ABC News:

Appeals court rejects Trump's immunity claim in federal election interference case

Trump had wanted the case dismissed based on his claim of "absolute immunity."

"We cannot accept former President Trump's claim that a President has unbounded authority to commit crimes that would neutralize the most fundamental check on executive power -- the recognition and implementation of election results," wrote the judges. "Nor can we sanction his apparent contention that the Executive has carte blanche to violate the rights of individual citizens to vote and to have their votes count."

"At bottom, former President Trump's stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the President beyond the reach of all three Branches," they wrote

Happy "no blanket presidential immunity" day for those who celebrate. As Joe Biden probably said to his staff, this is a BFD. Trump has until Monday to appeal.

See also SCOTUSBlog for a cert explainer, since that’s where this is headed.

PBS/NPR/Marist poll suggests the public agrees with the decision:

Trump should not get immunity, 2 out of 3 Americans say

About two-thirds of U.S. adults do not think former President Donald Trump should have immunity from criminal prosecution for actions he took while president, according to a PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll to be released Wednesday. The majority of Americans are aligned with a new federal appeals court ruling that found Trump can stand trial on charges tied to a plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

On the immigration issue, Catherine Rampell/Washington Post writes:

The GOP dog caught the car. Again.

Unlike the Obamacare repeal debacle, the passage of the Senate border bill would not be so terrible. I maintain serious concerns about its Title 42-like powers, as well as some other provisions relating to asylum. But much of the bill would make useful changes that should, theoretically, receive robust bipartisan support.

For example, it would invest much-needed resources in the border. It would give our Afghan allies — people who’ve already been vetted and are here in the United States but stuck in legal limbo — a pathway to permanent legal status. And for the first time, it would mandate that vulnerable, unaccompanied children seeking asylum receive legal counsel.

The White House and the bill’s Senate negotiators are now trying to defend it against myriad falsehoods about open borders and the like. But the burden of proving — or disproving — the merits of this hard-fought deal should be on the speaker: What, exactly, is Johnson’s objection to doing so many things his party ran for office to do?

Michael Tomasky/The New Republic:

The GOP Owns the Border Now. Here’s How Democrats Make Sure of It.

Hard-right Republicans killed the Senate immigration deal out of fealty to Trump. That’s the perfect opening for Biden to go on the attack.

Last week, momentarily and evidently naïvely, I was actually impressed that some number of Republican senators, apparently a majority of them, was going to stand up to Trump and defy his wishes by voting for this bill. That was how it looked last Thursday. I almost devoted my newsletter last Friday to the topic, telling readers to take note of this moment, because it may signal a new willingness on the part of some prominent Republicans to stand up to Trump.

Some reflex deep inside me counseled that I might live to regret putting the words “Republicans” and “principles” in the same sentence. The angel on my shoulder knew better.

Marc Jacob/”Stop the Presses” on Substack:

A dozen reasons Trump’s dictator threat is real

The short-attention-span media need to dwell on the danger

The news media aren’t talking enough about Donald Trump’s dictatorial ambitions. Sure, they quote his praise of despots and his dreams of “retribution,” but they need to make his stated intentions a major theme of campaign coverage.

In virtually every story about the campaign, they need to include at least a background sentence or two to remind people that he aims to be an autocrat if he wins. Repetition matters, as the right has long known and mainstream media often forget.

Brian Beutler/Off Message:

The Mainstream Media Should Be Honest About Trump’s Border Sabotage

And Joe Biden should bully them into it

One of my first pieces for Off Message encouraged President Biden to (as we say in the business) “work the media refs” more consistently. Their doom-laden coverage of his Afghanistan withdrawal and the economy’s recovery from the pandemic left Americans badly misinformed and, relatedly, helped tank his public approval. A bit of grabbing the bull by the horns was thus in order and badly needed.

Well, it still is, and the House GOP’s seemingly successful effort to sabotage the Senate’s bipartisan border security and foreign aid bill presents another great opportunity: Everyone knows House Republicans took orders from Donald Trump, and Trump’s been quite clear that he wants to kill the Senate bill so that the border remains overwhelmed, and he can blame the disorder on Biden during the campaign.

But Trump’s self-interested angle on this bill is often omitted from or buried in news reports, when it’s really the whole story. And unless this pattern of subterfuge is widely understood, Trump’s plan could work

And now for a musical interlude...

Jonathan Weiler/”Jonathan’s Quality Kvetching Newsletter” on Substack:

Why has Taylor Swift driven the rightwing crazy on the eve of the Super Bowl? A modest proposal :)

Enter Taylor Swift. For a quick refresher, she began dating KC tight end, Travis Kelce, during the 2023 season. Kelce is Mahomes’ favorite receiving target and is widely regarded as one of the best pass catching tight ends of all time, a key cog in the Chiefs’ two Super Bowl victories in the past four seasons. All of this was true and uncontroversial before last fall. But once his relationship with the planet's biggest pop star became public, and that pop star began regularly attending Kansas City games, the hype machines around both Swift and the NFL kicked into overdrive.1

That was a source of deep resentment for rightwing media even before last week. Swift has been a bane on the right for years now, especially since she endorsed Joe Biden in 2020. And Kelce has served as a pitchman for Pfizer's Covid vaccine which, you know….

