Ruth Ben-Ghiat/Resolute Square:

Why Mark Meadows' Mug Shot Haunts Me

The former GOP Congressman entered Trump's inner circle already mildly corrupt, refused his leader nothing, and exited as an accomplice to the greatest political crimes of modern American history.

Meadows’ mug shot, which displays a mix of anger and exhaustion, is an artifact from a particular tradition: political elites who enabled authoritarians and then found themselves on the wrong side of history. He glares at the camera, likely not quite believing that this is actually happening to him. Although there is a shade of humiliation, there is no visible remorse. Like so many others in the GOP, Meadows would likely do it all again if he knew it would succeed.

"It's never just the one individual, the bad actor," says consultant Dr. Alexander Stein, an expert on why people are led to engage in fraud and other criminal activities. "It's always the enablers and collaborators and all the other people who become enthralled by horrific behavior."

Someone said Vivek Ramaswamy is a one man GOP primary focus group, rehashing what they (say they) want. Every point.

It’s true and he will assuredly do better with them than with us. How well and for how long remains to be seen. After all, Donald Trump hates people competing for his spotlight, but Ramaswamy gets a pass for now (so long as he defends and sucks up to him).

Tom Nichols/Atlantic magazine:

The GOP’s Dispiriting Display

The Republican debate was a mess.

Beyond the scorekeeping, however, what the GOP debate showed is that the Republicans, as a party, don’t care very much about policy, that the GOP contenders remain in the grip of moral cowardice, and that Fox News is just as bad, if not worse, than it’s ever been.

As for independents, Ramaswamy didn’t do as well as the talking heads claimed. From Navigator Research:

Independent participants in the dial group saw Nikki Haley as the winner of the first Republican presidential primary debate, as most responded positively to her remarks on climate change, education, and foreign policy. After the debate, most participants felt Nikki Haley won the debate (45 percent), 21 points ahead of Ron DeSantis (24 percent), the second leading candidate. Haley’s favorability rose by 24 points after the debate (from 61 percent favorable to 85 percent favorable), 18 points higher than the next most favorably-viewed candidate, Tim Scott (67 percent favorable post-debate). Haley ranked first among participants in saying she was the candidate who “seems like they care the most about people like you” (42 percent), “would be a good role model to kids” (39 percent), and “would be most able to get things done” (27 percent). When asked which candidates “seem most likely to beat Joe Biden,” participants ratings were more diffuse, with 30 percent saying Ron DeSantis, 27 percent saying Nikki Haley, and a tie between Donald Trump and Chris Christie for third (12 percent each).

Ron DeSantis and Vivek Ramswamy were the leading candidates behind Trump entering the debate among Republican primary voters, but were not as well received initially by independent participants in this dial group. DeSantis entered the night with negative opinions among these participants (net -19; 36 percent favorable – 55 percent unfavorable) and Ramaswamy came in as an unknown quantity with only 36 percent having an opinion on him (21 percent favorable – 15 percent unfavorable). By the conclusion of the debate, both candidates had net negative favorability ratings among these participants (each net -10; 45 percent favorable – 55 percent unfavorable).

In any case, Trump remains the likely nominee.

Yahoo News:

Poll: DeSantis’s support collapses ahead of 1st GOP debate

The survey of 1,665 U.S. adults, which was conducted from Aug. 17 to 21, shows that DeSantis’s support among potential GOP primary voters has fallen farther — and faster — over the last few weeks than ever before, plummeting from his previous low of 23% in mid-July to just 12% today.

He didn’t exactly help himself during the debate, either (see above).

Politico:

GOP’s ‘anti-woke’ campaigns have voters hitting snooze

Polls show little support for attacks on corporations’ handling of environmental and social causes — even among Republicans.

The data comes as candidates who have anchored their campaigns in attacking big business — including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy — are struggling to gain significant traction against former President Donald Trump, who leads the field by a wide margin in the polls.

GOP pollsters say the recent data shows that many voters on the right, in line with the traditional conservative ideology, don’t want government meddling in business.

Aaron Blake/Washington Post:

Americans aren’t sold on a Biden impeachment inquiry

Most don’t connect Hunter Biden’s problems to the president in the way the GOP has

As for how Americans feel about all of this, we can say a few things:

• They’ve taken a dim view both of Hunter Biden’s actions and of the fairness of the Justice Department’s investigation of him, believing he might be getting special treatment.
• They don’t necessarily see much of a link to the president.
• There appears to be significantly less support for this impeachment inquiry than there was for those involving Donald Trump.

Let’s take each individually.

Isaac Chotiner/New Yorker magazine, interviewing J Michael Luttig:

The Constitutional Case for Barring Trump from the Presidency

Does the Fourteenth Amendment empower state election officials to remove him from the ballot?

What would be an example of something else that would be self-executing in a constitutional amendment?

The most obvious example, Isaac, is the age requirement in order to become President of the United States. So suppose that someone who was thirty-two years old applied to be on the ballot in a given state, and it was undisputed that that person was thirty-two years old and not thirty-five years old. It would be the Constitution itself that would empower that state election official to disqualify that candidate from the ballot for the Presidency.

Removing someone from the ballot because of the age requirement seems like it would be easy for an official to do without making a judgment call. Someone’s age is an objective fact. Whereas this seems like it calls for state officials to make judgment calls, which could potentially open things up for abuse. Is there a categorical difference there?

There is a categorical difference. There is vastly more judgment entailed in determining whether, for instance, the former President engaged in an insurrection or rebellion than in determining whether a candidate was thirty-five years old. That doesn’t relieve the obligated election official from making that determination. The process for placing individuals on the ballot varies from state to state. But, under our reading of the Fourteenth Amendment, an individual election official could make that decision himself or herself.

Franklin & Marshall Poll Release:

About one in three (30%) registered voters in Pennsylvania believes President Biden is doing an “excellent” or “good” job as president, which is a slight improvement from his April ratings (27%). It is normal for an incumbent’s job approval ratings to start to increase at this point in their first term. President Biden’s current rating is lower than President Trump’s and President Obama’s ratings in Pennsylvania at the same point in their terms. Despite this, he still holds an advantage in a head-to-head matchup against the former president, 42% to 40%, although many voters are looking for an alternative to both candidates.

16% want someone else, but we’ll see when it comes down to a binary choice. I suspect more than half will break blue and not red.

Note the improving views of the economy, slowly but steadily:

The August 2023 Franklin & Marshall College Poll finds that the state’s registered voters’ feelings about their personal finances are starting to improve, although many remain dissatisfied. About two in five (39%) respondents say they are “worse off” than a year ago, which is down from nearly half (46%) in April, and more say they are “better off” financially than they were last year (15% compared to 11%). Pennsylvania voters remain more pessimistic than optimistic about conditions in the state, but this sentiment has also improved--two in five (39%) registered voters believes the state is “headed in the right direction” which is higher than the one in three (32%) who felt that way in April. Concern about the economy (23%), including unemployment and higher gas and utility prices, continues as the most important and often mentioned problem facing the state.

From Cliff Schecter:

J Michael Luttig and Laurence H. Tribe/Atlantic magazine:

The Constitution Prohibits Trump From Ever Being President Again

The only question is whether American citizens today can uphold that commitment.

As students of the United States Constitution for many decades—one of us as a U.S. Court of Appeals judge, the other as a professor of constitutional law, and both as constitutional advocates, scholars, and practitioners—we long ago came to the conclusion that the Fourteenth Amendment, the amendment ratified in 1868 that represents our nation’s second founding and a new birth of freedom, contains within it a protection against the dissolution of the republic by a treasonous president.

This protection, embodied in the amendment’s often-overlooked Section 3, automatically excludes from future office and position of power in the United States government—and also from any equivalent office and position of power in the sovereign states and their subdivisions—any person who has taken an oath to support and defend our Constitution and thereafter rebels against that sacred charter, either through overt insurrection or by giving aid or comfort to the Constitution’s enemies.

David French/New York Times:

Appeasing Donald Trump Won’t Work

While I believe the court should intervene even if the hour is late, it’s worth remembering that it would face this decision only because of the comprehensive failure of congressional Republicans. Let me be specific. There was never any way to remove Trump from American politics through the Democratic Party alone. Ending Trump’s political career required Republican cooperation, and Republicans have shirked their constitutional duties, sometimes through sheer cowardice. They have punted their responsibilities to other branches of government or simply shrunk back in fear of the consequences.

In hindsight, for example, Republican inaction after Jan. 6 boggles the mind. Rather than remove Trump from American politics by convicting him in the Senate after his second impeachment, Republicans punted their responsibilities to the American legal system. As Mitch McConnell said when he voted to acquit Trump, “We have a criminal justice system in this country.” Yet not even a successful prosecution and felony conviction — on any of the charges against him, in any of the multiple venues — can disqualify Trump from serving as president. Because of G.O.P. cowardice, our nation is genuinely facing the possibility of a president’s taking the oath of office while also appealing one or more substantial prison sentences.

Paul Krugman/New York Times:

Biden and America’s Big Green Push

For the new industrial policy has already generated a huge wave of private investment in manufacturing, even though very little federal money has gone out the door so far. Why?

A new blog post from Heather Boushey of the Council of Economic Advisers argues that Biden’s industrial policy helps solve what she calls the “chicken and egg problem,” in which private-sector actors are reluctant to invest unless they’re sure that others will make necessary complementary investments.

The easiest example is electric vehicles: Consumers won’t buy E.V.s unless they believe that there will be enough charging stations, and companies won’t install enough charging stations unless they believe that there will be enough E.V.s. But similar coordination issues arise in many other areas, for example in the complementarity between battery and vehicle manufacture.

Even before seeing Boushey’s post, I’d been thinking along similar lines. In particular, the ongoing investment surge reminded me of a once-popular concept in development economics, that of the Big Push. This was the argument that you needed an active government role in development because companies wouldn’t invest in developing countries unless assured that enough other companies would also invest.

While Kev highlighted this Krugman piece yesterday, this is a different selection (and a follow-up).

Yarimar Bonilla/New York Times:

Enrique Tarrio and the Curious Case of the Latino White Supremacist

Yet however much Mr. Tarrio may identify with whiteness, it seems that in his time of need he turned to the Afro-Cuban gods. On the site formerly known as Twitter, Denise Oliver-Velez, a professor and former Young Lord and Black Panther, chastised his use of religious beads, commonly used among practitioners of Santería, as a “falta de respeto,” or disrespect. “Looks like the Orishas want him to go to prison,” she writes. If the Justice Department gets its way he will certainly have ample time to contemplate the paradoxes of his choices.

You might have seen this piece, but IMHO Denise cannot possibly get enough credit for her insight and, well, her life and work.

Washington Post:

Trump to release taped interview with Tucker Carlson, skipping GOP debate

Former president Donald Trump intends to skip the first Republican presidential primary debate in Milwaukee on Wednesday and instead plans to post a prerecorded interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that will be released that night, according to a person briefed on the matter.

Trump advisers said the interview had already been recorded. It is not yet clear where the interview will appear. Carlson has started a show on X, formerly called Twitter, but Trump sees the platform as a rival to Truth Social, which he helped create.

The coward won’t even do a live interview.

Matt Robison video from Blue Amp:

Josh Barro/”Very Serious” on Substack:

Memo to Ron DeSantis: Be Smarter The most embarrassing aspect of his super PAC's debate prep memo isn't the content. It's that he hobbled himself with a moronic campaign structure.

The memo’s content is embarrassing. It feeds narratives about DeSantis being aloof and unlikable (an anecdote about his family should involve “showing emotion,” the memo urges) and about him being too afraid to directly attack the candidate who’s beating him: Trump. Christie, whose career highlight involved dismantling an opponent for being canned and consultant-driven in a debate, is sure to beat DeSantis over the head with it.

But the strangest thing about these memos is that we’re able to see them at all.

Here’s your hot polling from the weekend:

And:

But:

I expect Trump to win Iowa (and the nomination) but I expect his lead to shrink.

By the way, a lot of this is Fox-fed Republicans convincing themselves that Biden is a doddering old man whom even Trump/anyone can beat.

They’re in for a rude awakening.

Of course he can win. But a dose of reality is bracing.

WSB-TV:

What is Georgia’s RICO Act?

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has a track record of using RICO charges in unconventional ways to achieve convictions.

RICO stands for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations. The RICO Act was passed in the Georgia General Assembly in 1980 and is used to prove that a business was being used for illegal means.

We expect RICO indictments in Georgia this week, perhaps as soon as Tuesday. But as I understand the right wing narrative, this is all because Donald Trump tried to overthrow the government to distract from Hunter Biden. Or something like that.

Axios:

Why Georgia's case against Trump could be so damaging

3. While the federal judiciary — and New York courts — are averse to televising criminal proceedings, Georgia courts are more transparent, Kreis notes.

• Georgia may end up being the only case that is broadcast to the world, potentially giving the public a better chance to digest the evidence — which could be politically damning for Trump.

Between the lines: Willis is considered a RICO expert who successfully prosecuted a large criminal case over a test cheating scandal in the Atlanta Public School System in 2015.

• She's also using the law to prosecute gang cases, including one centered on Atlanta rapper Young Thug.

CNN:

Georgia prosecutors have messages showing Trump’s team is behind voting system breach

Atlanta-area prosecutors investigating efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia are in possession of text messages and emails directly connecting members of Donald Trump’s legal team to the early January 2021 voting system breach in Coffee County, sources tell CNN.

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is expected to seek charges against more than a dozen individuals when her team presents its case before a grand jury next week. Several individuals involved in the voting systems breach in Coffee County are among those who may face charges in the sprawling criminal probe.

Investigators in the Georgia criminal probe have long suspected the breach was not an organic effort sprung from sympathetic Trump supporters in rural and heavily Republican Coffee County – a county Trump won by nearly 70% of the vote. They have gathered evidence indicating it was a top-down push by Trump’s team to access sensitive voting software, according to people familiar with the situation.

Trump allies attempted to access voting systems after the 2020 election as part of the broader push to produce evidence that could back up the former president’s baseless claims of widespread fraud.

Tamar Hallerman/X via Threadreader:

Next week is going to be busy here in Atlanta: we're expecting Fulton DA Fani Willis to pursue indictments against Trump + others. I’ve been covering her elections interference case since the beginning, along with my @ajccolleagues. Here's a look at what to expect 🧵 

For starters, my colleague @ajccourts put together this cheat sheet on where we've been and what's on the horizon …

 We're expecting prosecutors to begin presenting their case to grand jurors on Monday morning. Past racketeering cases have taken about 2 days to present. Which gels with two witnesses in this case saying they were told to come in Tues

Meanwhile, it’s not just Donald Trump.  Republicans all over the country are upset about losing power, so they rig the system and then accuse Democrats of doing the same.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Vos says lawmakers may consider impeachment if Protasiewicz doesn't recuse from redistricting cases

If Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janet Protasiewicz does not recuse from lawsuits challenging the state's legislative boundaries, Republicans who control the state Legislature might consider impeachment proceedings, the Assembly's top Republican said Friday.

Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, a Republican from Rochester, said in an interview on WSAU he does not believe impeachment should be considered lightly by lawmakers. But he said the idea could move forward if Protasiewicz does not recuse herself on cases he said she "prejudged" during her campaign for a seat on the state's highest court.

Noah Berlatsky/”Public Notice” on Substack:

Ohio's rejection of Issue 1 shows how toxic abortion has become for the GOP Turns out even folks in red and purple states don't like to have their rights taken away.

Republicans don’t want to let voters protect their own abortion rights. So, to prevent the abortion rights initiative from passing, they rushed for a vote on their own referendum, called Issue 1. Issue 1, had it been approved, would have raised the threshold for ballot initiatives to 60 percent. It also required petitioners to get ballot signatures from every Ohio county, effectively increasing the power of rural low-population areas dominated by more conservative voters.

The GOP was aware that asking voters to undermine their own influence was a hard sell. So they tried to rig the odds.

Ohio Capital Journal:

Frank LaRose’s very bad day. Sec. of State dodged press, issued angry statement as Issue 1 failed

It’s unclear whether, going into Tuesday, Frank LaRose anticipated that the measure he was championing was going to fail — even though related issues have gotten trounced in state after state after state.

But by Election Day, early voting had been torrid for weeks — especially in big cities where people were likely to vote against Issue 1, the initiative LaRose was supporting. Prospects seemed to be dimming for the measure — which would have made it much more difficult for voters to initiate and pass amendments to the state Constitution.

By Tuesday morning, LaRose, who was the most visible face of Issue 1, might have been worried. Before noon, he ducked a meeting with reporters. That afternoon, he was attacked by an Arizona Republican who came to Ohio to campaign for Issue 1. That evening, after the blowout became apparent, he skipped a press conference and the official speaking in his place pointed blame at his fellow Republicans.

At 11:23 p.m., LaRose broke his silence by issuing a statement. It was angry, misleading, and hardly a concession that voters disliked his proposal, which they defeated by a 14-point margin. Making the loss even more bitter, some counties that had voted for Donald Trump in 2020 joined the chorus in voting “no” on Issue 1.

Marisa Kabas/”The Handbasket” on Substack:

A conversation with the newspaper owner raided by cops Eric Meyer says his paper had been investigating the police chief prior to the raids on his office and home.

Very few stories these days take my breath away, but this one did the trick: Cops in Kansas raided the office of local newspaper the Marion County Record Friday morning because of a complaint by a local restaurant owner named Kari Newell. She was unhappy with the outlet’s reporting on how she kicked out reporters from a recent event at her establishment with US Congressman Jake LaTurner (R-KS) and subsequent research they were conducting. The cops responded in kind, seizing cell phones, computers, and other devices necessary for publishing the paper after receving a signed search warrant from a judge.

What has remained unreported until now is that, prior to the raids, the newspaper had been actively investigating Gideon Cody, Chief of Police for the city of Marion. They’d received multiple tips alleging he’d retired from his previous job to avoid demotion and punishment over alleged sexual misconduct charges.

The New Republic:

The Claremont Institute: The Anti-Democracy Think Tank

It was once (mostly) traditionally conservative and (sort of) intellectually rigorous. Now it platforms white nationalists and promotes authoritarianism.

Most of us are familiar with the theocrats of the religious right and the anti-government extremists, groups that overlap a bit but remain distinct. The Claremont Institute folks aren’t quite either of those things, and yet they’re both and more. In embodying a kind of nihilistic yearning to destroy modernity, they have become an indispensable part of right-wing America’s evolution toward authoritarianism.

Extremism of the right-wing variety has always figured on the sidelines of American culture, and it has enjoyed a renaissance with the rise of social media. But Claremont represents something new in modern American politics: a group of people, not internet conspiracy freaks but credentialed and influential leaders, who are openly contemptuous of democracy. And they stand a reasonable chance of being seated at the highest levels of government—at the right hand of a President Trump or a President DeSantis, for example.

Mike Pence was good on January 6th, but it’s the only day he was. The rest of the time he reverts to form.

David Rothkopf/Daily Beast:

It’s Time to Give Kamala Harris Her Due

The press has taken too long to notice, but the barrier-breaking vice president has been an accomplished leader and advocate in the Biden administration.

It appears that it is, at long last, time to acknowledge the extraordinary and vital role being played by Vice President Kamala Harris on behalf of the Biden administration and the United States.

Finally, the narratives in the press that had for too long been colored by the political agenda, misogyny and racism of critics, have begun to change to reflect reality.

That said, there is still an aspect to Harris’ performance as vice president that remains underappreciated—the substance of her record as a full partner to the president, at the lead on domestic and international issues. That record not only makes her one of the most effective vice presidents in modern U.S. history, it has been part of President Joe Biden’s active effort to ensure that no one is better qualified to succeed him as President of the United States.

Jamelle Bouie/New York Times:

Why an Unremarkable Racist Enjoyed the Backing of Billionaires

A whole coterie of Silicon Valley billionaires and millionaires have lent their time and attention to [Richard] Hanania, as well as elevated his work. Marc Andreessen, a powerful venture capitalist, appeared on his podcast. David Sacks, a close associate of Elon Musk, wrote a glowing endorsement of Hanania’s forthcoming book. So did Peter Thiel, the billionaire supporter of right-wing causes and organizations. “D.E.I. will never d-i-e from words alone,” wrote Thiel. “Hanania shows we need the sticks and stones of government violence to exorcise the diversity demon.” Vivek Ramaswamy, the Republican presidential candidate, also praised the book as a “devastating kill shot to the intellectual foundations of identity politics in America.”

The question to ask here — the question that matters — is why an otherwise obscure racist has the ear and support of some of the most powerful people in Silicon Valley? What purpose, to a billionaire venture capitalist, do Hanania’s ideas serve?

Look back to our history and the answer is straightforward. Just as in the 1920s (and before), the idea of race hierarchy works to naturalize the broad spectrum of inequalities, and capitalist inequality in particular.

Will Bunch/Philadelphia Inquirer:

It’s justice that Trump, who wanted to toss Black votes, gets charged under a KKK Act

Donald Trump's rise and his Jan. 6 insurrection are deeply rooted in racism. How fitting he's charged under a law to stop the KKK.

They wanted to overturn the results of a free and fair election.

In the days immediately after the vote, there was a wave of violence. Some people were dragged from their homes by members of a white-hooded mob and killed for supporting the wrong party — but that was only the beginning. A Republican governor wrote to the White House to warn that insurrectionists were plotting to storm the seat of government and prevent certification of the winner.

Gov. Robert K. Scott told the president that loyalists to the party that got fewer voters “will not submit to any election which does not place them in power.” He further warned: “I am convinced that an outbreak will occur here [on] the day appointed by law for the counting of ballots.”

The year was 1870, and the state was South Carolina.

This arraignment felt like a mob boss trial. 

"Don't commit any crimes. Don't mess with the jury. You may go"

On the other hand, watching him being treated like any other mob boss in court (down to addressing him as Mr Trump, not President Trump) was oddly reassuring.

Rule of Law and all that.

Glenn Kirschner/MSNBC:

Why this Trump indictment is the most important

The alternative could have been a true national disaster.

This indictment is as important as it is historic. The principles of prosecution set out that the government charges those who break our society’s laws for several reasons: to vindicate the rights of the victim; to protect others in the community who would otherwise be subjected to the continued crimes of the offender; and to hold accountable those who choose to violate the laws that represent the considered values of the citizenry, as embodied in the criminal statutes enacted by the peoples’ duly elected representatives. Another important principle, though one generally associated more directly with sentencing a criminal defendant, is deterring others from committing the same or similar crimes. This last factor — what the law calls “general deterrence” — is perhaps the most important vis-à-vis Trump’s crimes regarding Jan. 6 and the 2020 election.

Mediaite:

Pence SHREDS Trump’s ‘Crackpot Lawyers’ in Fiery Statement on the Campaign Trail: ‘I Had No Right to Overturn the Election’

On the alleged co-conspirators:

You know, I’m a student of American history, and the first time I heard in early December, somebody suggests that as vice president, I might be able to decide which votes to reject and which to accept. I knew that it was false. Our founders had just won a war against a king, and the last thing they would have done was vest unilateral authority in any one person to decide who would be the next president. I dismissed it out of hand, but sadly, the president was surrounded by a group of crackpot lawyers that kept telling him what itching ears wanted to hear.

Politico Playbook:

THE TRUMP DEFENSE TAKES SHAPE — In social media posts and interviews, both Trump and one of his main lawyers, JOHN LAURO, have now outlined how they will respond to the new Smith indictment.

In an interview with NPR, Lauro, a white-collar criminal defense attorney with over four decades of experience, detailed five pillars of his defense:

1. SLOW IT DOWN

...

5. ATTACK D.C.

But the argument that Trump and his GOP allies are giving the most attention is that Washington is an inherently unfair venue for a trial.

Cliff Schecter:

Matt Robison/Newsweek:

No, These Indictments Don't Strengthen Trump. That's Just Media Nonsense

The indictments aren't helping Trump and they aren't the reason he's increasing his lead. For that, you can thank the fact that Ron DeSantis is a historically terrible candidate. As the second place contender, he's widely viewed as the most likely Trump alternative, and as he has gotten more exposed in the national press, he's dropped half of his support. From March 10 through August 1, DeSantis went from 31.4 percent to 15.6 percent.

And where did those voters go? That ain't exactly rocket science either. Surveys show that Trump is the second choice of around 40 percent of DeSantis supporters. Lo and behold, as DeSantis has sunk, about 40 percent of the 15 point evaporation in his support has now shown up in Trump's column.

Benjy Sarlin/Semafor:

Donald Trump is ignoring anti-abortion activists and winning anyway

What’s going on here? Most Republicans identify as “pro-life” and say abortion should be mostly or entirely illegal in polls. But a May survey by our partners at Gallup found that only 21% of Republican voters who consider themselves “pro-life” say they only vote for candidates who share their view on abortion. That’s notably far less than the 37% of “pro-choice” Democrats who say they only vote for like-minded candidates, and the biggest gap between the two sides that Gallup has ever recorded.

Trump himself has argued abortion is overrated as a vote driver even as he continues to take credit for the fall of Roe v. Wade. He blamed “the abortion issue” for contributing to 2022 election losses, saying activists supported policies that were too extreme and that their supposed backers “just plain disappeared” after Dobbs.

John Burn-Murdoch/Financial Times:

Tragic fallout from the politicisation of science in the US

Many countries had partisan divides on Covid vaccination, but they were more lethal in the US than anywhere else

It would be easy to dismiss this trend as merely exasperating — an obstacle to progress on climate change and a source of irritation at extended family gatherings — but over the past 18 months, the politicisation of attitudes to science may have directly cost as many as 60,000 American lives.This is the stark implication of a new study from the Yale school of public health, which found that since Covid vaccines became widely available in the US, the mortality rate of registered Republicans in Ohio and Florida climbed by 33 per cent during America’s winter Covid wave last year, compared with just a 10 per cent rise among Democrats.

Rick Hasan/Slate:

U.S. v. Trump Will Be the Most Important Case in Our Nation’s History

Forget hush money payments to porn stars hidden as business expenses. Forget showing off classified documents about Iran attack plans to visitors, and then ordering the pool guy to erase the security tapes revealing that he was still holding onto documents that he had promised to return. Forget even corrupt attempts to interfere with election results in Georgia in 2020.

The federal indictment just handed down by special counsel Jack Smith is not only the most important indictment by far of former President Donald Trump. It is perhaps the most important indictment ever handed down to safeguard American democracy and the rule of law in any U.S. court against anyone.

The most interesting part of the trial will be the testimony of star witnesses VP Mike Pence and CoS Mark Meadows.

Rolling Stone:

Trump’s Plan to Save Himself: Scapegoat His Coup Lawyers

"John [Eastman] and Rudy [Giuliani] gave a lot of counsel," one Trump advisor says ominously. "Other people can decide how sound it was"

Trump is on the cusp of being indicted over Jan. 6 and its surrounding events, and if the case goes to trial, his current legal team is preparing an “advice of counsel” argument, attempting to pull blame away from the former president for any possible illegal activity. Plans for such a defense have been percolating since last year, the two sources say.

Several lawyers in Trump’s ever-shifting legal orbit spent time both this and last year quietly studying past high-profile cases involving this particular line of defense. The attorneys tried to game out how such an argument would fare in front of a judge or a jury.

New York Times:

The indictment says Trump had six co-conspirators in his efforts to retain power.

While their identities could not be determined, their descriptions match up with a number of people who were central to the investigation of Jan. 6.

Here is how the indictment describes those conspirators. The identities of the co-conspirators could not immediately be determined, but the descriptions of them appear to match up with a number of people who were central to the investigation into election tampering conducted by prosecutors working for Mr. Smith.

Among those people central to the inquiry were Rudolph W. Giuliani, a lawyer who oversaw Mr. Trump’s attempts to claim the election was marred by widespread fraud; John Eastman, a law professor who provided the legal basis to overturn the election by manipulating the count of electors to the Electoral College; Sidney Powell, a lawyer who pushed Mr. Trump to use the military to seize voting machines and rerun the election; Jeffrey Clark, a Justice Department official at the time; and Kenneth Chesebro and James Troupis, lawyers who helped flesh out the plan to use fake electors pledged to Mr. Trump in states that were won by President Biden.

David French/New York Times:

There’s little doubt that Trump conspired to interfere with or obstruct the transfer of power after the 2020 election. But to prevail in the case, the government has to prove that he possessed an intent to defraud or to make false statements. In other words, if you were to urge a government official to overturn election results based on a good faith belief that serious fraud had altered the results, you would not be violating the law. Instead, you’d be exercising your First Amendment rights.

The indictment itself recognizes the constitutional issues in play. In Paragraph 3, the prosecutors correctly state that Trump “had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won.”

Thus, it becomes all-important for the prosecution to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Trump knew he lost. Arguably the most important allegations in the indictment detail the many times that senior administration officials — from the vice president to the director of national intelligence to senior members of the Justice Department to senior White House lawyers — told him that there was no fraud or foreign interference sufficient to change the results of the election. That’s why it’s vitally important for the prosecution to cite, for example, the moment when Trump himself purportedly described one of his accused co-conspirators’ election fraud claims as “crazy.”

The French piece is one of the better reads this morning. It’s not a slam dunk case like the documents indictment, but it’s the most important of the cases Trump faces.

There’s lots to discuss here (and please do!) and/but some of the best stuff is still to be written.

Meanwhile here is the other news and opinions:

New York Times:

A Run of Strong Data Buoys Biden on the Economy

Voters continue to rate the president poorly on economic issues, but there are signs the national mood is beginning to improve.

Polls still show Mr. Biden remains underwater on his handling of the economy, with voters more likely to disapprove of his performance than approve of it. Yet there are signs that voters may be brightening their assessment of the economy under Mr. Biden, in part thanks to the mounting effects of the infrastructure, manufacturing and climate bills he has signed into law.

The run of positive economic news comes as his administration looks to credit “Bidenomics” for a sustained run of positive data.

The economy grew at a 2.4 percent annual rate in the second quarter of the year, handily beating economists’ expectations, the Commerce Department reported last week. Price growth slowed in June even as consumer spending picked up. The Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of year-over-year inflation, the Personal Consumption Expenditures Index, has now fallen to 3 percent this year from about 7 percent last June — easing the pressure on Mr. Biden from the economic problem that has bedeviled his presidency thus far.

Ron Filipkowski/Meidas Touch:

Desantis Challenges Kamala Harris to Debate Him on Slavery

Instead of taking on Trump, Desantis wants to pick a fight with the VP

Kamala Harris, who has embraced her role as the Administration's culture warrior with relish, immediately seized upon the issue and flew to Florida to give a serious of speeches and town halls to denounce the curriculum.  Perhaps most damaging to Desantis was that two of the most prominent black Republicans in the country - Tim Scott and Byron Donalds - agreed with Harris's criticisms of the curriculum.

The always thin-skinned Desantis responded to the criticism by attacking Scott and Donalds as DC swamp creatures who don't "fight back against the lies" from the Left.  The problem for Desantis is that he is getting hit from Right, Left and Center on this issue with no easy way out other than to backtrack on the policy, which he would never do.

USA Today:

Ron DeSantis looks to settle score with Kamala Harris over Florida's Black history curriculum

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis challenged Vice President Kamala Harris to come to Florida and have a discussion with him about the state's new African American History curriculum, which she has derided as "propaganda" and "lies" over an assertion that slaves benefitted from skills they developed in captivity.

DeSantis invited Harris to meet with him in Tallahassee, the state's capital, as early as Wednesday of this week in a letter that blasted the Biden administration and accused the vice president of attempting to "score cheap political points."

The Florida governor, who is also seeking the GOP nomination for the presidency, said in the Monday letter that his office posted on social media that Biden officials had "repeatedly disparaged our state and misinformed Americans" about the state's Black history standards

Bolts:

Liberals Flip the Wisconsin Supreme Court After Fifteen-Year Wait

The high court’s new majority may strike down the state’s abortion ban and gerrymanders, but Republicans have already signaled they’ll try impeaching judges.

Her victory hands liberals a majority on the supreme court for the first time since 2008. They will keep it until at least 2025, when Justice Ann Bradley’s term expires.

Protasiewicz easily beat her conservative opponent, former Justice Dan Kelly. She leads by 11 percentage points as of Wednesday morning, a feat powered by huge margins and comparatively strong turnout in Milwaukee and Madison’s Dane County, the state’s two urban cores.

Philip Bump/Washington Post:

Another GOP ‘bombshell’ fails to detonate

House Republicans are having a hard time selling the idea that Devon Archer’s testimony was important

Despite [Chairman James] Comer’s claim, though, the allegation is not becoming more credible every day. In fact, it is no more credible now than it was in early May, when Comer and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) first introduced it. But Hannity and Comer have a vested interest in presenting the allegation as credible and a vested interest in suggesting that closed-door testimony from one of Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s former business partners, Devon Archer, added to that credibility.

At this point, it does not. And to see why it does not, consider the central argument made by Comer, Hannity and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on Monday night — an argument that is easily debunked right at the start.

Paul Waldman/Washington Post:

Republicans would love to impeach Biden. It would backfire on them.

The dream of impeachment is alive in Congress. House Republicans have filed resolutions to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, Attorney General Merrick Garland, Vice President Harris and — of course — President Biden. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) hasn’t given his go-ahead to any of them, but he is toying with the idea.

Yet despite their obsession with impeachment, Republicans fundamentally misunderstand it. What makes impeachment unique is also what would make it such a disaster for them.

Max Burns:

Greg Sargent/The Washington Post:

Why MAGA elites are facing a fresh set of disasters

In the elite world of right-wing lawyers, an intriguing split screen effect has taken hold. On one side, longtime conservative legal causes are prevailing, most recently with the Supreme Court invalidating affirmative action programs and upholding the right of some businesses to deny service to LGBTQ+ couples.

But on the other screen, the legal causes championed by elites associated with the GOP’s MAGA wing are facing a string of disastrous setbacks.

Walter Shapiro/The New Republic:

House Republicans’ Impeachment Fever Is a Gift to Democrats

The GOP’s nutjob squad is going after Biden and a growing list of administration officials. If they keep it up, they’ll suffer the consequences in 2024.

The Republicans were only getting started last month when Marjorie Taylor Greene called Lauren Boebert “a little bitch” on the House floor in a dispute over whose effort to impeach Joe Biden should take priority. But now the Republicans appear to have a dizzying array of targets in addition to the president, as The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday. And rather than quaking in terror, Democrats should be shouting, “Bring it on.” Impeachment fever may be emotionally satisfying for the Republicans, but the frenzy comes with political costs for the GOP in 2024 and beyond.

The Hill:

GOP’s ‘dereliction of duty’ impeachment argument gets skeptical reviews

Republicans eager to impeach a Biden administration official have rallied around a new phrase to justify the rarely used move, accusing President Biden and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas of “dereliction of duty.”

The term, borrowed from the military, allows a court martial to punish service members who fail to obey orders or carry out their duties.

But experts say the GOP’s basis for removing either man from office is an odd fit for impeachment, which requires demonstrating high crimes or misdemeanors.

“It sounds quasi-official — it has a sort of military ring to it. But it’s not as though high crimes and misdemeanors and dereliction of duty go together. … It’s not traditionally one of the impeachment concepts that you would find in the panoply of presidential mistakes,” said Claire Finkelstein, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who specializes in national security law and democratic governance.  

“They’re looking for a phrase that will kind of draw people in because it sounds semi-official, but will not actually require them to say something true and correct, like, ‘The President has actually done such and such,’” she added.

Jennifer Rubin/The Washington Post:

A perpetually surprised media isn’t doing its job

“U.S. Economy Shows Surprising Vigor in First Half of 2023” a Wall Street Journal headline proclaimed this past week. On Axios, one read: “The economy’s latest upside surprise.” Yahoo Finance intoned, “Surprisingly Strong US Economic Data Keeps Recession Fears at Bay.”

You might find it remarkable that outlets touting their economic foresightedness and keen analysis could be continually surprised about the economy’s strength after 29 consecutive months of job growth, inflation steadily declining, durable goods having been up for three consecutive months, 35,000 new infrastructure projects, an extended period in which real wages exceeded inflation and outsize gains for lower wage-earners. It’s as though outlets are so invested in the narrative of failure and imminent recession that reams of positive data have had little impact on their “narrative.”

Amanda Marcotte/Salon:

Mike Pence's Big Lie campaign trail torture: He's reaping the disinformation he sowed

GOP voters torture Mike Pence with the Big Lie — too bad he was an avid disinfo fan for decades

"Do you ever second-guess yourself? That was a Constitutional right that you had to send those votes back to the states," a woman griped at Pence during an Iowa meet-and-greet at a pizza restaurant on Wednesday. She was, of course, flat wrong, and Pence told her as much.

"The Constitution affords no authority for the vice president or anyone else to reject votes or return votes to the states," Pence pushed back. He even sucked it up and mentioned Trump by name, saying, "President Trump was wrong about my authority that day and he's still wrong."

Pence's willingness to stand firm on this point has drawn him praise in the mainstream media, especially from the legion of never-Trump Republicans who are well-represented on cable news but not much elsewhere. Certainly, Pence has distinguished himself from most Republican leadership, especially people like Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy, who voted in favor of overturning the election even after Trump sent a bloodthirsty mob to the Capitol on January 6. Pence did hang in and make sure the election was certified that day, which showed a sense of duty lacking in most of his party.

What all this praise fails to take into account, however, is just how much responsibility Pence bears for getting the GOP to a place where January 6 was even possible.

A vote “intention” model, not a result:

Jamelle Bouie/The New York Times:

No One Can Stop Talking About Justice John Marshall Harlan

The language of colorblindness that Roberts and Thomas use to make their argument comes directly from Justice John Marshall Harlan’s lonely dissent in Plessy v. Ferguson, the decision that upheld Jim Crow segregation. “There is no caste here. Our Constitution is colorblind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens,” wrote Harlan, who would have struck down a Louisiana law establishing “equal but separate” accommodations on passenger railways.

But there’s more to Harlan’s dissent than his most frequently cited words would lead you to believe. When read in its entirety, the dissent gives a picture of Harlan not as a defender of equality, but as someone who thinks the Constitution can secure hierarchy and inequality without the assistance of state law. It’s not that segregation was wrong but that, in Harlan’s view, it was unnecessary.

Jill Lawrence/MSNBC:

Seeing the erosion of our freedoms makes it hard to celebrate this Fourth of July

The Supreme Court, conservative governors and gerrymandered state legislatures are racing to shrink our fundamental rights and freedoms.

In a 16-year span, George W. Bush and Donald Trump lost the popular vote but won the presidency. That is a system failure. It is not fair or democratic, and it led directly to today’s unbalanced Supreme Court. Five of the six conservative justices were appointed by these two presidents. Getting rid of the Electoral College would take a constitutional amendment, which is always a hard sell. But think of the arguments you could make to both parties. There are over 5 million registered Republicans in California whose votes would finally count. Wyoming’s nearly 23,000 Democrats would also factor in.

Red and blue states are not monolithic. Therefore, we should stop pretending, for example, that there are no injured parties when red states ban abortion or make it easy for teenagers and careless people to buy whatever weapons they want — no permits or instruction required. We should also stop pretending that we are 50 walled-off states, each deciding how many freedoms we should enjoy or how many it gets to restrict. Guns cross state lines. People who need abortions cross state lines. We are in this together, and Congress and the courts should be protecting our rights — not encouraging a free-for-all that leaves some states with far less democracy than others and some Americans feeling far less equal than others.

Tom Nichols/The Atlantic:

Reclaiming Real American Patriotism

This Fourth of July, let’s rescue our love of country from those who have hijacked it.

I was awash in thoughts of lobster rolls and salt water as I neared the dunes. And then that damn tearjerker of a John Denver song about West Virginia came on my car radio.

The song isn’t even really about the Mountain State; it was inspired by locales in Maryland and Massachusetts. But I have been to West Virginia, and I know that it is a beautiful place. I have never wanted to live anywhere but New England, yet every time I hear “Take Me Home, Country Roads,” I understand, even if only for a few minutes, why no one would ever want to live anywhere but West Virginia, too

That’s when I experienced the jolt of a feeling we used to think of as patriotism: the joyful love of country. Patriotism, unlike its ugly half brother, nationalism, is rooted in optimism and confidence; nationalism is a sour inferiority complex, a sullen attachment to blood-and-soil fantasies that is always looking abroad with insecurity and even hatred. Instead, I was taking in the New England shoreline but seeing in my mind the Blue Ridge Mountains, and I felt moved with wonder—and gratitude—for the miracle that is the United States.

How I miss that feeling. Because usually when I think of West Virginia these days, my first thought tends to be: red state. I now see many voters there, and in other states, as my civic opponents. I know that many of them likely hear “Boston” and they, too, think of a place filled with their blue-state enemies. I feel that I’m at a great distance from so many of my fellow citizens, as do they, I’m sure, from people like me. And I hate it.

New York Times:

Federal Judge Limits Biden Officials’ Contacts With Social Media Sites

The order came in a lawsuit filed by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, who claim the administration is trying to silence its critics.

A federal judge in Louisiana on Tuesday restricted the Biden administration from communicating with social media platforms about broad swaths of content online, a ruling that could curtail efforts to combat false and misleading narratives about the coronavirus pandemic and other issues.

The order, which could have significant First Amendment implications, is a major development in a fierce legal fight over the boundaries and limits of speech online.

New York Times:

Republicans Are Divided on Impeaching Biden as Panel Begins New Inquiry

A vote to send the Homeland Security Committee impeachment articles against President Biden for his border policies has underscored rifts in the G.O.P. about whether to try to remove him, and for what.

A vote last month to send impeachment articles against Mr. Biden for his border policies to the Homeland Security Committee alongside the Judiciary Committee amounted to a stalling tactic by Speaker Kevin McCarthy to quell the urgent calls for action from the hard right. But it has also highlighted the rifts in the House G.O.P. over moving forward and complicating a separate monthslong drive by the panel to prepare an impeachment case against Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, for the same offenses.

Neither pursuit appears to have the votes to proceed, and many Republicans are worried that without a stronger case against the president, even trying the move could be disastrous for their party.

Several rank-and-file Republicans from politically competitive districts had balked at the idea of impeaching Mr. Mayorkas, even after Mr. McCarthy endorsed that push. Few believe that the new investigation of Mr. Biden — a hastily arranged effort designed to halt a right-wing attempt to impeach the president outright with no investigation — will yield anything that could persuade them to oust him.

Better headline: Far too many Republicans are willing to consider idiocy.

And that’s more a comment on DeSantis than Newsom.

Wall Street Journal:

Why Biden Goes Silent at Some Key Moments

On the mutiny in Russia, Trump’s indictment and at moments during debt-limit talks, the voluble president has been very quiet

William Galston, a former aide to President Bill Clinton, said that Biden knows the dangers of a poorly thought-out remark. “I’m reminded of President George H.W. Bush’s refusal to dance verbally on the demise of the Soviet Union,” he said. “German reunification would have been much harder to achieve without his verbal self-discipline.”

The current president’s strategic silence is also notable because Biden wasn’t always known for verbal restraint, having landed in trouble for gaffes during speeches and fundraisers throughout his career.

From Cliff Schecter:

Storm Lake Times Pilot (Iowa):

Editorial: No guns in schools

The insurance industry did the Cherokee and Spirit Lake school districts a favor by denying them coverage if they insisted on arming staff. Each of the respective school boards that earlier passed policies that would put guns in staff hands rescinded those policies late last week when they finally acknowledged they would not have insurance protection come July 1.

The superintendents and school board members knew about this hole in their sketchy plans for months but, in Cherokee’s case for certain, tried to shield that information from the public until we reported it from email correspondence.

I hope you didn’t miss Chitown Kev’s roundup from yesterday, and the two big stories are still the two big stories. But other things happened as well.

I was told not to tweet this until the houses adjourned for fear of jinxing it, but the Minnesota legislature just completed what is probably the most productive session anywhere in the country since probably the New Deal. Sweeping bills and reforms across every area of life. 

Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor part[y] accompanied this monumental session with a six-vote margin in the House and a bare one-vote majority in the Senate. The scale of their achievement cannot be overstated. 

It’s great punctuation to the concept that if you want better deals from your electeds, vote Republicans out and Democrats in and get better electeds.

Are you disappointed in the debt ceiling deal or your election choices? Stop thinking of your vote as a reward for good behavior or for agreeing with you on all things and start thinking of it as a hardball message. Think SCOTUS, then think everything else from Wisconsin to Michigan to—as above—Minnesota.

Confused about why Ken Paxton, why now? Nancy Goldstein/Texas Observer can help:

PAXTON IS BURNING

Has accountability finally come to Texas? Don't hold your breath.

What the public saw—regardless of the lawmakers’ intentions—was an eruption into the open of fissures that have more to do with pride and power than justice. A cross between the state’s largest intra-party catfight and its most public self-inflicted gunshot wound, as the bad blood between Paxton and Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan, who serve as proxies for Trump and Republicans trying to distance themselves from Trump in advance of next year’s elections, finally spilled out into the open.

As for Ken Paxton, the impeached TX AG, the meta message is this: the process argument Paxton’s defenders tried (and the strong arming Paxton tried) failed.

Of course, it’s temporary removal for Paxton, pending how his wife votes in the Senate (hey, it’s Texas). But it is a reprieve.

Texas Tribune:

All eyes on Sen. Angela Paxton as Texas Senate takes up her husband’s removal

Ken Paxton helped elect his wife, Angela, to the state Senate. That chamber will now consider whether to remove him from the attorney general’s office. She has not said whether she will recuse herself.

On the campaign trail, she’s known for performing a version of an Al Dexter song, singing, “I’m a pistol-packin’ mama, and my husband sues Obama, I’m a pistol-packin’ mama, yes I am.”

Now that pistol-packin’ mama is one of 31 senators who hold her husband’s fate in their hands. It’s unclear what her role should or would be in the trial; while the Texas Constitution says legislators should recuse themselves from matters in which they have a personal stake, it also says all senators shall be present for an impeachment trial.

Angela Paxton did not respond to a request for comment. All eyes are now on her, to see how she handles this awkward moment with her colleagues.

Meanwhile:

David Rothkopf/Daily Beast:

Trump and Putin Are in Deep Trouble and Need Each Other More Than Ever

Russia’s getting battered by Ukraine, and the law is finally catching up with Trump. As 2024 approaches, the two disgraced allies have common interests.

Once again the interests of Trump and Putin are aligned, but this time the stakes for both are much higher than they were in 2016. That should worry us all. It should worry us a lot.

Insider:

DeSantis campaign tells nervous donors in leaked audio that voters will care more about a recession and Biden's age than the governor's anti-abortion record

• Leaked audio from FloridaPolitics.com revealed that donors were concerned about DeSantis' abortion ban.
• The DeSantis campaign shared talking points with fundraisers over how to discuss the issue.
• They said it would be less important to voters than Biden's age and predicted a recession.

And what if there’s no recession? And what if Trump’s behavior (and the GOP writ large) repels more than it attracts? or that Biden’s age is less of an issues once he’s out on the campaign trail?

Remember, he’s not COVID restricted now (and that played a big election role).

Washington Post:

Nikki Haley let the Confederate flag fly until a massacre forced her hand

She told Confederate groups that flag was about “heritage,” and her campaign said efforts to remove it from the State House grounds were “desperate and irresponsible”

And, as the daughter of Indian immigrants, she suggested that her identity as a minority woman could help her take on the NAACP, which was leading a boycott of the state until the Confederate flag was taken off the State House grounds.

“I will work to talk to them about the heritage and how this is not something that is racist,” Haley said in a discussion captured on video.

Bernard L Schwartz and David Rothkopf/Daily Beast:

Joe Biden Is the Master Deal Maker America Needs Right Now

If passed, the deal to preserve America’s financial standing in the world by avoiding the debt disaster threatened by Republicans would be one of Biden’s deftest accomplishments.

Joe Biden is the Congress whisperer.

Facing the toughest sort of Congressional opposition—obstructionist, nihilistic, extremist—the president has, during his first two and a half years in office, achieved extraordinary results. He has produced transformational legislation like the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, the $1 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the $750 billion Inflation Reduction Act and the $280 billion CHIPS and Science Act.

These were not just complex, major pieces of legislation that impacted the lives of millions, they were each historic in their own way—driving record job creation, leading to the biggest investment in our infrastructure in more than half a century, producing the biggest investment in combatting climate change in our history, resetting America’s approach to competitiveness.

Without a doubt there are things that didn’t get done in Biden’s first term, and there are bad things about this nascent debt ceiling deal.

But as in all things, you also have to ask compared to what? Default? Not getting stuff passed at all? If that’s your baseline it’s a good deal despite its compromises. And the same is true for the Biden record overall. 

Want a better deal than what we’ve got, with less compromise? Don’t lose the House. Put a majority in the Senate not based on a conservative Senator from West Virginia or a corporate sellout from Arizona. Put a winning president in the White House with a bigger coalition. Don’t shake your head knowingly, claiming there’s no difference between the parties.

If you can’t do those things, you’re not going to get the laws, policies and programs you want. And (wait for it)… you’re going to have to compromise.

Speaking of Republicans, let’s look at GOP dystopia:

Texas Tribune:

Attorney General Ken Paxton faces impeachment. Here’s how that works in Texas.

The Texas Legislature has never removed an attorney general. If the House votes to impeach, the Senate will hold a trial.

Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has been at the center of several scandals, faces a possible impeachment. A Texas House committee voted Thursday to recommend the action, opening the way for the Texas House of Representatives to hold a hearing and decide whether to impeach the three-term attorney general.

Paxton, the state’s top lawyer and one of its most powerful and controversial Republicans, has faced criminal investigations, legal battles and accusations of wrongdoing for years. But after he requested $3.3 million in taxpayer funds to end a lawsuit by former staffers who accused him of on-the-job retaliation, the Texas House General Investigating Committee began looking into accusations of wrongdoing.

The vote to impeach is today, and it’s by simple House majority. The article spells out what’s next.

New York Times:

How Fighting for Conservative Causes Has Helped Ken Paxton Survive Legal Woes

With the Texas House set to vote on his impeachment, Mr. Paxton is counting on political support that he’s amassed as a Republican legal firebrand.

Now, facing his own political showdown in the Texas House of Representatives on Saturday as the House prepares to vote on impeaching him, Mr. Paxton made the stakes plain for his Republican supporters.

In a news conference on Friday, he reminded them that he was “leading dozens of urgent challenges against Biden’s unlawful policies” and said that the “illegal impeachment scheme” was playing into the Democrats’ longstanding goal of removing him from office. He then called on supporters to come to the State Capitol on Saturday “to peacefully come let their voices be heard."

Michael Hiltzik/Los Angeles Times:

A glimpse into the dystopian abyss of President DeSantis’ America

Press interest has perked up lately, with DeSantis’ policy initiatives becoming more febrile as his announcement draws nigh.

But the press hasn’t begun to devote sufficient attention to the curious experiment DeSantis has launched, based on the hypothesis that it’s possible to win a presidential nomination, not to mention a presidential election, by appealing exclusively to a bloc of racists, antisemites, gun nuts and other nightcrawlers of the far right. An America led by DeSantis as he has portrayed himself thus far would be a dystopian hellhole.

Let the examination begin.

It would be proper to start with scrutiny of DeSantis’ positions on the most important geopolitical issues of our time, if they could be detected.

Well, that’s disqualifying.

Mariano Alfero/Washington Post:

DeSantis says, if elected president, he’d consider pardons for Jan. 6 offenders

Hosts of the conservative “The Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Show” asked DeSantis if he thinks Jan. 6 defendants “deserve to have their cases examined by a Republican president,” and whether he would pardon former president Donald Trump if he were “charged with federal offenses.” DeSantis said that on his first day in office, he would “have folks that will get together and look at all these cases.”

“Now, some of these case, some people may have a technical violation of the law,” DeSantis said. “But if there are three other people who did the same thing but just in a context, like [the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020] and they don’t get prosecuted at all, that is uneven application of justice, and so … we will use the pardon power.”

That, right there, is disqualifying.

NBC News:

Ron DeSantis administration officials solicit campaign cash from lobbyists

The practice raises ethical and legal questions about state employees trying to raise campaign cash from lobbyists who have business currently before the governor.

NBC News reviewed text messages from four DeSantis administration officials, including those directly in the governor's office and with leadership positions in state agencies. They requested the recipient of the message contribute to the governor’s campaign through a specific link that appeared to track who is giving as part of a “bundle” program.

“The bottom line is that the administration appears to be keeping tabs on who is giving, and are doing it using state staff,” a longtime Florida lobbyist said. “You are in a prisoner’s dilemma. They are going to remain in power. We all understand that.”

NBC News is not naming the specific staffers who sent the text messages because it could out the lobbyists who received the messages and shared them.

This is the way DeSantis runs Florida. It’s as disqualifying as his January 6th comments..

All of that is just a reminder that DeSantis is a pretty bad character, and in no way a ”better” choice for America than Donald Trump.

CT Mirror:

After long debate, CT Senate advances state voting rights act

The Connecticut Senate on Thursday night advanced a landmark bill intended to protect historically disenfranchised communities from discrimination at the ballot box, including key protections once considered a stronghold of the federal Voting Rights Act before it was gutted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Senate Bill 1226, dubbed the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of Connecticut — a nod to the late civil rights icon — passed on a 27-9 vote just before midnight, following hours of emotionally charged debate among lawmakers over what the proposal would accomplish. The Senate’s approval of the comprehensive bill marked the first time it passed out of either chamber since it was initially introduced in 2021.

Even blue states have work to do. 

Jonathan Martin/Politico:

Are the Anti-Trump GOP Forces Starting to Implode?

A mission-control breakdown for DeSantis and smooth launch for Scott bode ill for those hoping to thwart the former president.

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. — Will this go down as the week that the grand plan to deny Donald Trump the nomination fell apart?

For months, high-level Republican lawmakers, donors and strategists eager to block Trump have described, in separate conversations with me, an endgame to the presidential primary.

When it becomes clear in the early state and national polling who is consolidating support, the most influential figures with ties to the lagging candidates will stage a sort of political intervention and tell them it’s time to quit and rally to the strongest alternative to Trump.

Such a plot always struck me as a bit far-fetched, for starters because politicians aren’t known for putting party ahead of self. Yet the appetite among elite Republicans to move past Trump was and is so immense I thought there could at least be a do-the-right-thing effort.

Yet as spring turns to summer, traditionally the period when presidential hopefuls consider whether they’re gaining any traction, this vision seems more fantasy than strategy.

We don’t win based on merits alone. We win by doing the hard work (see Wisconsin). 

Lisa Rubin/Twitter:

Tonight, the Manhattan DA’s office publicly released a list of discovery items it has produced or will soon produce to Trump. Those items include a number of recorded conversations, including one between a witness and Trump. But something else interests me more. 

In New York state, a defendant is entitled to receive all witness testimony before the grand jury and any and all other witness statements provided to the relevant prosecutor’s office. But here, the Manhattan DA’s office also attached this two-page list of books.

Why? Because these books themselves may contain relevant witness statements. And it is quite a collection.

These are political books, gossip books and other books of interest  included in discovery. Give the thread a read.

On a different topic, here’s Cliff Schecter on freshman Dan Goldman and his approach to Congressional BS: