in Delaware, plans to use the interview to counter claims that he brokered a sweetheart deal with Hunter Biden under pressure from the White House. He is also set to dispute a whistle-blower's allegation that he once complained that he had not been given full authority to prosecute Hunter Biden on tax charges. The special counsel 'is prepared to take this unprecedented step of testifying before the conclusion of his investigation to make clear that he's had and continues to have full authority over his investigation and to bring charges in any jurisdiction,' according to his spokesman, Wyn Hornbuckle."
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: "The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Tuesday on whether the government may disarm people subject to domestic violence orders.... The Supreme Court itself recognized this in a 2014 majority opinion.... But the potential sweep of the decision in the new case extends far beyond domestic abuse."
Presidential Race 2024
Chris Cameron of the New York Times: "Five candidates have qualified for the third Republican presidential debate on Wednesday evening, the Republican National Committee announced on Monday.... Donald J. Trump, the dominant front-runner in the Republican primary, is skipping the debate, which will be held in Miami -- less than 70 miles from Mr. Trump's residence at Mar-a-Lago. Mr. Trump also did not participate in the previous two debates. The candidates who made the cut:" Chris Christie, Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy & Tim Scott. The NBC News story is here.
Alex Tabet, et al., of NBC News: “Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds [R] touted Ron DeSantis' accomplishments as governor of Florida as she endorsed him for president Monday -- and said she believes he will be able to win the 2024 general election, while Donald Trump cannot.... Reynolds, who is in her second term, had said she would stay neutral in the Republican primary race, though she appeared with DeSantis at least eight times since he announced his candidacy in late May.... Reynolds' assessment of Trump's electability clashes with current public polls, which often show Trump performing similarly to or better than DeSantis in matchups against President Joe Biden.... 'It will be the end of her political career in that MAGA would never support her again, just as MAGA will never support DeSanctimonious again,' he wrote on his social media platform.... 'Two extremely disloyal people getting together... they can now remain loyal to each other because nobody else wants them!!!' Trump added."
Annals of "Journalism," Ctd. Here's a link RAS has provided to a Philiadelphia Inquirer op-ed column by Will Bunch, which I'm sure is well-worth reading if you have access to the Inquirer: ~~~
Will Bunch: "With the world on fire, a cowardly, timid news media is a threat to U.S. democracy. News organizations are using cowardly words to describe killing abroad, fascism at home -- downplaying the danger to democracy. In one of the most perilous moments of crisis the world has seen in 75 years, and with the basic notions of free speech under assault, most newsrooms aren't fighting back. They are, instead, pulling their punches in a defensive, 'rope-a-dope' crouch, and thus failing to truly inform -- when democracy itself is at risk." (Also linked yesterday.)
~~~~~~~~~~
Israel/Palestine
The New York Times' live updates of developments Tuesday in the Israel/Hamas war are here. CNN's live updates are here. ~~~
~~~ The Washington Post's live updates for Tuesday are here: "Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu floated a plan for Israel to be responsible for Gaza's overall security for an 'indefinite period' after the war in an interview with ABC News.... Israeli forces advanced deeper into the territory, closing in on Gaza City -- a move that U.S. officials said would probably lead to increased casualties. In a phone call with Netanyahu, President Biden discussed 'tactical pauses' that would allow civilians to flee areas of fighting and ensure safe access for aid, according to the White House."
Karoun Demirjian of the New York Times: "Democrats in Congress, torn between their support for Israel in its war with Hamas and concern about civilian suffering in Gaza, are struggling with how far to go in calling for measures to mitigate civilian casualties as the left wing of the party escalates pressure for a cease-fire. In recent days, several House and Senate Democrats have urged temporary humanitarian pauses to facilitate aid deliveries of food, water and fuel to the Gaza Strip, echoing the Biden administration.... But few have embraced progressive Democrats' demands for a complete and lasting cease-fire, even as pro-Palestinian protesters took to the streets over the weekend to demand a total cessation of hostilities."
Share Article
Reader Comments (9)
So today we find out how effective voter suppression measures have been in red states and/or where the majority of American voters reside on the nutty-sane spectrum.
We had only one unopposed candidate running for office on our precinct's ballot. All the other candidates for port, dike district commissioners, etc. were unopposed. After some discussion, I voted for the fire commissioner candidate who bothered to provide information to the voters' pamphlet.
My son told me last night I might have screwed up.
Hope voting goes better elsewhere in the country.
@Ken Winkes: Like you, I consider myself to be a fairly responsible voter, but even I don't take the time to find out who I think is the best candidate for, say, municipal judge. If the position is partisan, I just vote for the Democrat, which isn't a very informed way to vote. But many positions are nonpartisan, and I don't have a clue. Sometimes I've been able to rely on the recommendations of friends or acquaintances who are in the know; occasionally, I've called the local Democratic party for advice because, let's face it, "nonpartisans" can be mighty partisan. Often (but far from always) newspaper endorsements or lists of candidate qualifications have helped me out. But, like you, I am positive I've made mistakes, except in the rare cases where a particular candidate for a usually-obscure position has made headlines.
Although the impulse to elect lower-level officials is democratic, I do think in many areas of the country, we have too many elected-office positions. Maybe the alternative should be not to exactly dispose of elections of these officials but to have a choice as to whether or not we want to vote for a candidate for a particular office or to allow a presiding authority -- governor, board of county commissioners, city council, etc. -- to make the appointments. This would give the higher-level elected official kind of a measure of what the public thinks of them, and at the same time would allow voters to effectively override the authorities and pick their own candidates.
Today's word is 'everybody'
Donald, who thinks you were the most ineffective president* to ever
serve? Donald answers 'everybody'
Donald, who thinks you lie every time your mouth opens? Donald
answers 'everybody'
Donald, who thinks you're the biggest fraud in the country?
Donald answers 'everybody'
Donald, who is correct in their assessments of you? Donald answers
'everybody'
We could go on for days.
Salon
"Dr. Lance Dodes on Trump's courtroom antics: "Decompensate to the point of gross paranoid psychosis"
"The decompensation consists of exposing an inability to see reality""
Bible thumper Johnson
Real Christian charity with Pat Morita and Redd Foxx
The GQP is tackling budget priorities
"Republicans will ... try to pass the financial services and general government appropriations bill. Members have proposed more than 250 amendments to the measure, including multiple Republican amendments to defund Biden’s office of gun violence prevention and one from Rep. Mike Collins (R-Ga.) to defund the vice president’s office."
"'This should be a national scandal': Medicare Advantage plans using AI for denials
As Medicare Advantage plans rely increasingly upon artificial intelligence to determine—and often deny—payment for patient care, a group of Democratic U.S. lawmakers on Friday urged Medicare's top official to strengthen oversight of AI and algorithmic tools used to make coverage determinations."
Re: The Combative Pretender, otherwise known as presidunce Bone Spurs.
What the Right takes for courage is fake, too. He knows he's protected by his money and his four year occupation of the White House and is hence running no danger whatsoever.
Few in history who trade on their bravery have had so little cause to be afraid.
As if these polls suggesting an orange monster win in 2024 aren't scary enough, the stories detailing an actual plan are horrifying. In this one, Aaron Blake in the Washington Post recaps five areas where the monster might seek to consolodate power. Authoritarian Second Term
Here Rachel Maddow interviews Devlin Barrett on the topic Interview