John Fugelsang/X via Threadreader on the heels of Tracy Chapman’s Grammy duet with Luke Combs:

I can name TONS of great Tracy Chapman songs. (a somewhat outraged thread) (1) -"Baby Can I Hold You" was covered by everybody from Pavarotti to George Michael to Neil Diamond to Nicki Minaj -Clapton covered "Gimme One Reason" -Neil Young played on Tracy Chapman's 2nd album

Do we induct people into the rock ‘n’ roll Hall of Fame because of their sexuality? I thought it was about the music they produced. Can you name three Tracy Chapman songs? If you do… You googled it.

— Bill Miller (@MelaninDeficien) February 6, 2024

Read the whole thread, or just watch this:

USA Today:

For President Biden, the economy goes from election liability to a potential strength in 2024

The recession that many economists predicted hasn't happened.

Consumer confidence is surging.

The stock market has soared to all-time highs.

And on Friday came a robust jobs report, with the U.S. economy adding 353,000 jobs in January, according to the Labor Department − nearly twice what was projected.

Here are some headlines on the good news:

The New York Times: 

January Jobs Report

U.S. Job Growth Surges

The labor market added 353,000 jobs in January, far more than expected, in a sign that economic growth remains vigorous.

The Wall Street Journal:

Jobs Growth of 353,000 Blasts Past Expectations as Labor Market Stays Hot

Unemployment was 3.7% as labor market defies predictions of significant slowdown

The Washington Post:

Labor market grew 353,000 in January, soaring past expectations

The unemployment rate has now been below 4 percent for two years -- the longest stretch since the 1960s

The economy is undeniably good. Want more proof? Look at this guy:

Or her:

Meanwhile …

POLITICO Magazine:

30 Things Joe Biden Did as President You Might Have Missed

Drone armies, expanded overtime pay and over-the-counter birth control pills are just some of the new things Biden has ushered in as president that you might not have heard about.

Most of the work of government doesn’t go viral on social media or become fodder for TV talking heads. Every president’s administration makes changes both significant and trivial that largely escape the public’s attention — yet many have long-lasting impact.

So we asked POLITICO’s newsroom, including the reporters who track the minutiae of government policy, to tell us about the major but under-the-radar changes made so far during Biden’s tenure that most of us might have missed. And there was a lot, from building drone armies to making birth control pills available in drug stores to lowering overdraft fees and loosening restrictions on marijuana. His administration even made a big decision on the colors for Air Force One, the president’s official aircraft.

Here’s what they said. (And if you’re curious, here’s a similar list we compiled for Donald Trump’s presidency.)

The Daily Mail:

Mayorkas impeachment in doubt as outgoing Republican Ken Buck says he will vote AGAINST it: GOP facing disaster if one more member rejects probe over border chaos

• 'It's maladministration. He's terrible, the border is a disaster, but that's not impeachable,' Buck told reporters
• 'The people that I'm talking to on the outside, constitutional experts, former members, agree that this just isn't an impeachable offense,' Buck said

CNN:

House GOP skeptical Biden inquiry leads to impeachment as election draws near

A growing number of senior House Republicans are coming to terms with a stark realization: It is unlikely that their monthslong investigation into Joe Biden will actually lead to impeaching the president.

Top Republicans are not expected to make an official decision on whether to pursue impeachment articles until after a pair of high-stakes depositions later this month with Hunter Biden and the president’s brother, James. But serious doubts are growing inside the GOP that they will be able to convince their razor-thin majority to back the politically perilous impeachment effort in an election-year, according to interviews with over a dozen Republican lawmakers and aides, including some who are close to the probe.

While no formal whip count ahas been conducted, one GOP lawmaker estimated there are around 20 House Republicans who are not convinced there is evidence for impeachment, and Republicans can only lose two votes in the current House margins.

Charlie Sykes/The Bulwark:

The GOP’s Sop to Cerberus

Grassley’s comment wasn’t a gaffe.

Even as the resident senior citizen around here, I find myself wishing that I could write off Iowa Senator Chuck Grasley’s latest gaucherie as the result of senility. But no such luck.

When Grassley raised doubts about a bipartisan tax cut bill because it would make President Biden “look good,” and make it harder for Donald Trump to regain the White House, the remark hardly qualified as a gaffe in today’s GOP.

To be sure, the octogenarian seemed confused about some of the details. “Passing a tax bill that makes the president look good — mailing out checks before the election — means he could be re-elected, and then we won’t extend the 2017 tax cuts,” Grassley said. There are, however, no checks in this bill. It’s a tax credit. For children.1 The bill is also packed with goodies for businesses, making it exactly the sort of thing that Republicans from the Before Times would have enthusiastically embraced.

The legislation is so popular that it passed a bitterly divided House by a huge margin — 357-70. Now it goes to the Senate where it faces Grassley. And Trump.

At this point, the details of the bill aren’t really that important here. What Grassley was saying was that helping Trump is more important than that passing any legislation. And, despite the House vote, he reflected the central dynamic of the GOP in 2024.

• It’s why Republicans will likely kill a border bill that includes almost everything they want.

• It’s why they have tanked proposals to aid Ukraine and Israel.

• It’s why they consistently opt for chaos over the more mundane business of actual governing.

It’s just the GOP’s latest sop to Cerberus.

Cliff Schecter reviews how to do a proper interview:

Brian Beutler/Off Message:

This Is Why Trump Is So Desperate To End The GOP Primary

He's winning handily, but he's in for a ton of bad news before Haley's last stand in South Carolina

The jury awarded Carroll a mere high-eight figures in damages. But Judge Arthur Engoron’s verdict in Trump’s civil fraud case is still due imminently, as is a DC Circuit Court of Appeals’s decision rejecting Trump’s claim to immunity for all crimes he committed as president. Trump will appeal all of these, but they each give Haley real fodder to confront Republican voters with the immense risk they’d be taking by nominating Trump for a third time: He’s impulsively crooked and consequences will catch up with him before the election.

Haley still won’t put it as bluntly as possible, still won’t warn Republicans that Trump, as a crook, could end up justifiably imprisoned later this year. But she’s moving in that direction.

“I absolutely trust the jury,” she told Meet the Press on Sunday. “And I think that they made their decision based on the evidence.” It’s not a hoax; it’s not a witch hunt.

Brian Beutler/Off Message:

Taylor Swift Exposed The GOP Freakshow By Being Normal

Maybe Republicans should wonder why all the attractive, likable people hate them?

There’s nothing terribly interesting underlying this bizarre freakout. Swift has millions of devoted fans and is also a liberal who endorsed Biden in 2020. Since this year’s election is shaping up as a 2020 rematch, she’s likely to endorse Biden again. If that’s interesting for any reason it’s because it exposes the intentionality behind the Big Lie: The same propagandists who apparently fear Swift’s mobilizing powers also claim Trump won in 2020—if their “rigged election” conspiracy theories were sincerely held, they wouldn’t fear that Swift’s endorsement might make Biden unbeatable.

David Rothkopf/Daily beast:

A Gaza Ceasefire Deal Is the Only Way to Avoid a Wider War

If the war between Israel and Hamas rages on indefinitely, the conflict will spread. It doesn’t have to be that way.

Republicans calling for massive attacks against Iran and its proxies—like Sens. Tom Cotton, Roger Wicker, Lindsey Graham, and John Cornyn—argue that this attack was just one among over 160 that have targeted U.S. personnel stationed in the region, arguing that U.S. deterrence strategies have been unsuccessful.

That said, calls for direct attacks against Iran, long a goal of Iran hawks, must be weighed not against past grievances, but against the consequences those attacks would have.

Such attacks could trigger a full-scale region-wide war that would put thousands of U.S. forces at risk and could necessitate deployments that would put even more members of the U.S. armed services in harm’s way. The U.S. and our allies must also be cognizant of the fact that an ill-considered or badly timed response could cause Iran to seek to derail talks between its proxy, Hamas, the Israelis, the U.S,. and intermediaries like Qatar.

Because the war in Gaza is the proximate cause of much of the heightened tension in the region (although admittedly far from all of it) and, therefore, because producing a ceasefire or moving toward a longer-term settlement in that war is one of the best ways of reducing risks to U.S. troops and facilities—as well as those of our allies—and because we appear to be at a very delicate point in negotiations to release Israeli hostages that might produce at least a ceasefire of some meaningful duration, the wrong kind of response could produce the opposite of the effect we seek.

On the domestic front, you can read the details here on the sham impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas from David J Bier, but this will give you the gist of it:

Jamelle Bouie/New York Times:

If It Walks Like an Insurrection and Talks Like an Insurrection …

I’ve argued, relying on evidence drawn from an amicus brief to the Colorado Supreme Court, that the former president’s actions make him an insurrectionist by any reasonable definition of the term and certainly as it was envisioned by the drafters of the 14th Amendment, who experienced insurrection firsthand. If that isn’t persuasive, consider the evidence marshaled by the legal scholars Akhil Reed Amar and Vikram David Amar in a more recent amicus brief. They argue that top of mind for the drafters of the 14th Amendment were the actions of John B. Floyd, the secretary of war during the secession crisis of November 1860 to March 1861.

During the crucial weeks after the election of Abraham Lincoln, as pro-slavery radicals organized secession conventions throughout the South, Floyd, “an unapologetic Virginia slaveholder,” Amar and Amar write, used his authority to, in the words of Ulysses S. Grant, distribute “the cannon and small arms from Northern arsenals throughout the South so as to be on hand when treason wanted them.” When it became clear that President James Buchanan would not surrender Fort Sumter to South Carolina, in late December, Floyd resigned to join the Confederacy.

What’s more, the Amars note, “the insurrectionary betrayals perpetrated by Floyd and other top officials in the lame-duck Buchanan administration went far beyond the abandonment of Southern forts. They also involved, through both actions and inactions of Floyd and his allies, efforts to prevent President-elect Lincoln from lawfully assuming power at his inauguration.”

Adam Bass/Third Party Crashers:

No champions for No Labels means yes problems

How a lack of eager candidates is threatening the political organizations chances of making an impact in the 2024 election

[Nikki] Haley and her former 2024 rival, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R), have quashed the idea of joining No Labels once Trump becomes the nominee. While Christie's reason for not joining the organization is unknown, it is likely that Haley sees another opening in 2028 as the next generation of Republican leadership after Trump. While this scenario is unlikely due to the GOP becoming more Trump-like by the day, Haley's reasoning has some merit, as she is almost certain she will become the runner-up in the primaries.

No Labels's problem also extends to non-presidential candidates.

Utah Senator Mitt Romney (R) and former Governor of Utah Jon Huntsman (R) have also declined to run on the presumptive ticket. Huntsman, a supporter of No Labels who joined Senator Joe Manchin for a listening session in New Hampshire last year, told Deseret News that it was "unlikely" he would run for office again, even on a No Labels ticket.

Considering that most of No Labels's supporters are Republicans disillusioned with their party, the number of politicians saying they would not be interested in running on the unity ticket is startling.

So why is this happening?

Michael Harriot/The Grio:

The lazy, stupid analysis of the ‘Black vote’ obscures the most important political issue of our time

OPINION: If the future of American democracy is really on the ballot, why aren’t we discussing the one issue hovering over the upcoming election?

Let’s get this out of the way: Black people are not going to vote for a Republican. It ain’t gonna happen.

Nearly a century has passed since a Republican presidential nominee even came close to winning a majority of the Black vote (Herbert Hoover in 1928 was the last). It is asinine, bordering on malpractice, for a journalist to publicly suggest that one of the most vociferously anti-Black candidates could achieve what no Republican has done in the last 96 years. Setting aside the media’s lazy, inexplicably stupid exercise in speculative fiction, one wonders why the mainstream media narrative seems to intentionally avoid the one topic that — when it comes to presidential elections — is more important and more mathematically relevant.

What about the white voters?

I haven’t seen the insurrection polling data or the turnout from Trump rallies but judging from the hyperbolic handwringing on cable news, you’d almost think that Black people make up the majority of voters in this country. The same organization (Pew Research) that said that thing about the “important role” of Black voters in 2024 knows that 55% of non-Hispanic whites voted for Trump in 2020, while 92% of Black voters, 59% of Hispanics and 7% of Asians voted for his opponent. Political scientists concede that white voters of both parties are more likely to switch parties when the candidate is Black. The New York Times article about Black voters drifting to the GOP didn’t even mention white people!

Republicans gamble on border politics

Democrats, meanwhile, see political opportunity in Republicans’ divisions whether or not the bill passes.

Maybe Trump’s opposition to a deal leads Republicans to walk away from it. If that happens: “I think we know who to blame,” said Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who represents a crucial swing state. “The person that orchestrates it and then the individuals that follow him.”

• “It puts the Republicans in a really, really bad position if they’re saying, ‘We’re not going to do a deal here because we want to play election-year politics because we think it’s going to help Donald Trump,’” said Ian Russell, a former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee political director who is now a consultant. “That has the potential to really blow up in their face.”

On the other hand, if Congress manages to pass a border bill that President Biden signs into law, Biden and House and Senate Democrats can run on the accomplishment in November.

Greg Sargent/The New Republic:

How Trump’s Unhinged Immunity Demand Could Unleash a Second-Term Crime Spree

If the courts decide that insurrection merits immunity, and Trump wins back the presidency, what might he feel emboldened to do in term two?

This has been widely depicted as a Hail Mary effort to scuttle special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump for conspiracy to obstruct the official proceeding of Congress’s count of presidential electors—otherwise known for nearly 250 years in this country as the peaceful transfer of power.

But there’s another way to understand Trump’s move: It’s about what comes next. If he wins on this front, he’d be largely unshackled in a second presidential term, free to pursue all manner of corrupt designs with little fear of legal consequences after leaving office again.

That Trump might attempt such moves is not idle speculation. He’s telling us so himself. He is openly threatening a range of second-term actions—such as prosecuting political enemies with zero basis in evidence—that would almost certainly strain the boundaries of the law in ugly new ways.

Let’s hear from some law professors on this, starting with Randall Eliason/Sidebars:

D.C. Circuit Skeptical of Trump's Immunity Claims

Judges highlight the extreme consequences of Trump's argument

Early in Sauer’s argument, Judge Pan hit him with a great series of questions that highlighted the extreme consequences of his position. Trump is arguing that the impeachment judgment clause in the Constitution means that a former president may only be criminally prosecuted if he or she was impeached and convicted for the same or similar conduct.

The impeachment judgment clause provides:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Trump’s argument is that because this clause refers only to the “party convicted” at impeachment being subject to later prosecution, that means, by negative implication, that a party who is not convicted after impeachment cannot be prosecuted.

Lee Kovarsky/X via Threadreader:

ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ON TODAY’S DC CIRCUIT (CADC) ARGUMENTS ON PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY (PI) (LAYPERSON FRIENDLY). Today, CADC heard oral arguments on whether DJT has PI for 1/6, in specific reference to Jack Smith’s prosecution in DC. Trump almost certainly lost 3-0.

The judges were Henderson (R-appointed), Childs (Biden), and Pan (Biden). The major issues were as follows.

Jonathan V Last/The Bulwark:

This Might Be the High-Water Mark of Trumpism

An argument for why Trump’s numbers can’t get much better and Biden’s numbers are likely to improve.

[Mark] Halperin then says that Biden’s three big problems are:

1. That he’s playing from behind as an incumbent, which sets a media narrative against him.

2. That Republicans have quickly and decisively rallied to Trump.

3. That parts of the Obama coalition—black, Hispanic, and young voters—have not (yet?) rallied to Biden.

I slightly disagree with Halperin on the importance of #1 and what he calls the Dominant Media. My own view is that journalists tend to overdetermine the influence of the media in electoral politics.

But however much weight you want to give this factor, Halperin is directionally correct: Because Biden is trailing Trump, the media slant is always something like, “Unemployment is 3.9%; Here’s Why That’s Bad for Biden.”

And the only way that’s going to flip is if Biden moves ahead in the polling.

As for #2 and #3, those are vectors along which Biden can reasonably hope to improve and Trump probably cannot.

For instance: I would posit to you that, over the next month, we will be approaching the high-water mark for Trump’s poll numbers.

Brian Beutler/Off Message:

We Can't Afford Weak-Kneed Liberalism In The Trump Era Sincere objections to disqualifying Trump from the ballot are reasoned backward from misplaced fear

The glaring weakness here is that Republicans are real adults, making decisions for themselves, with a mix of real and fake information, and the fact that their leader engaged in insurrection and might thus be disqualified from office was not hidden from them at any point. They called it an insurrection. They acknowledged Trump’s culpability. Then they decided to reanoint him as their leader. This strikes me as Their Problem, not Our Problem.

Marc Jacob/”Stop The Presses” on Substack:

Media play dumb and amplify Jan. 6 lies

When journalists sidestep the truth, MAGA disinformation wins

On Thursday, the Associated Press wrote this both-sides headline: “One attack, two interpretations: Biden and Trump both make the Jan. 6 riot a political rallying cry.”

On Sunday, USA Today chimed in with this outrageous lead: “For Donald Trump, Jan. 6, 2021, was ‘a beautiful day.’ For Joe Biden, it was the day ‘we nearly lost America.’” And then USA Today proceeded with a story that acted as if it didn’t know which view was more valid.

In between those two examples of performative ignorance, the New York Times weighed in with its own “dueling realities” spin:

These news outlets know who’s telling the truth and who’s lying. But they’re afraid to tell the public directly. In the Times’ case, its headline got roasted on social media (including by me), and was later rewritten:

Here are your dueling New Hampshire polls:

Ron Desantis is tanking in the polls. But, of course, the only polls that matter are on election day. Losers always say that before they lose.

Jonathan V Last/The Bulwark:

2024 Is Democracy's Moonshot

Like it or not, a crisis is coming. But we are facing it on good ground.

Just objectively speaking, the forces of stability are actually in a strong position.

The pandemic is over. I don’t think we appreciate this enough. COVID was so traumatic that we’ve memory-holed how unstable and deadly a place America was in four years ago.

The economy is strong. Forget the attitude surveys. If you were handed reams of economic data you would come to two rock-solid conclusions:

(1) The American economy is in a good place: Low unemployment, bottom-led wage growth, increasing household wealth, solid GDP growth.

(2) Relative to the rest of the world, the American economy has performed marvelously. Every advanced economy would trade places with us in a heartbeat.

We are not involved in any wars. The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are over and our troops are no longer in harm’s way. This gives America extra freedom of maneuver in dealing with our adversaries because we no longer have active conflicts leaching away our political will on a daily basis.

We are certainly involved in Ukraine, Gaza and other places but that’s not at all the same thing.

Steve Almond/WBUR:

Joe Biden’s drama-free White House is America’s most under-appreciated Christmas gift

Whatever the reasons, I can’t help but think of Biden and his economic team, toiling away without much fanfare, like Santa and his elves. Whether or not you support him, it’s worth acknowledging a few of the gifts Santa Joe has tucked under our tree this year.

A holiday meal sans masks. COVID hasn’t gone away; it’s now endemic. But thanks, in part, to Biden’s aggressive push to vaccinate the public, 2023 brought the end of the national emergency phase of the pandemic.

More buying power. For all the hyper-ventilating about inflation in the conservative media, Biden and the Federal Reserve have managed to engineer the “soft landing” once thought impossible. The result? Wage growth is now outpacing inflation.

Cheaper prescription drugs. As part of the Inflation Reduction Act, Biden took the fight to Big Pharma and capped the cost of insulin at $35 per month. By allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices directly, the law will eventually lower the price of numerous additional drugs.

A reminder of how Democrats always, always, always fret, from New York Times (September, 2011):

Democrats Fret Aloud Over Obama’s Chances

And in a campaign cycle in which Democrats had entertained hopes of reversing losses from last year’s midterm elections, some in the party fear that Mr. Obama’s troubles could reverberate down the ballot into Congressional, state and local races.

“In my district, the enthusiasm for him has mostly evaporated,” said Representative Peter A. DeFazio, Democrat of Oregon. “There is tremendous discontent with his direction.”

Democrats feared Mitt Romney and—uhm—Rick Perry, according to that piece. Meanwhile:

Same as all the other polls, (I) too early for predictive value and (II) basically tied before the campaign gets started in earnest, but not where it matters most. If that bothers you, see the New York Times piece above from 12 years ago.

USA Today with a headline we should be reading more often, because it’s true:

Donald Trump faces many signs of potential political trouble; here are a few of them

Here are some of the things that can and will happen to Trump as he pursues the presidency again.

Adverse court rulings

The potential of legal trouble is all around Trump, and could pop up any time..

Falling poll numbers; rising rivals

Trump's GOP rivals warn that his continued legal woes will eventually wear out voters who might start to consider alternatives…

Bad voter reaction

The ultimate bad sign for Trump would come from voters.

Des Moines Register:

Why does Trump keep saying migrants are 'poisoning' America? Many GOP caucusgoers like it

The poll found that 42% of likely Republican caucusgoers are more likely to support Trump for his "poisoning the blood" comments; 28% said they are less likely to support him; and 29% said it does not matter.

The poll, conducted by Selzer & Co., has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

…

That includes respondents of all age and income levels. It also includes married and single caucusgoers and those with children under 18, as well as likely caucusgoers from all four of Iowa's congressional districts.

Pluralities of men and women both say their support increases, with 45% of men and 38% of women saying they are more likely to support Trump after hearing him say illegal immigrants are "poisoning the blood" of America.

Politico:

House GOP traps itself in impeachment box

Republicans are barreling toward an impeachment vote, still short of a majority. But if they skip one altogether, it might look like failure to the base.

Much of the House GOP has tried to keep the question of a full-scale removal vote at arm’s length, despite the course they’ve charted toward formal articles of impeachment. It’s not hard to see why: They’ll start the election year with only a three-vote majority, which could shrink even further, and 17 incumbents who represent districts Biden won. Plus, Democrats are almost guaranteed to unanimously oppose impeachment.

All that means a vote to recommend booting the president from office would be highly risky.

Wall Street Journal:

Prices Fell in November for the First Time Since 2020. Inflation Is Approaching Fed Target.

Spending and personal income rose, as Americans’ confidence in the economy rebounded

The Federal Reserve is winning its fight over inflation, boosting Americans’ spirits and offering greater reassurance that the U.S. economy can avoid a recession while bringing prices under control.

The Fed’s preferred inflation measure, the personal-consumption expenditures price index, fell 0.1% in November from the previous month, the first decline since April 2020, the Commerce Department said Friday. Prices were up 2.6% on the year, not far from the Fed’s 2% target.

New York Times:

What Went Wrong for Ron DeSantis in 2023

The Florida governor entered the year flush with cash and momentum. In the months since, internal chaos and Donald Trump’s indictments have sapped even his most avid supporters.

“I don’t think it’s fair,” Mr. DeSantis said. “But it’s reality.”

He was talking about Mr. Trump’s predicament. But he could just as easily have been talking about his own.

Boxed in by a base enamored with Mr. Trump that has instinctively rallied to the former president’s defense, Mr. DeSantis has struggled for months to match the hype that followed his landslide 2022 re-election. Now, with the first votes in the Iowa caucuses only weeks away on Jan. 15, Mr. DeSantis has slipped in some polls into third place, behind Nikki Haley, and has had to downsize his once-grand national ambitions to the simple hopes that a strong showing in a single state — Iowa — could vault him back into contention.

For a candidate who talks at length about his own disinterest in “managing America’s decline,” people around Mr. DeSantis are increasingly talking about managing his…

“He lacks charisma,” [New Hampshire voter] Mr. Scaer said in an interview later. “He just doesn’t have that.”

If the great promise of the DeSantis candidacy was Trump without the baggage, Stuart Stevens, a top strategist on Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign, said that what Republicans got instead was “Ted Cruz without the personality.”

Cue the “Never Back Down” jokes about the DeSantis campaign backing down.

Matt McNeil and Cliff Schecter:

The Hill:

GOP struggles to outrun Texas, Supreme Court abortion cases

Across-the-aisle tensions on abortion have been on full display over the last week after the Texas Supreme Court blocked Kate Cox, a pregnant woman whose fetus was diagnosed with a fatal condition, from having an abortion. Cox left the state to obtain an abortion just hours before the Texas court rejected her challenge.

Biden has already sought to wield the case as a cautionary tale against Republicans in power and against the GOP presidential front-runner, former President Trump.

“I don’t think they can escape it,” Republican strategist Liz Mair said of next year’s White House candidates, adding that the recent Texas case underscores the salience of the issue.

Alabamain Sean Lulofs and Iowan Steve Deace have a convo, which Nicholas Grossman frames beautifully:

Let it sink in everywhere.

Greer Donley/New York Times:

What Happened to Kate Cox Is Tragic, and Completely Expected

As someone who has been studying state abortion definitions and exceptions in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s demise, I was not shocked.

The Texas anti-abortion law that went into effect shortly after Roe was overturned was drafted to ban the care needed by Ms. Cox and other women with similar cases: It does not include an exception for fetal anomalies, unlike laws in a handful of other states. The law does have a narrow exception allowing abortions in some medical emergencies, but it is written in such a vague and confusing way that it is difficult for even experts on this topic, like myself, to parse.

What is clear to me is that the Texas Supreme Court would have needed to make a broad and compassionate interpretation of the law for Ms. Cox to meet the high bar of that exception. Instead, the court interpreted the law narrowly — which is exactly what the state lawmakers who passed the legislation were hoping for. And the results have been tragic.

Jonathan V Last/The Bulwark:

The Case for Why Biden Will Win

We're all gonna make it.

I’ve been feeling more pessimistic than usual, because let’s be honest: Things are not great.

• There’s a yawning disconnect between voter sentiment and economic reality.

• The most successful first-term president since either Clinton or H.W. Bush has an impeachment proceeding against him for [reasons] and voters don’t seem to care.

• Republicans are going to nominate a guy who attempted a coup and now expressly says he’d like to be a dictator.

• This aspiring dictator is leading the incumbent president in most polls.

• Ukraine has bogged down, Russia is making small gains, and America is wavering in its support for the most consequential European war since WWII.

But last night on TNB our economist friend Noah Smith made a pretty radical argument:

Even though it feels like we’re in a moment that is outside of historical norms, the long-running dynamics of economics and politics are still at work. And these dynamics suggest that Joe Biden is likely to win reelection.

So let’s unpack Noah’s thesis.

Ronald Brownstein/The Atlantic:

Biden’s Economic Formula to Win in 2024

Could this be the president’s new strategy?

President Joe Biden and Democrats cannot win the debate over the economy without fundamentally reframing the terms of the choice they are offering voters, an extensive new research study by one of the party’s prominent electoral-strategy groups has concluded.

The study, scheduled to be released today, seeks to mitigate one of the party’s most glaring vulnerabilities heading into the 2024 election: the consistent finding in surveys that when it comes to managing the national economy or addressing inflation, significantly more voters express confidence in Republicans than in Democrats.

To close that gap, the study argues, Biden and Democrats must shift the debate from which party is best equipped to grow the overall economy to which side can help families achieve what the report calls a “better life.” The study argues that Democrats can win that argument with a three-pronged message centered on: delivering tangible kitchen-table economic benefits (such as increased federal subsidies for buying health insurance), confronting powerful special interests (such as major corporations), and pledging to protect key personal liberties and freedoms, led by the right to legal abortion.

Politico:

Republican strategist Jeff Roe quits pro-DeSantis super PAC amid turmoil

Roe announced his resignation late Saturday.

[Ron] DeSantis has been heavily leaning on Never Back Down to oversee his campaign’s functions, including its field deployment.

Why it matters: DeSantis was trying something new—using an outside group and not the campaign for basic campaign blocking and tackling. To abuse a football analogy even further, outsourcing your offensive and defensive lines means there’s no team coordination whatsoever (pretend it’d be illegal to coordinate), and you can imagine how that plays out on the field.

Well, it didn’t work. And DeSantis is is big trouble without a game plan just as Nikki Haley threatens to eclipse him altogether.

See also from Politico: DeSantis on the ropes

David French/New York Times:

To Support Ukraine, Persuade the Elephant

One of the most interesting explorations of the art of persuasion comes from New York University’s Jonathan Haidt, who several years ago described the process of persuasion as well as anyone I know. In his book “The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom,” he compares people’s relation to their emotions to a “rider on the back of an elephant.”

The rider is our rational mind. It’s the part of our brain that deals with facts and reason. It acknowledges, for example, that two plus two equals four, the sky is blue and the Southeastern Conference is the greatest college football conference in the history of the universe.

The elephant is basically everything else about us. As Haidt later explained in an excellent podcast discussion, the elephant represents “99 percent of what’s going on in your mind that you’re not aware of.” By controlling our emotional and social aspects, the elephant controls us far more than we might like; we are, after all, only riders. If the elephant doesn’t want to move, it won’t move. But if the elephant wants to move, as Haidt said on the podcast, “then it is effortless to persuade the rider to go along.” Thus the best way to persuade the elephant and rider to change course is to “reach the elephant first.”

Tom Sullivan/Hullabaloo:

Those Left-To-Right Sliders

What spurs some to lurch right is rejection by the left. Trust me, I’ve heard that one. Some new volunteers are quickly discouraged at not being elevated to positions of prominence and authority in political campaigns that are mostly grunt work directed by the more experienced. Grunt work is beneath their dignity. They are “big ideas” people.

We see something similar among better-knowns of the post-left. 

Cliff Schecter & Stephanie Miller:

The Rudy Giuliani defamation trial is now over.

NBC News:

Rudy Giuliani hit with $148M verdict for defaming two Georgia election workers

An attorney for Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, had urged the eight-person jury to “send a message” with its verdict.

It was a unanimous decision by an eight-person jury. Giuliani deserved punitive damages, and the plaintiffs—Fulton County, Georgia, election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss—deserve to be compensated.

The courts are saying that lying can be expensive. And Donald Trump’s fraud trial in New York is still yet to resolve (and it might send the same message).

In other news:

Neil Irwin/Axios:

What the Fed's rate policy pivot means for the economy

Why it matters: The end of the war on inflation is in sight. Barring some unpleasant economic surprises, the central bank is now prepared to take its foot off the brakes and move to a stance in which it is no longer actively trying to slow growth.

• Importantly, the majority of policymakers are now envisioning significant rate cuts in 2024, while also envisioning the economy remaining basically solid, with low unemployment and steady growth.
• In other words, rates will probably be coming down next year even in the absence of a severe downturn. That's a sweet spot both for financial markets and for families and businesses.
• The cycle of monetary tightening that has whipsawed markets and the economy for the last two years is, for all intents and purposes, over.

John Stoehr/The Editorial Board:

House Republicans ‘will regret’ voting for impeachment inquiry

An interview with the peerless Jill Lawrence.

Biden’s impeachment, which is imminent, is part of Trump’s vengeance movement. Fortunately, it’s being seen that way. Stories about it seem to have two critical features. One, that there’s no evidence linking Joe Biden to Hunter Biden’s businesses. Two, that beneath all the innuendo and conspiracy theory is an obsessive, driving force – a disgraced former president who’s still stinging from being impeached twice.

Since these impeachment proceedings are going to be based on nothing, one could say nothing will come of them – meaninglessness has no meaning. But that overlooks something important about the House GOP’s smear campaign. It represents fundamental weakness.

Craig Mauger/Detroit News:

In court, Michigan Republicans tie false elector effort to Donald Trump's campaign

While the Trump campaign has previously been tied to the overall strategy of crafting electoral certificates in seven battleground states, the testimony Thursday described campaign staffers as being involved in recruiting attendees and running the meeting of the false electors in Lansing on Dec. 14, 2020. During that gathering, 16 Republican activists signed a document that was used to claim the then-incumbent Republican president won Michigan's 16 electoral votes.

The revelations came on the second day of preliminary examinations for six of the Republican electors as Attorney General Dana Nessel's office pursues criminal forgery charges against those whose names appeared on the false certificate.

Bolts magazine:

The Thousands of Local Elections That Will Shape Criminal Justice Policy in 2024

Counties across the nation are electing DAs and sheriffs next year. Bolts guides you through the early hotspots.

Local DAs like [Georgia’s Fani] Willis have become a key GOP target this year, as Republicans go after prosecutors who they think are standing in the way of their political or policy ambitions. New laws in Georgia and Texas give courts and state officials more authority to discipline DAs. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who is challenging Trump for the GOP’s presidential nomination, has over the last 18 months removed two Democratic prosecutors from office, angry over their policies like not prosecuting abortion.

The presidential election is also pulling sheriffs into its orbit. Far-right sheriffs have allied with election deniers, using local law enforcement to amplify Trump’s lies about 2020, ramp up investigations, and even threaten election officials. One such sheriff, Pinal County’s Mark Lamb, is now running for the U.S. Senate in Arizona, leaving his office open. Over in Texas, Tarrant County (Fort Worth) Sheriff Bill Waybourn inspired a new task force that will be policing how people vote while he runs for reelection next year.

With roughly 2,200 prosecutors and sheriffs on the 2024 ballot, voters will weigh in on county offices throughout the nation next year, settling confrontations over the shape of local criminal legal systems while also choosing the president and Congress.

Bolts today is launching its coverage with our annual overview of which counties will hold such races and when: Find our full list here.

Bloomberg:

Mike Johnson May Be the Next House Speaker to Lose His Job

• Conservatives warn Johnson against deals on Ukraine, shutdown
• Lawmakers due back just 10 days before next US funding lapse

House Speaker Mike Johnson is ending 2023 with an ominous preview of what to expect in the new year: dissension in his ranks that threatens to hamstring deals on US government funding, Ukraine war aid and border policy.

It could also cost him his job.

The Louisiana Republican, elected speaker in October after GOP hardliners ousted his predecessor for making deals with Democrats, sent the House home for the holidays on Thursday after passing a bipartisan defense policy bill over strong objections from 73 ultra-conservatives.

This YouTube lecture from New York Times analyst Nate Cohn on the state of polling is excellent: